Drivers of scientific innovation in Social Sciences and Humanities Disciplines? (CHANGE-SSH)

Beyond Scientific Revolutions

When people think about scientific change, they often imagine dramatic breakthroughs such as Einstein's theory of relativity or Darwin's theory of evolution. But change in the social sciences and humanities is usually more gradual. Scholars introduce/adopt new concepts, methods, and research topics, which eventually become part of everyday academic practice and are often integrated into everyday use outside of academic contexts.

Existing research argues that change should not be understood solely in terms of major revolutions. Instead, disciplinary innovation may be defined as any lasting shift in a discipline's aims, theories, methods, or ways of organizing knowledge. A new analytical technique, an interdisciplinary approach, or the adoption of digital tools may all transform a field even if they do not overturn existing paradigms. 

Why Study Change Now?

Over the last three decades, universities and research systems have undergone profound transformations. Scholars increasingly collaborate internationally, publish in English-language journals, and compete for external funding. Research is also evaluated more frequently through rankings, citation metrics, and assessments of societal impact. These developments raise important questions. Do funding schemes encourage innovative research or promote conformity? Does pressure to publish in prestigious journals narrow the range of ideas being explored? Are disciplines becoming more alike as they respond to common evaluation systems?

The project seeks to understand if and how governance mechanisms—such as funding programs, research assessment exercises, and other policy initiatives—help stimulate intellectual creativity.

Four Disciplines, Two Countries

To investigate these issues, we select four disciplines that represent different traditions within SSH.

• Archaeology combines historical interpretation with increasingly sophisticated scientific methods such as genetics and radiocarbon dating.
• Linguistics spans both traditional philology and modern computational approaches.
• Political science includes both qualitative and quantitative traditions.
• Psychology bridges the natural sciences, medicine, and social sciences.

Studying these fields across Denmark, and Norway will allow us to compare how similar disciplines evolve under somewhat different institutional conditions.

Following the Trails of Ideas

The project uses a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods.

On the quantitative side, the team will analyze publication databases, citation patterns, and keyword networks to identify emerging research themes and shifts in intellectual influence. Bibliometric maps can reveal how concepts cluster together and how different research communities interact. One example from archaeology shows a divide between historically oriented research and more science-based approaches, connected through a handful of influential journals that serve as intellectual bridges.

On the qualitative side, researchers will conduct approximately 120 interviews with leading scholars, funding representatives, and members of scholarly societies. These conversations will help uncover how researchers perceive change, how new ideas gain acceptance, and how institutional pressures affect their work.

Why It Matters

Understanding disciplinary change is not merely an academic exercise. Research policies increasingly shape what scientists study, how they collaborate, and how success is measured. Better knowledge about these influences could help policymakers design funding systems and evaluation frameworks that encourage creativity rather than discourage it.

The project will also shed light on broader concerns about the future of scholarship: whether increasing standardization is reducing intellectual diversity, how local and national research traditions survive in a global academic environment, and what conditions are most conducive to innovative thinking.

Ultimately, the study treats academic disciplines as living communities whose evolution is shaped by both ideas and institutions. By examining how knowledge changes in the social sciences and humanities, the researchers hope to better understand how societies produce, organize, and renew knowledge itself.