Abstract

Our largest multidisciplinary problems outpace disciplinary training designed to reinforce boundaries. Using an interdisciplinary conversation about adolescent brain imaging, I argue that disciplinary stances (interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary) operate like rhetorical stases, helping diagnose where conversations build or diverge among experts. Because what constitutes interdisciplinarity is contested, mapping rhetorical features of each disciplinary stance stabilizes definitional debates by grounding interactions in specific discursive practices and offers technical communicators ways to facilitate and participate in stronger crossdisciplinary communication.

Journal
Technical Communication Quarterly
Published
2023-04-03
DOI
10.1080/10572252.2022.2100484
Open Access
Closed

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Rhetoric Society Quarterly

Cites in this index (12)

  1. Technical Communication Quarterly
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Technical Communication Quarterly
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Written Communication
Show all 12 →
  1. Written Communication
  2. College Composition and Communication
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Written Communication
  5. Rhetoric Society Quarterly
  6. Written Communication
  7. Written Communication
Also cites 19 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1177/0743558409357231
  2. 10.7208/chicago/9780226099088.001.0001
  3. 10.1080/02691728.2012.727192
  4. 10.1177/0743558409353063
  5. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198733522.001.0001
  6. 10.7208/chicago/9780226264196.001.0001
  7. 10.22323/2.15020201
  8. 10.1007/978-3-319-51268-6_6
  9. 10.1177/0743558409353339
  10. 10.1177/0743558408326913
  11. 10.1177/0743558409353780
  12. 10.1080/10705422.2014.901264
  13. 10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001
  14. 10.1086/599580
  15. 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102612-134009
  16. 10.1007/978-3-030-77392-2_4
  17. 10.1177/0743558409353065
  18. 10.1177/030631289019003001
  19. 10.1016/0362-3319(91)90040-B
CrossRef global citation count: 1 View in citation network →