科学学研究 ›› 2026, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (6): 1307-1319.
收稿日期:2025-04-14
修回日期:2025-05-29
出版日期:2026-06-15
发布日期:2026-06-15
通讯作者:
王伟(1982-),男,教授、博士生导师, E-mail: 作者简介:闵超(1990-),男,副教授、博士生导师。基金资助:
MIN Chao1, WU Bing-yi1,2, WANG Wei2(
)
Received:2025-04-14
Revised:2025-05-29
Online:2026-06-15
Published:2026-06-15
摘要:
科学政策呼吁将跨学科作为一种解决复杂社会问题的策略,但目前关于跨学科研究与其社会公众影响的证据仍然较少。本文关注科学知识的公共产品和重组两类属性,基于信号理论探讨了跨学科性对科学项目公众参与的影响。采用Experiment平台上的880个公众科学项目及其37,867人次公众参与的真实数据进行分析,结果表明,公众科学项目的跨学科性能够促进公众参与,包括直接影响和通过新颖性的中介产生的间接影响;学术研究团队身份能够正向调节跨学科性的直接影响,在特定跨学科策略下学术-非学术的混合团队身份会负向调节这种影响;在人文和社会科学导向和自然科学导向的公众科学项目中,跨学科性对公众参与的影响以及研究团队身份的调节作用存在显著差异。本文丰富了对跨学科研究产生社会影响的理解,为研究人员发起跨学科公众科学项目、开展跨学科公众科学实践提供了经验参考。
中图分类号:
闵超, 吴炳毅, 王伟. 跨学科性对科学项目公众参与的影响[J]. 科学学研究, 2026, 44(6): 1307-1319.
MIN Chao, WU Bing-yi, WANG Wei. The impact of interdisciplinarity on public engagement in citizen science[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2026, 44(6): 1307-1319.
| 类型 | 变量 | 最小值 | 中位数 | 最大值 | 均值 | 标准差 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 因变量 | Backers | 0 | 29 | 537 | 43.031 | 52.971 |
| Money | 0 | 72.72 | 10000 | 243.986 | 658.638 | |
| 自变量 | Variety | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1.248 | 0.467 |
| Balance | 0.018 | 0.025 | 1.775 | 0.27 | 0.348 | |
| Disparity | 0 | 0 | 0.658 | 0.087 | 0.166 | |
| 中介变量 | Novelty | 0.588 | 0.963 | 0.998 | 0.885 | 0.13 |
| 调节变量 | Academia (1=True) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.581 | 0.494 |
| Amateur (1=True) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.141 | 0.348 | |
| Mixed (1=True) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.278 | 0.448 | |
| 控制变量 | Challenge (1=True) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.475 | 0.5 |
| Institution (1=True) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.824 | 0.381 | |
| NumGoal | 1 | 4000 | 150000 | 6095.5 | 12203.413 | |
| NumBudget | 1 | 5 | 29 | 5.275 | 3.187 | |
| NumNotes | 0 | 4 | 44 | 5.728 | 6.522 | |
| NumDiscussion | 0 | 5 | 188 | 10.511 | 18.074 | |
| NumEndorse | 0 | 2 | 19 | 2.085 | 2.03 | |
| NumTeam | 1 | 2 | 23 | 2.96 | 2.281 | |
| LengthIntroduce | 183 | 2705.5 | 3444 | 2634.66 | 268.782 |
表1 变量的描述性统计结果
Table 1 Descriptive statistics of variables
| 类型 | 变量 | 最小值 | 中位数 | 最大值 | 均值 | 标准差 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 因变量 | Backers | 0 | 29 | 537 | 43.031 | 52.971 |
| Money | 0 | 72.72 | 10000 | 243.986 | 658.638 | |
| 自变量 | Variety | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1.248 | 0.467 |
| Balance | 0.018 | 0.025 | 1.775 | 0.27 | 0.348 | |
| Disparity | 0 | 0 | 0.658 | 0.087 | 0.166 | |
| 中介变量 | Novelty | 0.588 | 0.963 | 0.998 | 0.885 | 0.13 |
| 调节变量 | Academia (1=True) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.581 | 0.494 |
| Amateur (1=True) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.141 | 0.348 | |
| Mixed (1=True) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.278 | 0.448 | |
| 控制变量 | Challenge (1=True) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.475 | 0.5 |
| Institution (1=True) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.824 | 0.381 | |
| NumGoal | 1 | 4000 | 150000 | 6095.5 | 12203.413 | |
| NumBudget | 1 | 5 | 29 | 5.275 | 3.187 | |
| NumNotes | 0 | 4 | 44 | 5.728 | 6.522 | |
| NumDiscussion | 0 | 5 | 188 | 10.511 | 18.074 | |
| NumEndorse | 0 | 2 | 19 | 2.085 | 2.03 | |
