ArticleMinerva2026
Towards the Recognition of Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Researchers.
Article in Minerva, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A conceptual methodological approach for addressing complex interdisciplinary challenges.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Training integration in science, policy and practice: insights from designing and implementing integrative teaching and learning.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2026Article
- The pursuitworthiness of team science collaborations in translational neuroscience.European journal for philosophy of science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research are widely considered necessary to addressing complex, often called ´wicked´, problems. Moreover, national and international funding schemes, institutional structures, and education programs have been created to foster interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. However, there is a largely silenced ´wicked´ problem in the heart of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research: the precarious situation of academics engaging in such research in their individual work. Relying on STS and ID/TD scholarships, we identify the institutional, social, cultural, and psychological challenges of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary researchers in the contemporary scientific community. Based on Caniglia and Vogel (2023), we compare the position of these researchers to that of queer people in a heteronormative and sexually binary society. We argue that the challenges of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary scholars, and their queer-like status, should be conceptualized as a problem of recognition of these scholars. Following Fraser (2003), we understand denial of recognition -either through maldistribution of resources, or misrecognition of identity, or both- as a set of obstacles in equal participation in academic life. Finally, we distinguish between social and institutional recognition, concluding that while researchers can contribute to social recognition through their own actions, institutional recognition requires science policy interventions by research institutions and funders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.