Director of Research publishes chapter in open access book

The Albert & Jessie Danielsen Institute is pleased to announce the open access publication of a book on interdisciplinary research supervision which emerged from the Religion, Values, and Society Research Institute in Scandinavia. Director of Research, Dr. Steven J. Sandage, and Professor Emeritus of the Sociology of Religion, Dr. Nancy T. Ammerman, co-authored a chapter in this work. Citation and abstract are below.

Ammerman, N. T., & Sandage, S. J. (2026). Practicing interdisciplinary supervision: Views from the United States. In F. Saxegaard, M. Lövheim & G. Afdal (Eds.), Doctoral supervision across boundaries. Interdisciplinarity as process and practice (pp. 197–215). Scandinavian University Press. https://doi.org/10.18261/9788215074818-26-09

Abstract

This chapter offers a comparative perspective on interdisciplinarity in doctoral supervision. As social scientists of religion based in the U.S., our experiences with this interdisciplinary and international PhD research school led us to a set of observations about possible generative dynamics and directions for interdisciplinary doctoral supervision. Drawing upon our disciplines of sociology and psychology and the available literature on interdisciplinarity, we advance the thesis that constructive interdisciplinarity can be fostered through (a) leveling of power structures, (b) strategic use of social liminality, (c) immersive exposure to disciplinary diversity, and (d) intentional cultivation of healthy dynamics for relational development, intellectual humility, and collaboration. We describe the ways our position across the Atlantic provided a useful vantage point for comparison, noting diversities in academic cultures (both institutional and societal), institutional structures, and associated relational dynamics. We show how the need for interdisciplinary work arises from the complexity of the questions surrounding religion, even as disciplines retain strong identities. The success of interdisciplinary efforts often lies in informal communication and strong, healthy relationships —something the project under focus facilitated. Bringing together diverse cohorts in unfamiliar places meant that everyone was stretched in some way—in language, culture, and religious tradition as much as in disciplinary knowledge and experience. But ample opportunities for informal conversation and authentic connection served attachment-oriented dynamics, facilitating scholarly exploration and development and enhancing future scholarly networks, thus providing a model for career-shaping interdisciplinary understanding during a key period of professional socialization.