Crossdisciplinary approaches as applied in occupational science

ABSTRACT

This discussion paper aimed to explore various cross-disciplinary approaches (i.e., multi-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, trans-disciplinary, and post-disciplinary) employed in occupational science research. By describing how these approaches are applied in sample studies, our discussion paper shows that taking a cross-disciplinary approach can broaden understandings of complex societal issues related to health, well-being, and human behaviour. Although our paper is data-free and non-systematic, we present our reflections to encourage discussion on the topic of cross-disciplinary approaches. We also want to open the dialogue for occupational scientists to consciously choose cross-disciplinary approaches in their occupational science work. This will enhance the potential for groundbreaking and impactful processes and outcomes both in research and practice.

KEYWORDS:

• Occupational science
• interdisciplinary
• multidisciplinary
• occupational therapy
• transdisciplinary

Occupational science is a relatively new academic discipline that has emerged from various fields. It was created by a group of individuals with diverse disciplinary knowledge who recognised the importance of studying human behaviours and their doings (Yerxa et al., 1990). Occupational science deals with questions about occupation, or the meaningful activities that humans do, and their transaction with health, well-being, environments, cultures, and societies. Consequently, occupational science research allows for the overlapping of disciplines from the basic, medical, applied, and social sciences. Occupational science is therefore by nature produced through cross-disciplinary approaches (Clark et al., 1991). For instance, the following list of academic disciplines constitutes occupational science epistemology: evolutionary biology, anthropology, social geography, nursing, occupational therapy, psychology, and sociology (Laliberte Rudman et al., 2008; Molke et al., 2004).

Despite different histories, occupational science and occupational therapy share a common concern with occupation and while each discipline is distinct, the two are stronger together (Whiteford, 2023). Within the discipline of occupational science, however, there has been a tendency towards epistemic tensions, including the abandonment of occupational therapy knowledge from occupational science. This has led to criticism of both occupational science as well as occupational therapy for various reasons (Pollard et al., 2010).

Different Disciplinary Approaches

An ‘academic discipline’ is a subdivision of knowledge produced out of doing research and engaging in scholarship within the context of higher education institutions and universities. Through these processes, disciplines generate pieces of knowledge that are then translated into subjects within academia to be taught, learned, and delivered (Trowler, 2012). Broadly, research involves the search for ‘new’ knowledge to add to an existing body of knowledge through experimentation, theorisation, interpretation, observation, and correlation. Scholarship, on the other hand, entails providing the context of research by doing activities beyond research including teaching, mentoring, consulting, writing, and supervising graduate students. This also includes contributing to society outside the four walls of the university (Neumann, 1993).

Academic disciplines are dynamic. For instance, they can either become obsolete or transform into two or more sub-disciplines due to advancements in science and technology (Trowler, 2012). Along with these advancements and the increasing competition for funds to promote the disciplines, disciplinary experts have become subjected to more stringent protocols to perpetuate a culture of fortifying their disciplinary boundaries. This process is monodisciplinary, which involves researchers and scholars who only generate conceptualisations, methods, and paradigms within one discipline (Ramakrishna, 2022).

Thinking and working beyond one’s discipline entails utilising other disciplinary approaches to encourage research and scholarship grounded in two or more disciplines (Choi & Pak, 2006). Collectively, this is known as a cross-disciplinary approach. In the existing literature, the following cross-disciplinary approaches commonly exist: Multidisciplinary, inter-disciplinary, trans-disciplinary, and post-disciplinary. These cross-disciplinary approaches have been applied in education, research, scholarship, programme development, and policymaking in the past decades across different disciplines. Experts’ ability to intentionally identify which cross-disciplinary approach to use is crucial in solving modern-day societal issues, since a single discipline frequently reaches its limits in the search for answers and solutions (Darbellay, 2019). The cross-disciplinary approaches that involve different disciplines have been used interchangeably in the literature. To distinguish each approach, we describe them broadly with definitions and examples based on existing literature:

Multi-disciplinary is knowledge generated from at least two disciplines, but they add to one another and are not integrative. Members of a multidisciplinary team work independently as experts in their respective fields. Different perspectives are welcomed, with different paradigms, models, and theories presented side by side, or in parallel with each other, to provide a more complete picture of the research field (Choi & Pak, 2006).

