Improving the culture of interdisciplinary collaboration in ecology by expanding measures of success
Open accessAbstract
Interdisciplinary collaboration is essential to understand ecological systems at scales critical to human decision making. Current reward structures are problematic for scientists engaged in interdisciplinary research, particularly early career researchers, because academic culture tends to value only some research outputs, such as primary‐authored publications. Here, we present a framework for the costs and benefits of collaboration, with a focus on early career stages, and show how the implementation of novel measures of success can help defray the costs of collaboration. Success measures at team and individual levels include research outputs other than publications, including educational outcomes, dataset creation, outreach products (eg blogs or social media), and the application of scientific results to policy or management activities. Promotion and adoption of new measures of success will require concerted effort by both collaborators and their institutions. Expanded measures should better reflect and reward the important work of both disciplinary and interdisciplinary teams at all career stages, and help sustain and stimulate a collaborative culture within ecology.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
High-performing collaborative research teams are highly productive and provide positive experiences for all participants, maximizing net benefits for individuals and the team.
“Such teams are highly productive and provide positive experiences for all participants, maximizing net benefits for both individuals and the team as a whole (Goring et al. 2014).”
From Creating and maintaining high‐performing collaborative research teams: the importance of diversity and interpersonal skills (2014) · cites this paper as Goring et al. 2014
The conceptual-model section links collaboration to increased publication rates and describes personal satisfaction and enjoyment from fruitful collaboration. The discussion of distributing workloads says balancing participants’ costs and benefits can produce net benefits for the team. It does not establish that high-performing teams provide positive experiences for all participants or maximize benefits for every individual. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredA cultural shift within the scientific community is necessary to broaden the definition of scientific value and reward systems.
“Broadening the definition of scientific value and the reward systems will require a cultural shift within the scientific community (Uriarte et al. 2007;Goring et al. 2014)”
From Creating and maintaining high‐performing collaborative research teams: the importance of diversity and interpersonal skills (2014) · cites this paper as Goring et al. 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720 · see citing works
Cheruvelil, K. S., Soranno, P. A., Weathers, K. C., Hanson, P. C., Goring, S. J., Filstrup, C. T., & Read, E. K. (2014) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/130001 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Self-citationQuantitative and empirical demonstration of the Matthew effect in a study of career longevity
Petersen, A. M., Jung, W.-S., Yang, J.-S., & Stanley, H. E. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1016733108 · Cited by 228 · see citing works
Transdisciplinary Research, Transformative Learning, and Transformative Science
Pennington, D. D., Simpson, G. L., McConnell, M. S., Fair, J. M., & Baker, R. J. (2013) · BioScience · doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.7.9 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Klein JT. 2010. A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, and Mitcham C (Eds). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Odum EP and Barrett GW. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cheruvelil, K. S., Soranno, P. A., Weathers, K. C., Hanson, P. C., Goring, S. J., Filstrup, C. T., & Read, E. K. (2014) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/130001 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Self-citationEight grand challenges in socio-environmental systems modeling
Elsawah, S., Filatova, T., Jakeman, A. J., Kettner, A. J., Zellner, M. L., Athanasiadis, I. N., Hamilton, S. H., Axtell, R. L., Brown, D. G., Gilligan, J. M., et al. (2020) · Socio-Environmental Systems Modelling · doi:10.18174/sesmo.2020a16226 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
- Authors
- Goring, S. J., Weathers, K. C., Dodds, W. K., Soranno, P. A., Sweet, L. C., Cheruvelil, K. S., Kominoski, J. S., Rüegg, J., Thorn, A. M., & Utz, R. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies (US)
- Kansas State University (US)
- Michigan State University (US)
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- University of Georgia (US)
- University of New Hampshire (US)
- National Ecological Observatory Network (US)
- Corresponding author
- Goring, Simon J
- ORCID
- Venue
- Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-02
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 39-47
- ISSN
- 1540-9295 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-9309
- OpenAlex
- W2096735936
- Cited by
- 168
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 16
- FWCI
- 33.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (publishedVersion)
- K-State Research Exchange (Kansas State University) (submittedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1065255, 1065656, 1137327, 1064998, 1065864, 1138160)
- Directorate for Biological Sciences (EF1137327)
- Division of Emerging Frontiers
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
- Keywords
- interdisciplinary collaboration, success indicators, early-career researchers, research evaluation, science outreach, science-policy interface
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