| NumTeam | 1 | 2 | 23 | 2.96 | 2.281 | |
| LengthIntroduce | 183 | 2705.5 | 3444 | 2634.66 | 268.782 |
| DV | Novelty | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
| Year dummy | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Variety | -0.020** (0.009) | ||
| Balance | -0.042*** (0.012) | ||
| Disparity | -0.068*** (0.026) | ||
| Constant | 1.221*** (0.148) | 1.233*** (0.149) | 1.206 *** (0.147) |
| F-statistic | 3.52*** | 3.90*** | 3.64*** |
| Observations | 880 | 880 | 880 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.054 | 0.062 | 0.057 |
表2 跨学科性对公众科学项目新颖性的影响
Table 2 The impact of interdisciplinarity on the novelty of citizen science projects
| DV | Novelty | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
| Year dummy | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Variety | -0.020** (0.009) | ||
| Balance | -0.042*** (0.012) | ||
| Disparity | -0.068*** (0.026) | ||
| Constant | 1.221*** (0.148) | 1.233*** (0.149) | 1.206 *** (0.147) |
| F-statistic | 3.52*** | 3.90*** | 3.64*** |
| Observations | 880 | 880 | 880 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.054 | 0.062 | 0.057 |
| DV | IV | 模型 | ACME | ADE | TE | PM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Backers (In) | Variety | Model 1 | 0.008* | 0.111** | 0.119*** | 0.069* |
| Balance | Model 2 | 0.017** | 0.118* | 0.135** | 0.125* | |
| Disparity | Model 3 | 0.028** | 0.253** | 0.280** | 0.099* | |
| Money (In) | Variety | Model 4 | -0.006 | 0.149** | 0.144** | -0.038 |
| Balance | Model 5 | -0.012 | 0.157 | 0.145 | -0.083 | |
| Disparity | Model 6 | -0.019* | 0.421** | 0.401** | -0.048 |
表4 Bootstrap中介效应分析结果
Table 4 Report on Bootstrap mediation effect analysis
| DV | IV | 模型 | ACME | ADE | TE | PM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Backers (In) | Variety | Model 1 | 0.008* | 0.111** | 0.119*** | 0.069* |
| Balance | Model 2 | 0.017** | 0.118* | 0.135** | 0.125* | |
| Disparity | Model 3 | 0.028** | 0.253** | 0.280** | 0.099* | |
| Money (In) | Variety | Model 4 | -0.006 | 0.149** | 0.144** | -0.038 |
| Balance | Model 5 | -0.012 | 0.157 | 0.145 | -0.083 | |
| Disparity | Model 6 | -0.019* | 0.421** | 0.401** | -0.048 |
| Interaction | Academia | Amateur | Mixed | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | Model 9 | |||
| Variety* Interaction | 0.182** (0.144) | -0.066 (0.121) | -0.177* (0.095) | ||||||||
| Balance* Interaction | 0.285** (0.125) | -0.097 (0.167) | -0.279* (0.143) | ||||||||
| Disparity* Interaction | 0.487** (0.457) | -0.274 (0.323) | -0.417 (0.264) | ||||||||
| F-statistic | 72.54*** | 72.46*** | 72.25*** | 71.93*** | 71.71*** | 64.34*** | 72.33*** | 72.23*** | 71.97*** | ||
| Observations | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | ||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.642 | 0.641 | 0.641 | 0.640 | 0.639 | 0.662 | 0.641 | 0.641 | 0.640 | ||
表5 公众科学项目研究团队身份对跨学科性与公众参与广度关系的影响
Table 5 The impact of research team identity on the relationship between interdisciplinarity and public engagement breadth
| Interaction | Academia | Amateur | Mixed | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | Model 9 | |||
| Variety* Interaction | 0.182** (0.144) | -0.066 (0.121) | -0.177* (0.095) | ||||||||
| Balance* Interaction | 0.285** (0.125) | -0.097 (0.167) | -0.279* (0.143) | ||||||||
| Disparity* Interaction | 0.487** (0.457) | -0.274 (0.323) | -0.417 (0.264) | ||||||||