Inter-disciplinary is when at least two disciplines are combined to create synthesised knowledge. Members of interdisciplinary teams share models and theories and work tightly together on the project. Thereby, they analyse, synthesise, and harmonise links between disciplines into a coordinated and coherent whole (Choi & Pak, 2006)

Trans-disciplinary entails fostering a higher form of cooperation in generating and applying knowledge. This approach refers to a process where knowledge transcends disciplinary boundaries, which involves bringing together different actors and ordinary citizens to solve complex or ‘wicked’ problems (Yeung et al., 2021). The main purpose of trans-disciplinary work is to bridge academia and society through intentional dialoguing and partnership to produce knowledge that can be consumed by society in everyday life (Yeung et al., 2021).

Post-disciplinary is regarded as an unpopular, transgressive, volatile, disobedient, and militant way of generating knowledge (Darbellay, 2019). It refers to reversing the perspective of the need for a disciplinary foundation in the process of producing knowledge. In other words, post-disciplinary approaches allow for the progressive decompartmentalization or even the disappearance of disciplinary knowledge, also known as disciplinary. This way of thinking and producing knowledge is typically avoided by disciplinary authorities and gatekeepers, who are often adherents of a monodisciplinary approach. Hence, researchers and scholars in each discipline devote themselves to applying specific research methods, developing new approaches, and creating conceptual paradigms to promote and protect the discipline’s scholarly boundaries (Darbellay, 2019).

Cross-Disciplinary Approaches within Occupational Science

To emphasise the importance of a cross-disciplinary approach to occupational science, the International Society of Occupational Scientists (ISOS) identified four underlying beliefs. One of these is that “occupational science embraces a multidisciplinary, multi-perspective approach to research, debate and activism” (International Developments in Occupational Science, 2000, p. 88). Similarly, Occupational Science Europe stated its aim “to be a multi-disciplinary group [that] actively encourages the involvement of many disciplines” (‘About OSE’, 2018, emphasis added). These statements from leading occupational science organisations emphasise that occupational science is anchored to and guided by multi-disciplinary approaches and perspectives.

Following the lead of eminent occupational scientists who declared occupational science to be an inter-disciplinary field (Laliberte Rudman et al., 2008), the ISOS five-year strategic plan from 2022 to 2027 includes the priority goal to “develop partnerships to broaden inter-disciplinary awareness of occupational science” (ISOS, 2023, p. 2). Furthermore, recent papers published in the Journal of Occupational Science have identified a shift to being a trans-disciplinary field (Mansilla et al., 2023; Simó Algado, 2023). The shift in terminology that has occurred from multi-disciplinary to trans-disciplinary occurred without clear explanation. While research and scholarship constituting experts from different disciplines engender broad, deep, and profound knowledge creation (Darbellay, 2019), it is evident that occupational science organisations and occupational scientists themselves use different terminologies. While it is common for researchers and scholars to use terms like multi-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, trans-disciplinary, and post-disciplinary interchangeably, they have distinct meanings and purposes (Ramakrishna, 2022). Furthermore, established, emerging, and new disciplines evolve, expand, fragment, and reconfigure to establish ‘boundaries’ between disciplines and sub-disciplines (Trowler, 2012). In some cases, a discipline may become obsolescent and disappear (Harkin & Healy, 2013). Hence, with the current financial turmoil in academia brought about by the growing number of academic departments that house and finance the progression of academic disciplines (Ramakrishna, 2022), it is imperative that researchers and scholars communicate openly how cross-disciplinary approaches could maximise the sharing and integration of research funding, resources, and efforts (Choi & Pak, 2006).

