Problematizing assumptions about interdisciplinary research: implications for health professions education research

Mathieu Albert,Suzanne Laberge,Paula Rowland,Farah Friesen

doi:10.1007/s10459-019-09911-7

Abstract

This article critically examines three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisciplinary research—defined in this article as communication and collaboration between researchers across academic disciplines (e.g. Sociology, Psychology, Biology)—and examines these assumptions’ implications for health professions education research (HPER). These assumptions are: (1) disciplines are silos that inhibit the free flowing of knowledge across fields and stifle innovative thinking; (2) interdisciplinary research generates a better understanding of the world as it brings together researchers from various fields of expertise capable of tackling complex problems; and (3) interdisciplinary research reduces fragmentation across groups of researchers by eliminating boundaries. These assumptions are among the new beliefs shaping the contemporary academic arena; they orient academics’ and university administrators’ decisions toward expanding interdisciplinary research and training, but without solid empirical evidence. This article argues that the field of HPER has largely adopted the premises of interdisciplinary research but has not yet debated the potential effects of organizing around these premises. The authors hope to inspire members of the HPER community to critically examine the ubiquitous discourse promoting interdisciplinarity, and engage in reflection about the future of the field informed by evidence rather than by unsubstantiated assumptions. For example: Should research centres and graduate programs in HPER encourage the development of interdisciplinary or disciplinary-trained researchers? Should training predominantly focus on methods and methodologies or draw more on disciplinary-based knowledge? What is the best route toward increasing the field’s profile within academia and attracting the best students and researchers to engage in HPER? These are questions that merit attention at the current juncture as the future of the HPER field relies on decisions made in the present time.

Highlights

We critically examine three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisciplinary research—defined in this article as communication and collaboration between researchers across academic disciplines (e.g. Sociology, Psychology, Biology)— and examine these assumptions’ implications for health professions education research (HPER)
These assumptions are: (1) disciplines are silos that inhibit the free flowing of knowledge across fields and stifle innovative thinking (Giacomini 2004; Jacob 2015); (2) interdisciplinary research generates a better understanding of the world as it brings together researchers from various fields of expertise capable of tackling complex problems (National Academy of Sciences 2005; Townsend et al 2015); and (3) interdisciplinary research reduces fragmentation across groups of researchers by eliminating boundaries (Armstrong 2006; Giacomini 2004)
While lively debates about academic disciplines and interdisciplinarity have been ongoing for decades outside HPER, starting as far back as the early 1970s (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 1972), the HPER community has been silent on this topic

Summary

Introduction

We critically examine three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisciplinary research—defined in this article as communication and collaboration between researchers across academic disciplines (e.g. Sociology, Psychology, Biology)— and examine these assumptions’ implications for health professions education research (HPER) These assumptions are: (1) disciplines are silos that inhibit the free flowing of knowledge across fields and stifle innovative thinking (Giacomini 2004; Jacob 2015); (2) interdisciplinary research generates a better understanding of the world as it brings together researchers from various fields of expertise capable of tackling complex problems (National Academy of Sciences 2005; Townsend et al 2015); and (3) interdisciplinary research reduces fragmentation across groups of researchers by eliminating boundaries (Armstrong 2006; Giacomini 2004). Another point of divergence lies in the fact that van Enk’s and Regehr’s article is underpinned by a prescriptive orientation as they want members of the HPER field to modify their practices and behaviours in order to achieve a Problematizing assumptions about interdisciplinary research:

Representative quotes from academic literature

Web of Science Categories

Findings

Implications for the field of health professions education research