2024-10-29 | | Total: 3
Addressing global societal challenges necessitates insights and expertise that transcend the boundaries of individual disciplines. In recent decades, interdisciplinary collaboration has been recognised as a vital driver of innovation and effective problem-solving, with the potential to profoundly influence policy and practice worldwide. However, quantitative evidence remains limited regarding how cross-disciplinary efforts contribute to societal challenges, as well as the evolving roles and relevance of specific disciplines in addressing these issues. To fill this gap, this study examines the long-term evolution of interdisciplinary contributions to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), drawing on extensive bibliometric data from OpenAlex. By analysing publication and citation trends across 19 research fields from 1970 to 2022, we reveal how the relative presence of different disciplines in addressing particular SDGs has shifted over time. Our results also provide unique evidence of the increasing interconnection between fields since the 2000s, coinciding with the United Nations' initiative to tackle global societal challenges through interdisciplinary efforts. These insights will benefit policymakers and practitioners as they reflect on past progress and plan for future action, particularly with the SDG target deadline approaching in the next five years.
Academics and departments are sometimes judged by how their research has benefitted society. For example, the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) assesses Impact Case Studies (ICS), which are five-page evidence-based claims of societal impacts. This study investigates whether ChatGPT can evaluate societal impact claims and therefore potentially support expert human assessors. For this, various parts of 6,220 public ICS from REF2021 were fed to ChatGPT 4o-mini along with the REF2021 evaluation guidelines, comparing the results with published departmental average ICS scores. The results suggest that the optimal strategy for high correlations with expert scores is to input the title and summary of an ICS but not the remaining text, and to modify the original REF guidelines to encourage a stricter evaluation. The scores generated by this approach correlated positively with departmental average scores in all 34 Units of Assessment (UoAs), with values between 0.18 (Economics and Econometrics) and 0.56 (Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience). At the departmental level, the corresponding correlations were higher, reaching 0.71 for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Leisure and Tourism. Thus, ChatGPT-based ICS evaluations are simple and viable to support or cross-check expert judgments, although their value varies substantially between fields.
This extended abstract describes the challenges in implementing recommender systems for digital archives in the humanities, focusing on Monasterium.net, a platform for historical legal documents. We discuss three key aspects: (i) the unique characteristics of so-called charters as items for recommendation, (ii) the complex multi-stakeholder environment, and (iii) the distinct information-seeking behavior of scholars in the humanities. By examining these factors, we aim to contribute to the development of more effective and tailored recommender systems for (digital) humanities research.