The contributing authors for this special edition reflected on three major themes of interdisciplinarity1: (a) reality as multileveled and more complex than assumed by single disciplines, (b) researchers and practitioners in adapted physical activity (APA) being faced with complex problems that cannot be solved by a single discipline, and (c) solutions of complex problems require the use of a holistic multilevel perspectives (Repko & Szostak, 2017). They addressed knowledge integration and its relevance for practice and research in the field of APA using instrumental, conceptual, and critical classifications of interdisciplinarity. Instrumental interdisciplinarity occurs when scholars utilize or borrow ideas from another discipline to enhance problem solving in their home disciplines (Slater & Hearn, 1996). Conceptual interdisciplinarity examines assumptions of institutional and social power embedded in disciplinary work (Aran, 2004). Critical interdisciplinarity links interdisciplinary research with critical theory to create a potent mixture of critical questioning with negotiation (Sumner, 2003).
APA has been described as both a cross-disciplinary and multidisciplinary field, drawing upon the research traditions of the social sciences, the humanities, the arts, and the natural sciences to guide research and practice (Bouffard, 2014; Hutzler & Sherrill, 2007; Kagan, 2009; Reid & Stanish, 2003). Multidisciplinary inquiry involves disciplinary specialists working on a single problem with no attempt to integrate the different perspectives while cross-disciplinary research has been used as a synonym for multidisciplinary research, an umbrella term for disciplinary collaborations, or the viewing of one discipline from the viewpoint of another (Bouffard & Spencer-Cavaliere, 2016).2 Disciplines are guided by different world views or frames (e.g., paradigms, ontologies, epidemiologies, theories). “Frames are mental structures that shape the way we see the world” and are from whence ideas come (Lakoff, 2004, p. xv). Communication across disciplines can be difficult and divisive as people are often educated within traditional frames that can confine understanding of the foundations of other areas of inquiry (Jacobs & Frickel, 2009; Repko & Szostak, 2017).
Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly “is a multidisciplinary, international journal and the field relies on multiple disciplines to produce its body of knowledge, . . . guided by disciplines (or domains of knowledge) such as biomechanics, motor control/neuroscience, exercise biochemistry, exercise physiology, sport and exercise psychology, sociology, critical theory, poststructuralism, or philosophy” (Bouffard, 2014, p. 2). The editorial board of Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly infrequently publishes interdisciplinary research due to rare submissions yet may benefit from interdisciplinarity as a way of building on the strengths of our diverse bodies of knowledge (Bouffard, 2014). To publicly engage in the narrative surrounding interdisciplinarity counters perceptions of being too inward looking in a rapidly changing sociopolitical climate around diversity, human experience, and movement. “We must insist on the value of complexity, so that divergent thinking is not eclipsed in the effort to speak with one voice. We must make room for the disputes that are at the centre of knowledge generation” (Viseu, 2015, p. 291). Valuing complexity requires resisting acquiescence to habits of mind, stepping back from entrenched assumptions, and reframing the way we see the world (Lakoff, 2004). Thinking differently, speaking differently, and “troublemaking” are required to bring about social change at the risk of being dismissed or marginalized as being as irrational, dismissive of our history, or underinformed by our colleagues (Lakoff, 2004; Updale, 2008). Yet calls for integration of research, theory, and practice in APA through interdisciplinarity continue to increase (Bouffard, 2014; Bouffard & Reid, 2012; Szostak, 2016). We invite you to examine how the contributing authors frame their thinking, the goals they seek, and the plans and actions they suggest for developing the research relationships needed for interdisciplinary research in APA.
Rick Szostak, in his article titled “Interdisciplinarity and Adapted Physical Activity,” explores the application of interdisciplinarity to the field of APA, encouraging researchers to avoid the allocation of scarce resources to the reinvention of previously identified and successful strategies for justifying, engaging with, and pursuing interdisciplinary research. He artfully brings together literature on interdisciplinarity, creativity, and team research to reinforce that interdisciplinary research is neither impossible nor easy. By advocating for a shared set of strategies for interdisciplinary research, he notes that communication across disciplinary researchers is enhanced, sparing the need to explain ontological and epistemological adherences, theories, methodologies, and the rationale for engaging with the knowledge base of other disciplines. Moreover, shared strategies enhance journal and grant reviewers’ abilities to evaluate interdisciplinary work.
