Brian Manata, Jessica Bozeman, Karen Boynton, Zachary Neal
{"title":"学术界的跨学科合作:感知情境规范和合作动机的角色建模","authors":"Brian Manata, Jessica Bozeman, Karen Boynton, Zachary Neal","doi":"10.1080/10510974.2023.2263922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTIn academia, interdisciplinary collaborations allow individuals with different areas of expertise and resources to accomplish shared goals. Nevertheless, because interdisciplinary scholars often have different knowledge areas or methodological training, such collaborations may be less likely to form. In this manuscript, we provide a step toward understanding how interdisciplinary collaborations form within academic contexts. Specifically, we propose a model in which the effect of organizational norms on collaborative outcomes are mediated by departmental norms and motivation, sequentially. To test this model, 197 interdisciplinary faculty members from a large university in the Northeast were surveyed. Overall, the results provide some support for our proposed model, such that if organizations provide structural support and foster an environment that welcomes collaborations, interdisciplinary collaborative relationships will be more likely to form (i.e. faculty members will be increasingly motivated to engage in interdisciplinary research).KEYWORDS: Interdisciplinarycollaborationsnormsmotivationmultilevel Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1. The hypothesized model is unidirectional for model testing purposes, and the chosen direction is based on theoretical considerations (e.g., multilevel theory). Although, this is not to suggest that only one direction is possible (e.g., the reverse causal model is also plausible). This matter is addressed further in the discussion.2. Given the nature of the sample and data collection, it was possible for respondents to choose intra-departmental members as collaborators. If these types of relationships were removed from the analysis, the results and conclusions remained virtually identical. As such, their inclusion or exclusion made no difference in the analysis.3. Preliminary analyses showed that none of the main variables differed significantly when making comparisons between the different departmental groups.4. Because this was a global variable, respondents were not able to report different attendance numbers for workshops, colloquia, etc.5. PATH is a DOS-based program that can be used to perform path analysis. This program was run using the DOS emulator DOSBox (Veenstra et al., Citation2019), and a free copy of PATH can be attained from the first author.6. This model also fits the data when controlling for the demographic variables (χ2[6] = 3.25, p = .77), and when using full information maximum likelihood estimation procedures (χ2[6] = 6.04, p = .42). These analyses were performed using the lavaan package in the R software environment (R Core Team, Citation2023; Rosseel et al., Citation2023).Additional informationNotes on contributorsBrian ManataBrian Manata (PhD Michigan State University, 2015) is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. His research focuses on organizational behavior, especially as it pertains to groups and teams. His work has appeared in Management Communication Quarterly, Project Management Journal, International Journal of Project Management, and Human Communication Research.Jessica BozemanJessica Bozeman (MA Northern Illinois University, 2019) is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. Her research investigates the social nature of group communication and has previously appeared in Communication Studies.Karen BoyntonKaren Boynton (BA University of Minnesota Duluth, 2020) is a graduate student in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. Her research focuses on disclosures in interpersonal communication. Her work has appeared in Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships and Technology, Mind, and Behavior.Zachary NealZachary Neal (PhD University of Illinois at Chicago, 2009) is a Professor in the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. He studies network methods and theory, and he has written and edited numerous books on these topics. His work has also appeared in numerous journals (e.g., Scientific Reports, Nature Reviews Methods Primers, and Psychological Methods).","PeriodicalId":47080,"journal":{"name":"Communication Studies","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interdisciplinary Collaborations in Academia: Modeling the Roles of Perceived Contextual Norms and Motivation to Collaborate\",\"authors\":\"Brian Manata, Jessica Bozeman, Karen Boynton, Zachary Neal\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10510974.2023.2263922\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTIn academia, interdisciplinary collaborations allow individuals with different areas of expertise and resources to