Those with interdisciplinary dissertations earn less than those who didn't

[RedPill]

I didn't see a thread on this here. I thought I would drop it by. As someone wanting to pursue interdisciplinary research, this is concerning. No one in their right mind would get a PhD for the money, but it's still an interesting find. I wonder why..

 

"A new study, based on data from all people who earned Ph.D.s in 2010, suggests the opposite. In the year after earning their doctorates, those in the cohort who did interdisciplinary dissertations earned, on average, $1,700 less than those who completed dissertations in a single field. The study was conducted by Kevin M. Kniffin and Andrew S. Hanks, two postdoctoral fellows at Cornell University, and has been released by the Cornell Higher Education Research Institute.

 

Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/10/31/study-finds-phds-who-write-interdisciplinary-dissertations-earn-less#ixzz2lbxrhLzI 
Inside Higher Ed "

 

 

[poopfever]

Thanks for posting.

 

This makes sense. People are scared of things that don't fit into easily identifiable compartments. To study something without its own defined lineage means you'll have less opportunity, but you'll have a better education (if it's what suits your sensibilities and interests). I love the idea.

 

I am very interested in a masters of liberal studies programs, and also looking at interdisciplinary phd programs (berkeley's rhetoric, stanford's modern thought). 

[DogMa]

My MA is in an interdisciplinary program. I agree with poopfever () and think that many employers are unsure of how a potential employee with that kind of background would fit into their company. They are used to the traditional programs that turn out graduates that have had a reliable course load - tailored to something like business or biology. It is up to the student though to show how an interdisciplinary background can work in a certain position.

[NOWAYNOHOW]

I am also getting my MA in an interdisciplinary (well, relatively) department and I've been encouraged by a lot of faculty to pick one discipline for the PhD, rather than going through to a similarly nontraditional doctoral program.  I think if you want to teach, it's more attractive to say you can do Discipline 101 and Specialty 300 than trying to prove how your interdisciplinary degree makes you versatile, but unable to do the fundamentals.  I know you usually learn those either way, but on paper, eh