Law and social science

How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough?

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

The movement toward greater team-based research reflects a larger movement among both universities and funding agencies—within the USA and globally—to promote interdisciplinarity. The goals of interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research are defined. A discussion of the pros and cons of interdisciplinary work in general, followed by an application of these themes to research and training in law and social science, is presented. Interdisciplinarity, as a collaborative research enterprise and as a component of students’ training, is an important issue. Moreover, the difference between interdisciplinary teams and interdisciplinary persons must be considered. An analysis of leading law–psychology journals shows that relatively few publications come from disciplines other than psychology. Given the benefits of greater interdisciplinarity, this is a less than ideal situation. The chapter next considers the illustrative example of an interdisciplinary approach, as exemplified by the scholarship of Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr., in his research on judges’ decision making. More specifically, how religion influences judges’ decision making is assessed. The chapter concludes with recommendations for increasing interdisciplinary research and training opportunities in law and social science.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationThe Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.
PublisherSpringer New York
Pages113-128
Number of pages16
ISBN (Print)9781493920778, 9781493920761
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

Social Sciences
Research
Decision Making
Religion
Publications
Students
Psychology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Bornstein, B. H. (2015). Law and social science: How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough? In The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr. (pp. 113-128). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2077-8_8

Law and social science : How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough? / Bornstein, Brian H.

The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.. Springer New York, 2015. p. 113-128.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Bornstein, BH 2015, Law and social science: How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough? in The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.. Springer New York, pp. 113-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2077-8_8
Bornstein BH. Law and social science: How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough? In The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.. Springer New York. 2015. p. 113-128 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2077-8_8
Bornstein, Brian H. / Law and social science : How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough?. The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.. Springer New York, 2015. pp. 113-128
@inbook{15b59544abb74383a519e0b954dfb0ae,
title = "Law and social science: How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough?",
abstract = "The movement toward greater team-based research reflects a larger movement among both universities and funding agencies—within the USA and globally—to promote interdisciplinarity. The goals of interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research are defined. A discussion of the pros and cons of interdisciplinary work in general, followed by an application of these themes to research and training in law and social science, is presented. Interdisciplinarity, as a collaborative research enterprise and as a component of students’ training, is an important issue. Moreover, the difference between interdisciplinary teams and interdisciplinary persons must be considered. An analysis of leading law–psychology journals shows that relatively few publications come from disciplines other than psychology. Given the benefits of greater interdisciplinarity, this is a less than ideal situation. The chapter next considers the illustrative example of an interdisciplinary approach, as exemplified by the scholarship of Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr., in his research on judges’ decision making. More specifically, how religion influences judges’ decision making is assessed. The chapter concludes with recommendations for increasing interdisciplinary research and training opportunities in law and social science.",
author = "Bornstein, {Brian H}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/978-1-4939-2077-8_8",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781493920778",
pages = "113--128",
booktitle = "The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Law and social science

T2 - How interdisciplinary is interdisciplinary enough?

AU - Bornstein, Brian H

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - The movement toward greater team-based research reflects a larger movement among both universities and funding agencies—within the USA and globally—to promote interdisciplinarity. The goals of interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research are defined. A discussion of the pros and cons of interdisciplinary work in general, followed by an application of these themes to research and training in law and social science, is presented. Interdisciplinarity, as a collaborative research enterprise and as a component of students’ training, is an important issue. Moreover, the difference between interdisciplinary teams and interdisciplinary persons must be considered. An analysis of leading law–psychology journals shows that relatively few publications come from disciplines other than psychology. Given the benefits of greater interdisciplinarity, this is a less than ideal situation. The chapter next considers the illustrative example of an interdisciplinary approach, as exemplified by the scholarship of Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr., in his research on judges’ decision making. More specifically, how religion influences judges’ decision making is assessed. The chapter concludes with recommendations for increasing interdisciplinary research and training opportunities in law and social science.

AB - The movement toward greater team-based research reflects a larger movement among both universities and funding agencies—within the USA and globally—to promote interdisciplinarity. The goals of interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research are defined. A discussion of the pros and cons of interdisciplinary work in general, followed by an application of these themes to research and training in law and social science, is presented. Interdisciplinarity, as a collaborative research enterprise and as a component of students’ training, is an important issue. Moreover, the difference between interdisciplinary teams and interdisciplinary persons must be considered. An analysis of leading law–psychology journals shows that relatively few publications come from disciplines other than psychology. Given the benefits of greater interdisciplinarity, this is a less than ideal situation. The chapter next considers the illustrative example of an interdisciplinary approach, as exemplified by the scholarship of Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr., in his research on judges’ decision making. More specifically, how religion influences judges’ decision making is assessed. The chapter concludes with recommendations for increasing interdisciplinary research and training opportunities in law and social science.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84957029800&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84957029800&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-1-4939-2077-8_8

DO - 10.1007/978-1-4939-2077-8_8

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781493920778

SN - 9781493920761

SP - 113

EP - 128

BT - The Witness Stand and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Jr.

PB - Springer New York

ER -