accomplish shared goals. Nevertheless, because interdisciplinary scholars often have different knowledge areas or methodological training, such collaborations may be less likely to form. In this manuscript, we provide a step toward understanding how interdisciplinary collaborations form within academic contexts. Specifically, we propose a model in which the effect of organizational norms on collaborative outcomes are mediated by departmental norms and motivation, sequentially. To test this model, 197 interdisciplinary faculty members from a large university in the Northeast were surveyed. Overall, the results provide some support for our proposed model, such that if organizations provide structural support and foster an environment that welcomes collaborations, interdisciplinary collaborative relationships will be more likely to form (i.e. faculty members will be increasingly motivated to engage in interdisciplinary research).KEYWORDS: Interdisciplinarycollaborationsnormsmotivationmultilevel Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1. The hypothesized model is unidirectional for model testing purposes, and the chosen direction is based on theoretical considerations (e.g., multilevel theory). Although, this is not to suggest that only one direction is possible (e.g., the reverse causal model is also plausible). This matter is addressed further in the discussion.2. Given the nature of the sample and data collection, it was possible for respondents to choose intra-departmental members as collaborators. If these types of relationships were removed from the analysis, the results and conclusions remained virtually identical. As such, their inclusion or exclusion made no difference in the analysis.3. Preliminary analyses showed that none of the main variables differed significantly when making comparisons between the different departmental groups.4. Because this was a global variable, respondents were not able to report different attendance numbers for workshops, colloquia, etc.5. PATH is a DOS-based program that can be used to perform path analysis. This program was run using the DOS emulator DOSBox (Veenstra et al., Citation2019), and a free copy of PATH can be attained from the first author.6. This model also fits the data when controlling for the demographic variables (χ2[6] = 3.25, p = .77), and when using full information maximum likelihood estimation procedures (χ2[6] = 6.04, p = .42). These analyses were performed using the lavaan package in the R software environment (R Core Team, Citation2023; Rosseel et al., Citation2023).Additional informationNotes on contributorsBrian ManataBrian Manata (PhD Michigan State University, 2015) is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. His research focuses on organizational behavior, especially as it pertains to groups and teams. His work has appeared in Management Communication Quarterly, Project Management Journal, International Journal of Project Management, and Human Communication Research.Jessica BozemanJessica Bozeman (MA Northern Illinois University, 2019) is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. Her research investigates the social nature of group communication and has previously appeared in Communication Studies.Karen BoyntonKaren Boynton (BA University of Minnesota Duluth, 2020) is a graduate student in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. Her research focuses on disclosures in interpersonal communication. Her work has appeared in Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships and Technology, Mind, and Behavior.Zachary NealZachary Neal (PhD University of Illinois at Chicago, 2009) is a Professor in the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. He studies network methods and theory, and he has written and edited numerous books on these topics. His work has also appeared in numerous journals (e.g., Scientific Reports, Nature Reviews Methods Primers, and Psychological Methods).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47080,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication Studies\",\"volume\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2023.2263922\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2023.2263922","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在学术界,跨学科合作允许拥有不同专业知识和资源的个人实现共同的目标。然而,由于跨学科学者通常有不同的知识领域或方法训练,这种合作可能不太可能形成。在这份手稿中,我们为理解跨学科合作如何在学术背景下形成提供了一个步骤。具体而言,我们提出了一个组织规范对合作结果的影响依次被部门规范和动机所中介的模型。为了验证这一模型,我们对来自东北一所大型大学的197名跨学科教师进行了调查。总的来说,结果为我们提出的模型提供了一些支持,例如,如果组织提供结构性支持并培养一个欢迎合作的环境,跨学科合作关系将更有可能形成(即教师将越来越多地参与跨学科研究)。关键词:跨学科合作规范动机多层次披露声明作者未发现潜在利益冲突。为了模型测试的目的,假设的模型是单向的,而选择的方向是基于理论考虑的(例如,多层次理论)。虽然,这并不是说只有一个方向是可能的(例如,反向因果模型也是合理的)。这个问题将在讨论中进一步处理。考虑到样本和数据收集的性质,受访者有可能选择部门内部成员作为合作者。如果这些类型的关系从分析中删除,结果和结论实际上是相同的。因此,他们的纳入或排除在分析中没有区别。初步分析表明,在不同院系组间进行比较时,各主要变量均无显著差异。由于这是一个全局变量,受访者无法报告研讨会、座谈会等的不同出席人数5。PATH是一个基于dos的程序,可用于执行路径分析。该程序使用DOS模拟器DOSBox (Veenstra等人,Citation2019)运行,可以从第一作者处获得PATH的免费副本。在控制人口统计变量(χ2[6] = 3.25, p = .77)和使用全信息最大似然估计程序(χ2[6] = 6.04, p = .42)时,该模型也符合数据。这些分析是在R软件环境中使用lavaan包进行的(R Core Team, Citation2023;Rosseel et al., Citation2023)。作者简介:brian Manata(密歇根州立大学博士,2015年),美国宾夕法尼亚州州立大学传播艺术与科学系助理教授。他的研究重点是组织行为学,特别是与团体和团队相关的组织行为学。他的作品发表在《管理传播季刊》、《项目管理杂志》、《国际项目管理杂志》和《人类传播研究》上。Jessica Bozeman (MA Northern Illinois University, 2019)是美国宾夕法尼亚州州立大学传播艺术与科学系的一名博士生。她的研究调查了群体传播的社会性质,并曾发表在《传播学》杂志上。Karen Boynton(明尼苏达大学德卢斯分校文学学士,2020年毕业),美国宾夕法尼亚州立大学传播艺术与科学系研究生。她的研究重点是人际交往中的信息披露。她的作品发表在《人际关系:关于个人关系和技术、思想和行为的国际期刊》上。Zachary Neal(2009年获得伊利诺伊大学芝加哥分校博士学位),美国密歇根州东兰辛市密歇根州立大学心理学系教授。他研究网络方法和理论,并撰写和编辑了许多关于这些主题的书籍。他的作品也出现在许多期刊上(例如,科学报告,自然评论方法入门,和心理学方法)。