The parsimony of the recommended guiding principle for viewing the field of APA and the preparation of students, “No intervention with one type of research” is worthy of deep reflection, as is the recommendation for mapping the big picture by identifying interacting variables that encase complex questions. Mapping challenges disciplinary singularity (without ignoring disciplinary contributions), historical adherence to disability as an individual problem, ableistic good intensions, a focus on restorative function, and many other axiological beliefs (see Peers, 2018). Placing disciplinary and interdisciplinary research along a continuum of research endeavors, rather than dichotomizing ontological and epistemological adherences, encourages insights that may breakdown the epistemology of ignorance that can prevent us from widening views of our field in the broader world. Dr. Szostak notes that some APA researchers consciously (or nonconsciously) already draw on different disciplines (theories and literature bases) that can feed forward insights to other disciplines. The author encourages wakefulness to the relationship of disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity for theory extension, thereby advancing insights into complex questions, encouraging the preparation of student in disciplinary research traditions while also acquainting them with interdisciplinary, creative, and/or team research.
Dan Goodley, in his article titled “Understanding Disability: Biopsychology, Biopolitics, and an In-Between-All Politics,” embraces critical interdisciplinarity as an emerging paradigm for knowledge formation, illustrating the foundational and complementary roles of disciplines in interdisciplinary work. He theorizes labeling (categorization), disability, and the human condition from multiple perspectives: (a) biopsychological, (b) biopolitics, and (c) in-between-all politics. The biopsychological perspective aims to know psychopathology, psychological disorders, biogenic, and neuropsychology—or the “abnormal” to constitute and understand the nonconsidered normal. Dr. Goodley outlines four ways that disability studies scholars have responded to the individual model of disability by (a) eradicating disablism (while ignoring impairment), (b) embracing or reembracing impairment, (c) the enculturation of impairment, and (d) phenomenology.
The second perspective of disability categorization was biopolitics or the discussion of biopower. Biopower discourses are re/produced through institutional regimes that support labeling, intervention by experts, and subjectification toward self-improvement that are based on assumptions of deficits. The in-between-all politics perspective highlights the desire for and rejection of categories, tensions, or that which reminds us of the complexity of divergent (binary) practices of disablism (erasure of disability), and ableism (promotion of the autonomous citizen) with an invitation to imagine what might occur in the space between. Dr. Goodley synthesizes divergent assumption bases—achieving important and differing conclusions about disability that would not be achieved from a single discipline perspective and highlighting the application of disability categorization to APA research and practice.
Maureen Connolly and William Harvey, in their article titled “Critical Pedagogy and APA: A Resonant (and Timely) Interdisciplinary Blend,” explore from a critical interdisciplinary perspective, postsecondary education and the problem of strategic, outcome-oriented, correct answer seeking, and grade focus students. They highlight the dissonance between the demands of student placement contexts (and ultimately job environments that require multilayered understandings of complicated interactions) and the perceived competence of students who have not embraced nor practiced proximal learning, trial and error, reflection, and/or refinement. Interdisciplinarity is promoted to integrate APA/education and critical pedagogy through disability activisms, instructional design, pedagogical theory, and community-focused educational programming. Through pedagogic reflection, the authors integrate thought from different disciplines (that some say cannot be done) and apply it to an extremely complex community service learning context. They reinforce the work required of instructors for students to experience high-quality and deeply informed interdisciplinarity.
Danielle Peers, in her paper titled “Engaging Axiology: Enabling Meaningful Transdisciplinary Collaboration in Adapted Physical Activity,” presents a strong argument for axiological reflection and its importance for an ethical commitment to transdisciplinary research. She does this through instrumental and critical perspectives of interdisciplinarity, engaging with the disciplines of philosophy, queer studies, ethics, humanities, arts, and medicine. She suggests that the advancement of transdisciplinary research in APA is undermined by four axiological dissonances: (a) piss on pity—disability as a social issue not personal tragedy, (b) desiring disability—disability is generative, (c) against abnormal—increasing opportunities not decreasing abnormality, and (d) nothing about us without us—disability leadership. Dr. Peers puts forward a compelling solution to the problem of the axiological gap and resulting axiological dissonance through an understanding of, commitment to, and action toward transdisciplinary thinking, engagement, practice, and research in APA.
