Situations in Mapping

Mapping strategies will differ according to the nature of the complex question being addressed. In mapping a complex question, the interdisciplinarian should appreciate that one or more of the following situations is likely:

· Different authors may speak of different stages in a causal process. One speaks of how A influences B and another of how B influences C. Mapping the entire causal process may be all that is necessary to integrate these understandings. The greatest challenge may involve clearly identifying what each author is actually talking about.

· Different authors may stress different causes of a particular result. If these are complementary then again mapping may be all that is necessary for integration. If they conflict, then a more complicated type of integration is called for, and should be reflected in the final map.

· It may be that the causal variables stressed by different authors interact. Mapping these interactions can aid in assessing whether different understandings are complementary.

· It may be necessary to map phenomena at different levels: individuals versus groups; atoms versus molecules; watch springs versus watches. While these different levels need to be appreciated, they need not unduly complicate the mapping process [see the Keestra chapter in Allen Repko, William H. Newell and Rick Szostak, Case Studies in Interdisciplinary Research]. Special problems arise if there are Emergent Properties such that activities at one level are more than the sum of activities at lower levels.

· Different causal relationships may unfold in different places or at different times. It may be important to keep track of spatial or temporal locations.

This material is discussed in Repko, Interdisciplinary Research, 2011, chapter13, drawing mostly on the Henry and Bracy chapter in Allen Repko, William H. Newell and Rick Szostak, Case Studies in Interdisciplinary Research, but also the Connor chapter.