| F-statistic | 72.54*** | 72.46*** | 72.25*** | 71.93*** | 71.71*** | 64.34*** | 72.33*** | 72.23*** | 71.97*** | ||
| Observations | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | ||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.642 | 0.641 | 0.641 | 0.640 | 0.639 | 0.662 | 0.641 | 0.641 | 0.640 | ||
| Interaction | Academia | Amateur | Mixed | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | Model 9 | |||
| Variety* Interaction | 0.068 (0.137) | 0.009 (0.250) | -0.094 (0.137) | ||||||||
| Balance* Interaction | 0.339 (0.203) | 0.140 (0.355) | -0.479** (0.220) | ||||||||
| Disparity* Interaction | 0.172 (0.428) | 0.035 (0.859) | -0.237 (0.412) | ||||||||
| F-statistic | 16.90*** | 16.95*** | 16.90*** | 16.82*** | 16.75*** | 16.82*** | 16.71*** | 16.87*** | 16.70*** | ||
| Observations | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | ||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.285 | 0.285 | 0.285 | 0.284 | 0.283 | 0.284 | 0.282 | 0.284 | 0.282 | ||
表6 公众科学项目研究团队身份对跨学科性与公众参与深度关系的影响
Table 6 The impact of research team identity on the relationship between interdisciplinarity and public engagement depth
| Interaction | Academia | Amateur | Mixed | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | Model 9 | |||
| Variety* Interaction | 0.068 (0.137) | 0.009 (0.250) | -0.094 (0.137) | ||||||||
| Balance* Interaction | 0.339 (0.203) | 0.140 (0.355) | -0.479** (0.220) | ||||||||
| Disparity* Interaction | 0.172 (0.428) | 0.035 (0.859) | -0.237 (0.412) | ||||||||
| F-statistic | 16.90*** | 16.95*** | 16.90*** | 16.82*** | 16.75*** | 16.82*** | 16.71*** | 16.87*** | 16.70*** | ||
| Observations | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | 880 | ||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.285 | 0.285 | 0.285 | 0.284 | 0.283 | 0.284 | 0.282 | 0.284 | 0.282 | ||
| DV | Backers (In) | Money (In) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | |
| Variety | -0.418** (0.169) | -0.125 (0.501) | ||||||
| Balance | -0.465** (0.216) | -0.009 (0.520) | ||||||
| Disparity | -0.945** (0.452) | -0.158 (1.453) | ||||||
| Variety* Academia | 0.473* (0.270) | |||||||
| Balance* Academia | 1.178** (0.513) | |||||||
| F-statistic | 10.02*** | 9.92*** | 9.97*** | 9.07*** | 9.37*** | 5.81*** | 5.79*** | 5.79*** |
| Observations | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.597 | 0.594 | 0.595 | 0.593 | 0.602 | 0.441 | 0.440 | 0.440 |
表8 人文和社会科学导向项目中跨学科性对公众参与的影响
Table 8 The impact of interdisciplinarity on public engagement in humanities and social sciences-oriented projects
| DV | Backers (In) | Money (In) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | |
| Variety | -0.418** (0.169) | -0.125 (0.501) | ||||||
| Balance | -0.465** (0.216) | -0.009 (0.520) | ||||||
| Disparity | -0.945** (0.452) | -0.158 (1.453) | ||||||
| Variety* Academia | 0.473* (0.270) | |||||||
| Balance* Academia | 1.178** (0.513) | |||||||
| F-statistic | 10.02*** | 9.92*** | 9.97*** | 9.07*** | 9.37*** | 5.81*** | 5.79*** | 5.79*** |
| Observations | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 | 123 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.597 | 0.594 | 0.595 | 0.593 | 0.602 | 0.441 | 0.440 | 0.440 |
| [1] |
D'este P, Robinson-García N. Interdisciplinary research and the societal visibility of science: The advantages of spanning multiple and distant scientific fields[J]. Research Policy, 2023, 52(2): 104609.
