Interdisciplinary Data Report

Overview

One of the 2016–17 actions identified in the ARC Statement of Support for Interdisciplinary Research is for the ARC to provide data on interdisciplinary proposals.

This is the first such data report, enabled by the inclusion in proposals of questions about whether the proposed research is interdisciplinary. The report includes the outcomes of selection rounds for: Discovery Early Career Researcher Award for funding commencing in 2017, Discovery Indigenous for funding commencing in 2017, Discovery Projects for funding commencing in 2017, and Future Fellowships for funding commencing in 2016.

The analysis of data arising from the interdisciplinary research (IDR) questions is the first step by the ARC in seeking information to help it better understand the IDR profile of ARC-funded researchers to inform future ARC policy and to assist with the appropriate assessment of proposals. 

The report is indicative of the volume and range of interdisciplinary applications and outcomes. It should be noted that these are both subject to large variations between disciplines in interdisciplinary intensity, so that drawing any direct conclusions about application versus success rate needs to be approached with caution. 

[top]

Summary outcomes

What proportion of total proposals received by the ARC identified as involving IDR?

Of the 5092 proposals received for funding under the four schemes, 2981 (or 59 per cent) identified as involving IDR. The proportion of IDR proposals received was much higher under the Future Fellowships and Discovery Indigenous schemes.

Table 1. Proportion of IDR proposals received

What proportion of total research projects funded by the ARC identified as involving IDR?

Of the 941 research projects funded under the four schemes, 537 (or 57 per cent) identified as involving IDR.

Table 2. Proportion of IDR proposals funded

What is the success rate of IDR proposals compared to the overall success rates?

The success rate of proposals that indicated they involved IDR ranged from 16.0 per cent under the Discovery Early Career Researcher Award scheme to 33.3 per cent under the Discovery Indigenous scheme. Success rates are on par with overall success rates achieved for each scheme.

Table 3. Success rates for IDR proposals

How is the research interdisciplinary? By design, investigatory team, methodology or other?

‘Methodology’ was selected most often on funded proposals (44 per cent of all instances identified across the four schemes) followed by ‘investigatory team’ (33 per cent of all instances identified), ‘design’ (20 per cent of all incidences identified) and ‘other’ (3 per cent of all instances identified) (see Figure 1). Note that researchers were able to select more than one category. Approximately 70 per cent of funded IDR research projects indicated that they were interdisciplinary in two or more ways.

Table 4. Instances of IDR element for proposals received and funded

Figure 1. Instances of IDR element on funded research projects

Alt-text:
Blue—Design 20%
Red—Investigatory team 33%
Green—Methodology 44%
Purple–Other 3%

 [top]

By Field of Research

In what 2-digit Fields of Research (FoR) are the largest proportion of IDR projects recorded as a proportion of total projects?

The 2-digit FoRs with the highest proportion of IDR proposals (that is, IDR proposals as a proportion of total proposals) were Medical and Health Sciences (81 per cent), Philosophy and Religious Studies (81 per cent), Built Environment and Design (80 per cent) and Law and Legal Studies (80 per Cent).

Figure 2. Proportion of funded IDR projects by 2-digit FoR

Alt-text:
A graph of proportion of funded IDR projects by 2-digit FOR.
Blue—IDR projects funded
Red—Non-IDR projects funded

Table 5. Funded projects by 2-digit FoR

[top]