Rationale and Aim

Cooperation across disciplines can take many forms and usually strengthens disciplines that cooperate and interact with one another (Whiteford, 2023). In addition, the interchanging use of cross-disciplinary approaches is usually enriching, albeit complicated (Pollard et al., 2010), thus warranting exploration of how cross-disciplinary approaches are used. This is important to be able to provide knowledge, as occupational science is an emerging academic discipline with the ambition of becoming more established within academic institutions, societies, and the public. Therefore, this discussion paper explores how various cross-disciplinary approaches are used in occupational science research and scholarship by describing how they have been applied in exemplar studies. Specifically, our ambition was to discuss the nuances, benefits, risks, and outcomes of studies that utilised a cross-disciplinary approach from the point of view of the authors.

Our Approach

Finding exemplar studies entailed purposive hand-searching of relevant peer-reviewed studies within the field of occupational science that would suit our aims. As occupational therapy is considered an applied discipline closely linked to occupational science (Kristensen & Petersen, 2016), we also included studies from occupational therapy. We purposefully selected these studies that attempted to use each of the cross-disciplinary approaches, either explicitly or implicitly, in order to generate insights that we can use to continue this discussion. We acknowledge that our selection process was not systematic, but we intentionally chose sample studies that represent real-world examples. Table 1 identifies the authors, year of publication, study title, journal, and disciplines involved in each of the selected articles.

Table 1. The selected sample study for each cross-disciplinary approach, as well as involved disciplines for each study

Cross-disciplinary approach	Sample study selected	Involved disciplines
Multidisciplinarity	Cardona Reyes & Muñoz Arteaga. (2016). Multidisciplinary production of interactive environments to support occupational therapies. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 63, 90–99.	Rehabilitation sciences, occupational therapy, physical therapy, software engineering
Interdisciplinarity	Yañez & Zúñiga. (2018). The law and occupational justice: Inputs for the understanding of disability in Chile. Journal of Occupational Science, 25(4), 520–529.	Law studies, bioethics, human rights, occupational science
Transdisciplinarity	Castro de Jong, Pike, West, Valerius, Kay & Ellis. (2021). Shared music, shared occupation: Embedding music as a socio-altruistic collective- and co-occupation in occupational therapy education. Journal of Occupational Science, 28(3), 374–387.	Occupational science, occupational therapy, and music
Postdisciplinarity	Turcott & Holmes. (2021). The (dis)obedient occupational therapist: A reflection on dissent against disciplinary propaganda. Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional, 29, e2924.	Occupational science, sociology, psychoanalysis, socio-politics

After selecting the articles, we used the following questions to guide us in identifying the nuances, benefits, risks, and outcomes of the various forms of cross-disciplinary studies:

1. How did the authors define multi-, inter-, trans-, and post-disciplinary approaches and how were these approaches applied?

2. How did the authors include, integrate, and/or bridge the knowledge from other disciplines with occupational science and/or occupational therapy knowledge?

3. What are the (dis)advantages of using the identified cross-disciplinary approach?

The information from the selected studies was extracted and encoded into a matrix which constituted excerpts that directly addressed our aim. Each author was assigned one of the sample studies. A second author was then assigned to cross-check the extracted information, adding, editing, or revising it as necessary. A third round of review was done to synthesise and condense the extracted information.

Discussing the Selected Studies

This paper explores the cross-disciplinary approaches applied in occupational science research, in order to initiate discussion of the nuances, benefits, risks, and outcomes of the various multi-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, trans-disciplinary, and post-disciplinary approaches. The selected articles revealed that occupational science is situated in a constellation of disciplines characterised by pluralistic epistemologies, ontologies, axiologies, and methodologies. This means that occupational science is not limited to informing or being informed only by occupational therapy research (Yerxa, 1990) and clinical practice (Kristensen & Petersen, 2016). Since our aim was to initiate debate within occupational science and occupational therapy, we envisaged starting our discussion using secondary data from the exemplar studies.

