@article{1468a39ec1b044f683d592e93651870f,
title = "The division of cognitive labor and the structure of interdisciplinary problems",
abstract = "Interdisciplinarity is strongly promoted in science policy across the world. It is seen as a necessary condition for providing practical solutions to many pressing complex problems for which no single disciplinary approach is adequate alone. In this article we model multi- and interdisciplinary research as an instance of collective problem solving. Our goal is to provide a basic representation of this type of problem solving and chart the epistemic benefits and costs of researchers engaging in different forms of cognitive coordination. Our findings suggest that typical forms of interdisciplinary collaboration are unlikely to find optimal solutions to complex problems within short time frames and can lead to methodological conservatism. This provides some grounds for both reflecting on current science policy and envisioning more effective scientific practices with respect to interdisciplinary problem solving.",
keywords = "Collective problem solving, Division of cognitive labor, Interdisciplinarity, Modularity",
author = "Samuli Reijula and Jaakko Kuorikoski and Miles MacLeod",
note = "Funding Information: This article was presented at the Centre for Philosophy of Social Science (University of Helsinki) research seminar as well as the DFG research network workshop Simulations of Scientific Inquiry (University of Bochum), Ghent-Brussels Seminars in Logic, History and Philosophy of Science (Ghent University), and CamPOS seminar (University of Cambridge). We{\textquoteright}d like to thank the participants at those sessions for their valuable feedback. Further we would like to thank the contributions of the three anonymous reviewers for their questions and comments, Kate Sotejeff-Wilson for editing the manuscript, and Maximilian Noichl for help with the illustrations. This research received funding from the Academy of Finland. Funding Information: This article was presented at the Centre for Philosophy of Social Science (University of Helsinki) research seminar as well as the DFG research network workshop Simulations of Scientific Inquiry (University of Bochum), Ghent-Brussels Seminars in Logic, History and Philosophy of Science (Ghent University), and CamPOS seminar (University of Cambridge). We{\textquoteright}d like to thank the participants at those sessions for their valuable feedback. Further we would like to thank the contributions of the three anonymous reviewers for their questions and comments, Kate Sotejeff-Wilson for editing the manuscript, and Maximilian Noichl for help with the illustrations. This research received funding from the Academy of Finland. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023, The Author(s).",
year = "2023",
month = jun,
day = "10",
doi = "10.1007/s11229-023-04193-4",
language = "English",
volume = "201",
journal = "Synthese",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "6",
}