DOI URL |
| [2] |
Fontana M, Iori M, Leone Sciabolazza V, et al. The interdisciplinarity dilemma: Public versus private interests[J]. Research Policy, 2022, 51(7): 104553.
DOI URL |
| [3] |
Kim H, Park H, Song M. Developing a topic-driven method for interdisciplinarity analysis[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2022, 16(2): 101255.
DOI URL |
| [4] |
Fontana M, Iori M, Montobbio F, et al. New and atypical combinations: An assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity[J]. Research Policy, 2020, 49(7): 104063.
DOI URL |
| [5] |
Kaplan S, Vakili K. The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2015, 36(10): 1435-1457.
DOI URL |
| [6] |
Wu B, Zhou W. Where do breakthroughs originate? Utilizing patent knowledge network to identify breakthrough technological innovations[J]. Scientometrics, 2025, 130(5): 2551-2576.
DOI |
| [7] |
Pinheiro H, Vignola-Gagné E, Campbell D. A large-scale validation of the relationship between cross-disciplinary research and its uptake in policy-related documents, using the novel Overton altmetrics database[J]. Quantitative Science Studies, 2021, 2(2): 616-642.
DOI URL |
| [8] | 海本禄. 大学科研人员合作研究参与意愿的实证研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2013, 31(4): 578-584. |
| Hai B L. Empirical study of university researchers' intention to participate cooperation research[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2013, 31(4): 578-584. | |
| [9] | 周全, 汤书昆. 媒介使用、信息认知能力与公众的环境科学知识获取——基于全国代表性数据的实证研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2017, 35(4): 481-490. |
| Zhou Q, Yang S K. Media use, information cognitive ability and the public's environmental science knowledge acquisition-Empirical research based on national representative data[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2017, 35(4): 481-490. | |
| [10] | 于凡, 董关鹏. 走出“缺失模型”:科学传播的“理智与情感”[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(10): 2047-2054. |
| Yu F, Dong G P. Getting rid of the "deficit model": The "rationality and emotion" of science communication[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2024, 42(10): 2047-2054. | |
| [11] | 杨正. “公众科学”研究——公民参与科学新方式[J]. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(9): 1537-1544. |
| Yang Z. Citizen science research-A new method for public engagement with science[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2018, 36(9): 1537-1544. | |
| [12] |
Durant J, Evans G, Thomas G. The public understanding of science[J]. Nature, 1989, 340: 11-14.
DOI |
| [13] | 王继超, 翟晓梅. 科技伦理治理中的公众参与[J]. 科学学研究, 2025, 43(1): 217-224. |
| Wang J C, Zhai X M. Public participation in the ethical governance of science and technology[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2025, 43(1): 217-224. | |
| [14] |
Cologna V, Mede N G, Berger S, et al. Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries[J]. Nature Human Behaviour, 2025, 9(4): 713-730.
DOI PMID |
| [15] | 王伟, 李莹, 刘海王, 等. 科学方法论对公众科学参与意愿的影响[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(3): 469-483. |
| Wang W, Li Y, Liu H W, et al. Influence of scientific methodology on the public's willingness to participate in citizen science[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2024, 42(3): 469-483. | |
| [16] |
Bonney R, Shirk J L, Phillips T B, et al. Next steps for citizen science[J]. Science, 2014, 343(6178): 1436-1437.
DOI PMID |
| [17] |
Wang W, Guo L, Wu Y J, et al. Content-oriented or persona-oriented? A text analytics of endorsement strategies on public willingness to participate in citizen science[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2022, 59(2): 102832.
DOI URL |
| [18] |
Stock R M, Zacharias N A. Two sides of the same coin: How do different dimensions of product program innovativeness affect customer loyalty?[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2013, 30(3): 516-532.