Study 1: The multi-disciplinary case

Description

Published in a biomedical informatics journal, the paper by Reyes and Arteaga (2016) is a case study that reports the multi-disciplinary production of interactive environments to support people attending rehabilitation services in an organisation in Mexico. No explicit definition of a multi-disciplinary approach was provided, only a description of how one discipline can support another. In this study, software engineering is perceived to be the central discipline that produces assistive technologies for use in rehabilitation services, including occupational therapy. Specifically, the multi-disciplinary approach was used to gather a group of people from different disciplines to produce an interactive environment consisting of sensors, assistive devices, and video game consoles through software engineering for patients undergoing rehabilitation.

Reflections

While the paper upholds the traditional definition of a multi-disciplinary approach due to the reasonable intersection between occupational therapy, software engineering, and rehabilitation sciences, the authors of the paper were all software engineers. The article highlights how a multi-disciplinary approach was used to generate knowledge about the user experience of software developed for people with physical disabilities to aid environment navigation. This situation revealed, albeit unintentionally, the dominance of the software engineering tone and perspective in the paper, which is to be expected when there are no co-authors from other disciplines. This could also be attributed to the disciplinary nature (i.e., biomedical informatics) of the journal where the paper was submitted. Arguably, while the approach is multi-disciplinary, there is compartmentalisation rather than a harmonisation of concepts. For example, applications, as well as power relation dynamics, shift towards the software engineers as they are considered the authors, and the rehabilitation experts and occupational therapists are considered the research participants.

Initiating a cooperative approach in research can begin through multi-disciplinary processes. Thus, using a multi-disciplinary approach involves people coming from different disciplines who can together create and produce new technologies, products, and innovations to help people. However, if the multi-disciplinary approach is not employed intentionally, it might not effectively connect two or more disciplines to generate new knowledge, as seen in this case.

Study 2: The inter-disciplinary case

Description

Yañez and Zúñiga (2018) wrote an article published in the Journal of Occupational Science that aimed to broadly describe the concepts of occupational justice and occupational rights of people with disabilities within the Chilean legal framework. The authors provided no explicit definition of the inter-disciplinary approach except that it was largely described as the working together and engagement of two or more disciplines that produce ‘collaboration’ towards a common goal. One of the motivations for writing the article was the lack of interdisciplinary work in the field of occupational science. The disciplines involved in the article were occupational science, human rights, law studies, and bioethics—all of which were juxtaposed to achieve a better understanding of the disability laws in Chile. Specifically, the authors, who came from the disciplinary backgrounds of occupational therapy and public law, intersected the concepts of occupational justice (drawn from the occupational science discipline) with the legal framework of disability in Chile. The intent was to analyse the practical implications of the legislation in the context of Chilean daily life. The authors acknowledged that this multi-layered analysis cannot be achieved by only navigating within a single discipline.

Reflections

When using an inter-disciplinary approach, it is important to see an explicit dynamic exchange between disciplines. The exchanges could mean borrowing concepts and methods from one discipline and applying them in another, resulting in the production of new and hybridised knowledge. In this case, the concept of occupational justice was to be applied in law studies and bioethics. Additionally, the use of policy analysis as a method to situate the research objective was borrowed from law studies to inform other disciplines, including occupational science, occupational therapy, and disability studies.

The concepts used were applied in a practical situation within the Chilean context. In other words, the inter-disciplinary approach was utilised so that theoretical concepts such as occupational justice and bioethics could be translated into actual practice. Moreover, the authors raised the consciousness of the hegemony of the English language within the literature, reifying the need to underscore a South American point of view, including the Spanish language, to contribute to the global dialogue in occupational science.

