The late Hawaiian comedian Rap Replinger once stated that Hawai`i was not a "melting pot," in which individuals from different cultures assimilated into a cohesive whole; rather, Hawai`i was a "salad bowl," in which such individuals retained their unique backgrounds, but still created a shared identity by living together. Likewise, research has encountered similar discussions regarding how to integrate multiple fields of expertise into one project. Perhaps, interdisciplinary research is the "melting pot" that focuses on integrating and synthesizing different fields` knowledge and methodologies; multidisciplinary research is the "salad bowl" that involves individuals from different fields collaborating, with each providing their own discipline-specific knowledge to the study. Further variations of the terms and composition of teams exist (e.g. transdisciplinary, with definitions for each of these variations well-defined by Wagner et al.). But each term has the commonality of integrating knowledge to solve a complex research or societal problem. For the purposes of this paper, we are utilizing the umbrella term, "multiple disciplinary" to denote all these various approaches concisely. Multiple disciplinary teams in sport- and exercise-related research may be comprised of researchers (and others) from domain-specific fields focused on individual and public health, well-being and behavior, as well as the stakeholders involved in sport and exercise, including the athletes, coaches, community members, and public health organizations. Many researchers are supportive of a push towards multiple disciplinary research and realize that such efforts can help provide a generalist perspective for multiple fields. However, these thoughts are not always translated into action. Multiple disciplinary collaborations are complex and require significant effort to ensure their uses are truly collaborative by allowing for contributions from all involved. Those taking part in research must also weigh the time commitment with the benefits gained (i.e., what is in it for them?), potential competing interests, and how other projects may interject and take their attention away. Increasingly, major grant bodies encourage multiple disciplinary research, et empirical findings suggest a negative association between interdisciplinarity teams and potential of fundability. Such findings may likely complicate researchers` needs to obtain funding (as it can be a component of job performance evaluation) alongside their drive to pursue research collaborations that allow them to better understand and/or differently examine their topics, populations, and methodologies of interest. As a result, we must continue to consider, and reflect on, the strategies that enable us to conduct the most relevant and impactful sport- and exercise-related research. Ultimately, having an upfront discussion to understand each other`s motivations is important for team dynamics (and reviewing this discussion through the duration of the project).
© Copyright 2021 Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. Elsevier. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.