Interdisciplinary Collaborations in Academia: Modeling the Roles of Perceived Contextual Norms and Motivation to Collaborate
ABSTRACTIn academia, interdisciplinary collaborations allow individuals with different areas of expertise and resources to accomplish shared goals. Nevertheless, because interdisciplinary scholars often have different knowledge areas or methodological training, such collaborations may be less likely to form. In this manuscript, we provide a step toward understanding how interdisciplinary collaborations form within academic contexts. Specifically, we propose a model in which the effect of organizational norms on collaborative outcomes are mediated by departmental norms and motivation, sequentially. To test this model, 197 interdisciplinary faculty members from a large university in the Northeast were surveyed. Overall, the results provide some support for our proposed model, such that if organizations provide structural support and foster an environment that welcomes collaborations, interdisciplinary collaborative relationships will be more likely to form (i.e. faculty members will be increasingly motivated to engage in interdisciplinary research).KEYWORDS: Interdisciplinarycollaborationsnormsmotivationmultilevel Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1. The hypothesized model is unidirectional for model testing purposes, and the chosen direction is based on theoretical considerations (e.g., multilevel theory). Although, this is not to suggest that only one direction is possible (e.g., the reverse causal model is also plausible). This matter is addressed further in the discussion.2. Given the nature of the sample and data collection, it was possible for respondents to choose intra-departmental members as collaborators. If these types of relationships were removed from the analysis, the results and conclusions remained virtually identical. As such, their inclusion or exclusion made no difference in the analysis.3. Preliminary analyses showed that none of the main variables differed significantly when making comparisons between the different departmental groups.4. Because this was a global variable, respondents were not able to report different attendance numbers for workshops, colloquia, etc.5. PATH is a DOS-based program that can be used to perform path analysis. This program was run using the DOS emulator DOSBox (Veenstra et al., Citation2019), and a free copy of PATH can be attained from the first author.6. This model also fits the data when controlling for the demographic variables (χ2[6] = 3.25, p = .77), and when using full information maximum likelihood estimation procedures (χ2[6] = 6.04, p = .42). These analyses were performed using the lavaan package in the R software environment (R Core Team, Citation2023; Rosseel et al., Citation2023).Additional informationNotes on contributorsBrian ManataBrian Manata (PhD Michigan State University, 2015) is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. His research focuses on organizational behavior, especially as it pertains to groups and teams. His work has appeared in Management Communication Quarterly, Project Management Journal, International Journal of Project Management, and Human Communication Research.Jessica BozemanJessica Bozeman (MA Northern Illinois University, 2019) is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. Her research investigates the social nature of group communication and has previously appeared in Communication Studies.Karen BoyntonKaren Boynton (BA University of Minnesota Duluth, 2020) is a graduate student in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA. Her research focuses on disclosures in interpersonal communication. Her work has appeared in Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships and Technology, Mind, and Behavior.Zachary NealZachary Neal (PhD University of Illinois at Chicago, 2009) is a Professor in the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. He studies network methods and theory, and he has written and edited numerous books on these topics. His work has also appeared in numerous journals (e.g., Scientific Reports, Nature Reviews Methods Primers, and Psychological Methods).