Through an inter-disciplinary approach, it is possible to promote the strengths and unique constellation of knowledge of one discipline to another. In this case, occupational science is being promoted in the discipline of law studies, concretely allowing researchers and scholars to co-publish their works in occupational science journals. As seen within this case, aside from equalising the contributions of all the disciplines involved in the research, an interdisciplinary approach can also help fill the gap between one discipline and another. This can be done in terms of epistemology, ontology, and/or methodology.

Study 3: The trans-disciplinary case

Description

This educational discussion paper written by Castro de Jong and colleagues (2021) was published in the Journal of Occupational Science. It aimed to describe a 6-year collaboration between an occupational therapy programme in a mid-sized Australian city and a socio-altruistic music programme. The collaborative programme was designed to empower all participants to engage in helping others through music. This case involved an educational immersion anchored to an organic collaboration between educational programmes from different disciplines: occupational therapy and music. The authors were also consistent in mentioning that there was intentional dialoguing between partners from the year 2014 to 2020. The authors addressed the connection between occupational therapy theory and music due to the historical background of occupational therapy in art and creative activities as well as the importance of cultural context and cultural occupations within occupational therapy knowledge.

Reflections

The authors were able to stay true to the definition of a trans-disciplinary approach based on the approach’s purpose: involving ordinary citizens and bridging academia and practice. The study saw ordinary citizens as having the capacity to contribute to solving societal problems. The issue at hand dealt with the poor health and well-being of elderly individuals and people with disabilities. The proposed solution involved using music therapy and facilitating conversations and sharing of experiences among diverse groups of people. Moreover, the partnership of the two academic programmes with the community was seen to be a sustainable approach to bridging academia and practice. For the authors, this partnership was seen to produce a transformative programme and a marked change for the students, in terms of learning the value of music as a therapeutic agent in community work settings.

In a trans-disciplinary approach, sharing knowledge seems to be an important activity to be done intentionally, not just as an outcome but as a process. In this case, the approach taken allowed for a nuanced form of collaboration between different disciplines. Rather than implementing a formal music therapy programme, the educational initiatives centred around using music as a means of promoting social engagement between the academic and local communities. The goal was to improve the health and well-being of marginalised groups. In other words, using a trans-disciplinary approach veers away from the compartmentalization of disciplinary knowledge and its application, allowing the harmonisation of knowledge that transcends traditional ways of producing, reproducing, and applying knowledge. In this case, music was seen beyond sounds, songs, and playing instruments. Rather, it was understood as a tool for social connectedness and enriched collaboration among participants, with communal singing acting as a bridge between various participants.

As seen in this case, the intentional use of a trans-disciplinary approach in research can encompass consideration of pluralistic perspectives in understanding and creating knowledge. Moreover, there is a high likelihood of participating in new experiences and opportunities for lateral and reflective thinking (solving problems through an indirect and creative approach that does not follow rigid step-by-step logic) among those involved in the trans-disciplinary team.

Study 4: The post-disciplinary case

Description

The paper by Turcotte and Holmes (2021), published in Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional, attempts to deconstruct dominant (consensual) discourses that shape the status quo in occupational therapy and envision alternative paths for the development of the discipline. A post-disciplinary approach was not explicitly defined in the paper. However, the paper critically analysed the theoretical concepts of disobedience and dissensus drawn from the works of Erich Fromm and Jacques Rancière respectively. The purpose was to challenge the dominant assumptions of occupational therapy. A post-disciplinary approach allows for the progressive de-compartmentalisation or even the disappearance of disciplinary knowledge of a certain discipline. For the authors, occupational therapy was considered a discipline with disciplinary propaganda, regarded as a harmless and intrinsically beneficial health profession. This propaganda does not welcome concepts and theories where occupations are deemed harmful towards health, and where occupational therapy is not situated as a health profession. These arguments are, however, welcomed in occupational science discourses. While not explicitly mentioned, the authors are motivated to apply principles underpinned by the post-disciplinary approach by utilising ‘disobedient’ and ‘dissenting’ discourses to criticise occupational therapy as a discipline and profession. It is also important to note that the authors came from various disciplines including occupational therapy, rehabilitation sciences, and nursing.

