Morgan, G. T.; Touchie, M. F.; Robinson, J.; Jakubiec, A. and Tran, J. (2026) Critical reflections on the process of interdisciplinary building science research. Buildings & Cities, 7(1), pp. 653-666. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Interdisciplinary building science research has emerged as a promising approach to gaining more holistic understandings of the ways in which buildings perform and are experienced by their inhabitants. The problem is that despite a desire for interdisciplinary approaches, there remains a disconnect between those trained in technical studies and those whose fields are grounded in community-based or participatory efforts. Despite its adoption in research practice, the processes involved in combining traditionally technical engineering-led efforts with those from the social sciences means there are significant implications for research design and execution when performing this type of interdisciplinary research. This article provides critical reflections on the theoretical and practical epistemological, methodological, and engagement challenges encountered and navigated by a team of interdisciplinary researchers exploring the ways in which wellbeing emerges in the built environment. These reflections address the realities of interdisciplinary building science research, bounded by the limits of time, resources and disciplinary siloes. These insights are used to identify the ways in which research teams may be able to anticipate, address and work through the challenges encountered in their own work exploring building performance and experience.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building science; built environment; interdisciplinary research; mixed methods; research design; research management; teamwork |
| Index terms: | research design, building science, building performance, reflection, well-being, community-based, teamwork, research practice, built environment, interdisciplinary research, social science, mixed method |
| Subjects: | management, research methods, quality assurance, research design and methodology, data collection methods, communities and social development, theoretical framing, professional development, infrastructure and transport systems, engineering principles, mental health and wellbeing |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Health and Safety, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Information Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here