Arya Sharma, in the interview article titled “Conceptualizing Obesity as a Chronic Disease: An Interview With Dr. Arya Sharma,” presents an alternate paradigm to obesity interventions for people who have body mass indexes above 30. He challenges the conventional wisdom of individually focused clinical therapies involving exercise, diet, and behavioral interventions to reduce weight and bring caloric intake and caloric expenditure into a sustainable balance. He purports that obesity should be increasingly recognized as a chronic disease, similar to other lifestyle diseases such as diabetes and heart disease. If given disease status, those with health concerns due to significant body mass indexes would be eligible to receive public health–supported surgical interventions to manage their weight. Dr. Sharma purports that the stigma-inducing focus on self-failing (e.g., coping with life events through food, laziness, lack of self-regulatory control) and prescribed dietary and behavioral interventions does not address biological processes that make obesity a lifelong problem to which there is no easy person-focused solution and no easy way back. He advocates for an interdisciplinary approach to obesity suggesting that APA specialists have a role to play as exercise has multifaceted impacts beyond caloric expenditure including reduced appetite, improved sleep, and an enhanced sense of well-being.
Notes
Interdisciplinarity as “a process of answering a question, solving a problem, or addressing a topic that is too broad or complex to be dealt with adequately by a single discipline, and draws on the disciplines with the goal of integrating their insights to construct a more comprehensive understanding” (Repko & Szostak, 2017, p. 8).
References
Aran, J.D. (2004). Conceptualization of interdisciplinarity: Configurations of knowledge and action. Human Relations, 57, 379–412. doi:10.1177/0018726704043893
Bouffard, M. (2014). Farewell editorial. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31, 1–3. doi:10.1123/apaq.31.1.1
Bouffard, M., & Reid, G. (2012). The good, the bad, and the ugly of evidence-based practice. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 29, 1–24. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e7f1/d3f00dc079a42b3591e7b5cc76c82568f397.pdf. doi:10.1123/apaq.29.1.1
Bouffard, M., & Spencer-Cavaliere, N. (2016). Interdisciplinarity in adapted physical activity. Quest, 68, 4–14. doi:10.1080/00336297.2015.1117002
Hutzler, H., & Sherrill, C. (2007). Defining adapted physical activity: International perspectives. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 24, 1–20. doi:10.1123/apaq.24.1.1
Jacobs, J.A., & Frickel, S. (2009). Interdisciplinarity: A critical assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 43–65. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27800068. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115954
Kagan, J. (2009). The three cultures: Natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities in the 21st century. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant: Know your values and frame the debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.
Peers, D. (2018). Engaging axiology: Enabling meaningful transdisciplinary collaboration. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 35(2). doi:10.1123/apaq.2017-0095
Reid, G., & Stanish, H. (2003). Professional and disciplinary status of adapted physical activity. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 20, 213–229. doi:10.1123/apaq.20.3.213
Repko, A.F., & Szostak, R. (2017). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Slater, L., & Hearn, A. (1996). Outside the lines: Issues in interdisciplinary research. Montreal, QC, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Sumner, J. (2003). Relations of suspicion: Critical theory and interdisciplinary research. History of Intellectual Culture, 3, 1–12. Retrieved from https://www.ucalgary.ca/hic/files/hic/sumnerpdf.pdf
Szostak, R. (2016). Interdisciplinary best practices for adapted physical activity. Quest, 68, 69–90. doi:10.1080/00336297.2015.1117001
Updale, E. (2008). The ethics of the everyday: Problems the professors are too posh to ponder? Clinical Ethics, 3, 34–36. doi:10.1258/ce.2007.007053
Viseu, A. (2015). Integration in social science into research is crucial. Nature, 525, 291. doi:10.1038/525291a