Reflections

The authors did not mention anything about ‘post-disciplinary’, albeit they implicitly framed their discourses from critical theory, which included postmodernist and post-structuralist thinking. While the discipline under investigation in the study was occupational therapy, other disciplines were mentioned to support the theoretical analysis using a post-disciplinary approach. For instance, nursing and physical therapy disciplines were introduced to relate similar criticisms of their disciplinary assumptions. Moreover, the authors drew from the works of Fromm, who is a sociologist (sociology) and a psychoanalyst (psychology), and Rancière, who is a philosopher who mostly draws on socio-politics. Fromm believes that disobedience is not merely an act of transgressing the law, but action towards resisting dominant regimes. Rancière believes that political consensus is nothing less than an aesthetic regime that determines what is right and wrong in the eyes of political authorities.

The post-disciplinary approach is beneficial in constructing a discourse within and on the periphery of a certain discipline. It allows the application of pluralistic knowledge, not to employ eclectic or non-systematic theorisation, but to co-create new disciplinary conversations through the process of challenging disciplinary assumptions (Anesa & Fragonara, 2021). In doing so, using a post-disciplinary approach in occupational science allows for recognition of its disciplinary limitations and weaknesses towards generating creative methods because of transgressive, disruptive, and controversial conversations. As seen in this case, when using this approach in research, it is also crucial to include positionality statements to declare personal biases that inform arguments, discourses, and debates. This is important as doing so can challenge disciplinary dogma, parameters, and boundaries.

Discussion

Ensuring research quality entails inter-disciplinary approaches (i.e., considering the intersections of different disciplines), language clarity, operationalisation, and transparency (among 77 other quality dimensions of research) (Margherita et al., 2022). There is no hierarchy among cross-disciplinary approaches. Rather, multi-, inter-, trans-, and post-disciplinary approaches each have their unique characteristics, strengths, and limitations and can be used based on the intentions of the research and the researchers. This is in line with Darbellay (2019), who regarded knowledge to be complex, hence producing and applying knowledge cannot materialise when only one approach from one discipline is utilised. However, the reason why one approach is preferred over the other remains open for debate. while Choi and Pak (2007) argued for an inter-disciplinary approach to guide research, by selecting the appropriate disciplines within the research team, they also asserted that authors need to explain why multiple disciplines are used within a research project. They later clarified that researchers should cautiously select their approach according to the needs of the research area (Choi & Pak, 2008).

Different cross-disciplinary approaches are being applied in occupational science and occupational therapy research. We selected four articles within these fields, demonstrating how occupational science intersects with various academic disciplines and professions. None of the exemplars of cross-disciplinary approaches we investigated explicitly identified or defined the approach used. From our perspective, it is important for authors to explain their intention and purpose for using any of these approaches, meaning that the authors of the selected articles were not explicit, specific, and transparent enough in defining the approach that they used.

Conclusion

We encourage occupational science researchers to engage in intentional discussions on cross-disciplinary approaches, from the planning stage through to the dissemination phase of the research and scholarship process. Our hope is that a more systematic synthesis of research evidence can be undertaken in the future, with comprehensive coverage of all cross-disciplinary approaches and their derivatives situated in occupational therapy and occupational science. Such discussions will need to encompass possible epistemic tensions within the discipline. The findings could potentially open possibilities to include knowledge, methods, and perspectives from other disciplines to address occupation-focused research objectives.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Acknowledgements

Parts of this paper have previously been presented as a workshop in the Occupational Science Europe Conference 2023 in Odense, Denmark held August 24-26, 2023.

Additional information

Funding

The authors did not receive support from any funding agency in relation to this work.