Perspective | Published:

A Nobel opportunity for interdisciplinarity

Nature Physicsvolume 14pages10751078 (2018) | Download Citation

Despite the growing interdisciplinarity of research, the Nobel Prize consolidates the traditional disciplinary categorization of science. There is, in fact, an opportunity for the most revered scientific reward to mirror the current research landscape.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the supplementary information files of this published article.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. 1.

    Ledford, H. How to solve the world’s biggest problems. Nature 525, 308–311 (2015).

  2. 2.

    Bromham, L., Dinnage, R. & Hua, X. Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success. Nature 534, 684–687 (2016).

  3. 3.

    Brown, R. R., Deletic, A. & Wong, T. H. Interdisciplinarity: How to catalyse collaboration. Nature 525, 315–317 (2015).

  4. 4.

    Shechtman, D., Blech, I., Gratias, D. & Cahn, J. W. Metallic phase with long-range orientational order and no translational symmetry. Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1951–1953 (1984).

  5. 5.

    Jha, A. Dan Shechtman: ‘Linus Pauling said I was talking nonsense’. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/jan/06/dan-shechtman-nobel-prize-chemistry-interview (6 January 2013).

  6. 6.

    Wang, D., Song, C. & Barabási, A.-L. Quantifying long-term scientific impact. Science 342, 127–132 (2013).

  7. 7.

    Shen, H.-W. & Barabási, A.-L. Collective credit allocation in science. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 12325–12330 (2014).

  8. 8.

    Schwarz, E. et al. Structure and transcription of human papillomavirus sequences in cervical carcinoma cells. Nature 314, 111–114 (1985).

  9. 9.

    Dixon, R. A. et al. Cloning of the gene and cDNA for mammalian beta-adrenergic receptor and homology with rhodopsin. Nature 321, 75–79 (1986).

  10. 10.

    Börner, K. et al. Design and update of a classification system: The UCSD map of science. PloS ONE 7, e39464 (2012).

  11. 11.

    Charlton, B. G. Why there should be more science Nobel prizes and laureates — and why proportionate credit should be awarded to institutions. Med. Hypotheses 68, 471–473 (2007).

  12. 12.

    Rzhetsky, A., Foster, J. G., Foster, I. T. & Evans, J. A. Choosing experiments to accelerate collective discovery. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 14569–14574 (2015).

  13. 13.

    Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F. & Uzzi, B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316, 1036–1039 (2007).

  14. 14.

    World, C. An interdisciplinary celebration. Chemistry World https://www.chemistryworld.com/opinion/an-interdisciplinary-celebration/7907.article (1 November 2014).

  15. 15.

    Lehmann, S., Jackson, A. D. & Lautrup, B. E. Measures for measures. Nature 444, 1003–1004 (2006).

  16. 16.

    Mazloumian, A., Eom, Y.-H., Helbing, D., Lozano, S. & Fortunato, S. How citation boosts promote scientific paradigm shifts and Nobel Prizes. PloS ONE 6, e18975 (2011).

  17. 17.

    Radicchi, F. & Castellano, C. A reverse engineering approach to the suppression of citation biases reveals universal properties of citation distributions. PloS ONE 7, e33833 (2012).

  18. 18.

    Van Noorden, R., Maher, B. & Nuzzo, R. The top 100 papers. Nature 514, 550–553 (2014).

  19. 19.

    Chen, S., Arsenault, C. & Larivière, V. Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary? J. Informetr. 9, 1034–1046 (2015).

  20. 20.

    Van Noorden, R. Interdisciplinary research by the numbers. Nature 525, 306–307 (2015).

  21. 21.

    Fortunato, S. Growing time lag threatens Nobels. Nature 508, 186 (2014).

  22. 22.

    Porter, A. & Rafols, I. Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics 81, 719–745 (2009).

  23. 23.

    von Euler, U. The Nobel Foundation and its role for modern day science. Naturwissenschaften 68, 277–281 (1981).

  24. 24.

    Yong, E. The absurdity of the nobel prizes in science. The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/10/the-absurdity-of-the-nobel-prizes-in-science/541863/ (3 October 2017).

  25. 25.

    Al-Khalili, J. Why the Nobel prizes need a shakeup. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/08/nobel-prizes-need-shakeup (2012).

  26. 26.

    Nissani, M. Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: The case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research. Soc. Sci. J. 34, 201–216 (1997).

  27. 27.

    Perc, M. The Matthew effect in empirical data. J. R. Soc. Interface 11, 20140378 (2014).

  28. 28.

    Evans, J. A. & Foster, J. G. Metaknowledge. Science 331, 721–725 (2011).

  29. 29.

    Sinatra, R., Deville, P., Szell, M., Wang, D. & Barabási, A.-L. A century of physics. Nat. Phys. 11, 791–796 (2015).

  30. 30.

    Clauset, A., Larremore, D. B. & Sinatra, R. Data-driven predictions in the science of science. Science 355, 477–480 (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank H.-W. Shen for providing the data set of Nobel Prize-winning papers, F. Musciotto for Web of Science data extraction, and M. Iori, F. Battiston and A.-L. Barabási for helpful comments. R.S. and M.S. acknowledge support from AFOSR grant FA9550-15-1-0077 and from the Templeton Foundation grant no. 61066. R.S. acknowledges support from AFOSR grant FA9550-15-1-0364 and from the Central European University Intellectual Themes Initiative ‘Just Data’.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Network and Data Science, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary

    • Michael Szell
    •  & Roberta Sinatra
  2. Center for Complex Network Research, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA

    • Michael Szell
    •  & Roberta Sinatra
  3. Complexity Science Hub, Vienna, Austria

    • Michael Szell
    •  & Roberta Sinatra
  4. MTA KRTK Agglomeration and Social Networks Lendulet Research Group, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary

    • Michael Szell
  5. Northwestern Institute on Complex Systems (NICO) and Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    • Yifang Ma
  6. Key Laboratory of Mathematics, Informatics and Behavioral Semantics, Ministry of Education, Beijing, China

    • Yifang Ma
  7. Department of Mathematics, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary

    • Roberta Sinatra
  8. ISI Foundation, Torino, Italy

    • Roberta Sinatra

Authors

  1. Search for Michael Szell in:

  2. Search for Yifang Ma in:

  3. Search for Roberta Sinatra in:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roberta Sinatra.

Supplementary information

  1. Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Figures and Notes

  2. Supplementary Dataset 1

    Bibliographic information of the 220 papers with interdisciplinary impact found among the top 10,000 cited papers, including identified subfields

  3. Supplementary Dataset 2

    Field-specific citations of the top 10,000 cited papers

  4. Supplementary Dataset 3

    Bibliographic information of the Nobel Prize-winning papers, including field-specific citations and laureates

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-018-0314-6