DOI URL |
| [19] | 王伟, 郭丽环, 周飞, 等. 背书人社会角色对众筹科学融资绩效的影响[J]. 科学学研究, 2021, 39(10): 1736-1747. |
| Wang W, Guo L H, Zhou F, et al. Impact of endorser's identity on crowd science's on financing performance[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2021, 39(10): 1736-1747. | |
| [20] |
张红, 任靖远, 刘晨阳, 等. 创造性产品评价中的从众效应[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(6): 688-698.
DOI |
|
Zhang H, Ren J Y, Liu C Y, et al. Conformity effect of the evaluation of creative products[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2019, 51(6): 688-698.
DOI |
|
| [21] | 吕琦, 上官燕红, 李锐. 基于参考文献和文本内容学科分类的跨学科测度研究[J]. 情报学报, 2024, 43(8): 976-991. |
| Lv Q, Shangguan Y H, Li R. Interdisciplinary measurement research based on reference literature and text content subject classification[J]. Journal of the China Society for Scientific and Technical Information, 2024, 43(8): 976-991. | |
| [22] | Weisberg R W: Creativity and Knowledge: A Challenge to Theories, Handbook of Creativity[M]. New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press, 1999: 226-250. |
| [23] |
Leahey E, Beckman C M, Stanko T L. Prominent but less productive:The impact of interdisciplinarity on scientists’ research[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2017, 62(1): 105-139.
DOI URL |
| [24] |
Hackett E J, Leahey E, Parker J N, et al. Do synthesis centers synthesize? A semantic analysis of topical diversity in research[J]. Research Policy, 2021, 50(1): 104069.
DOI URL |
| [25] |
Arnold A, Cafer A, Green J, et al. Perspective: Promoting and fostering multidisciplinary research in universities[J]. Research Policy, 2021, 50(9): 104334.
DOI URL |
| [26] |
Rhoten D, Parker A. Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path[J]. Science, 2004, 306(5704): 2046-2046.
PMID |
| [1] | 杨超 乔瀚 李如烟. 美国人工智能监管政策的复杂性及临近性研究———基于州域层面政策文本的主题模型[J]. 科学学研究, 2026, 44(1): 61-74. |
| [2] | 娄琬婷 龚丽敏 张一驰. 政府补贴对创业企业的创新绩效影响研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(8): 1760-1770. |
| [3] | 程鹏 童松 崔鹤 孙泽昌. AI 时代下科学知识生产的伦理困境与策略[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(11): 2254-2261. |
| [4] | 和鸿鹏 胡万亨. 为了科学,还是为了公众? ———论公众科学的两种进路[J]. 科学学研究, 2023, 41(2): 193-201. |
| [5] | 崔维军 孙成 吴杰 刘珏 马宁 李璐. 高价值专利对企业技术标准化能力的影响研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2023, 41(2): 296-306. |
| [6] | 王国燕 徐飞. 中国科学学研究的范式演变[J]. , 2021, 39(3): 0-0. |
| [7] | 李梅芳 王梦婷 齐海花 齐阳阳. 科技政策国际研究的演化[J]. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(9): 1565-1574. |
| [8] | 杨正. “公众科学”研究——公民参与科学新方式[J]. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(9): 1537-1544. |
| [9] | 刘则渊 陈悦. 中国科学学40年 ——纪念全国科学大会40周年[J]. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(8): 1345-1352. |
| [10] | 朱军文 李奕嬴. 国外科技人才国际流动问题研究演进[J]. 科学学研究, 2016, (5): 697-703. |
| [11] | 陈悦 陈超美 刘则渊 胡志刚 王贤文. CiteSpace知识图谱的方法论功能[J]. 科学学研究, 2015, 33(2): 242-253. |
| [12] | 朱桂龙 张艺 陈凯华. 产学研合作国际研究的演化[J]. 科学学研究, 2015, 33(11): 1669-1686. |
| [13] | 丁大尉 胡志强 王衍行. 网络信息共享与当代科学知识生产的新特征——基于对arXiv知识共享模式的分析[J]. , 2014, 32(4): 486-492. |
| [14] | 吴肃然. 再思科学知识社会学:社会学经验研究的启示[J]. , 2013, (6): 801-806. |
| [15] | 邱德胜. 论实验室研究的理论渊源[J]. , 2013, (3): 330-334. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||