Iranian Higher Education
Volume 17, Issue 3 (2025)
ihej 2025, 17(3): 21-42 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
khoshnam M. A socio-logical analysis of the obstacles and the promoting factors for developing interdisciplinary research from the perspective of Bourdieu's academic Champ approach. ihej 2025; 17 (3) :21-42
URL: http://ihej.ir/article-1-2160-en.html
URL: http://ihej.ir/article-1-2160-en.html
Assistant Professor, Theory-Oriented STI Studies Department, National Research Institute for Science Policy (NRISP), Tehran, Iran. , khoshnam@nrisp.ac.ir
Abstract: (16 Views)
Objective: Despite the fact that upstream documents, recent research and studies in the Iranian higher education system emphasize the necessity of developing interdisciplinary research; however, what is seen is that intradisciplinary studies continue to have greater appeal in Iran. The purpose of this article is to address the obstacles to the development of interdisciplinary studies and to present ideas for the development of such studies from a sociological perspective and from Bourdieu's academic Champ approach in the country's scientific system.
Method: The qualitative approach and semi-structured interview tool were used to collect data. The research community includes researchers and experts active in the field of interdisciplinary studies, 12 of whom were selected using purposeful sampling. To analyze the data, deductive content analysis was used based on the concepts of Bourdieu's theory of the academic field and the approach of Brown and Clark.
Results: The findings show that disruption in conversion of capital, symbolic violence, unbalanced support, lack of academic prestige, being considered worthless, the field structure based on competition and disciplinary distinction, conflict over disciplinary boundaries, maintaining power through maintaining boundaries, preventing others from entering traditional departments, scientific imperialism, researchers' habitus based on monodisciplinary dominance, dependence of scientific identity on the specialized field, mastery of the method and language of their specialized field, reproduction of power structures based on monodisciplinary dominance, lack of legal support, and imbalance in the power structure have caused scientific disciplines to compete with other actors in the academic field as independent factors with their own capital, and obstacles to the development of interdisciplinary research.
Conclusion: The academic field allows for the formation of interdisciplinary research only when it redefines scientific and disciplinary rules, facilitates the path of transforming the scientific capital of interdisciplinary researchers into institutional capital, symbolic capital, academic credibility and legitimacy, socializes habitus in a new direction, and transforms the power structure from a mono-disciplinary to a polyphonic state. Real transformation in interdisciplinary research requires the transformation of the field, not the individual reformation of researchers. If the field does not change, no amount of individual skill or motivation of the researcher will be able to change the interdisciplinary situation.
Method: The qualitative approach and semi-structured interview tool were used to collect data. The research community includes researchers and experts active in the field of interdisciplinary studies, 12 of whom were selected using purposeful sampling. To analyze the data, deductive content analysis was used based on the concepts of Bourdieu's theory of the academic field and the approach of Brown and Clark.
Results: The findings show that disruption in conversion of capital, symbolic violence, unbalanced support, lack of academic prestige, being considered worthless, the field structure based on competition and disciplinary distinction, conflict over disciplinary boundaries, maintaining power through maintaining boundaries, preventing others from entering traditional departments, scientific imperialism, researchers' habitus based on monodisciplinary dominance, dependence of scientific identity on the specialized field, mastery of the method and language of their specialized field, reproduction of power structures based on monodisciplinary dominance, lack of legal support, and imbalance in the power structure have caused scientific disciplines to compete with other actors in the academic field as independent factors with their own capital, and obstacles to the development of interdisciplinary research.
Conclusion: The academic field allows for the formation of interdisciplinary research only when it redefines scientific and disciplinary rules, facilitates the path of transforming the scientific capital of interdisciplinary researchers into institutional capital, symbolic capital, academic credibility and legitimacy, socializes habitus in a new direction, and transforms the power structure from a mono-disciplinary to a polyphonic state. Real transformation in interdisciplinary research requires the transformation of the field, not the individual reformation of researchers. If the field does not change, no amount of individual skill or motivation of the researcher will be able to change the interdisciplinary situation.
Keywords: Iranian higher education, interdisciplinary research, sociology of science, academic Champ approach
Type of article: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2025/11/5 | Accepted: 2025/11/1 | ePublished ahead of print: 2026/02/23
Received: 2025/11/5 | Accepted: 2025/11/1 | ePublished ahead of print: 2026/02/23
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |