學科合作如同拼圖般，需不斷地拼湊著學科領域的完整性，與連結其他學科之間相關的延伸性。在研究過程中，合作是不斷地在尋找可拼湊的區塊，如何將已知與未知的研究，透過多元的知識領域區塊做有效的串連與延伸。以落實學科研究發展的可行性，來擴大學科領域之間的研究版圖，或發掘學科本身的核心區塊，以整合學術領域之間完整的架構。如何去尋找、拼湊合作研究區塊的可能性？是須集結各類門專業知識，來擴充與探究學術研究的完整性。
　　研究合作不僅是極為專業的知識連結，亦是一連串跨領域研究結合的可能性。但同時交錯著各種不確定的要素、與他人之間的互動行為、環境與資源之間分配等，摻雜著各種複雜的因素，直接或間接微妙影響著整體研究合作的過程與發展。
研究人員在尋找與發展合作研究關係之際，即是一連串的行為模式。研究人員如何貫穿學術合作之間的各種可能性？以如何尋求與建立合作之管道？在合作過程中如何達成研究共識？以探討合作研究進行之際，各項行為因素之影響。
　　本研究為學術研究合作行為之探討，以中央研究院地球科學之研究人員為例。本研究採用半結構式訪談法，深度訪談對象為十四名研究人員，分別為特聘研究員、研究員、副研究員、助研究員，為本研究之訪談對象。主要探討的面向，以參照文獻探討為主軸，將歸納為兩部分：一、探討影響合作研究的各項因素、二、了解合作研究的各種溝通管道，以具體呈現本研究探討影響合作研究之行為面向。
　　合作研究的因素：(一)合作研究關係的建立、(二)影響合作研究關係發展的條件、(三)尋找適的合合作夥伴要素、(四)合作過的夥伴繼續合作的原因、(五)合作人員的多寡對研究影響的因素、(六)個人特質影響合作研究進展的要素、(七) 研究人員在意的因素、(八)研究經驗與網絡關係影響合作的要素，由八項研究的合作層面，依序歸納為二十二種影響合作研究的因素。影響因素為：1.互補性、2. 態度、3. 研究目標、4.興趣、5.人格特質、6.研究成果、7.愉快、8. 研討會交流、9.能力、10.文獻、11.朋友、同事或推薦、12.學習、13.互信、14.品質、15. 經費、16. 時間安排、17.口碑、18.安全性、19.政策、20.師生或直屬關係、21.訪問、22.網路搜尋。
　　合作研究的各種溝通管道：(一) 合作研究知識的認知與結合、(二)合作研究溝通模式的轉變，由兩項研究溝通的層面，依序歸納九種溝通介面的方式。溝通方式為：1.E-mail、2.當面溝通與當場特殊儀器操作學習、3.打電話、4.Skype、5.Facebook、6.LINE、7. WebEx、8.ResearchGate、9.Dropbox。

Interdisciplinary cooperation is like putting together jigsaw puzzles. It requires constant construction of the integrity of one discipline while linking it with other related disciplines. During the course of research, cooperation is a process of looking for jigsaw blocks and finding the links between the known and unknown researches in order to effectively connect and extend the multidisciplinary blocks. It extends the research scopes of different disciplines or discovers the core blocks of the disciplines through the implementation of the feasibility of the development of disciplines in order to integrate the comprehensive structure among different disciplines. How to search and put together the possible interdisciplinary cooperation blocks? We have to combine all kinds of professional knowledge to expand and explore the integrity of academic research.
Research cooperation is not only a connection between professional knowledge, but also a possibility of integrating a series of interdisciplinary researches. A variety of uncertain factors, interaction with others and the allocation of environment and resources are intertwined simultaneously. All kinds of complex factors directly or indirectly affect the process and development of the overall research cooperation.
The process of looking for and developing research cooperation relationship is a series of behavior patterns. How do researchers connect all kinds of possibilities between interdisciplinary cooperation? How to seek and establish the cooperation channels? How to reach consensus during the cooperation? Explore the effect of different factors in research cooperation.
This study takes the researcher in the Institute of Earth Science of Academia Sinica as an example to explore the behavior of academic research cooperation. This study adopts the semi-structured interview method. In-depth interviews have been conducted with fourteen researchers, including distinguished research fellows, research fellows, associate research fellows and assistant research fellows. Based on the literature review, the interviews focused on two parts: (1) discussion of the various factors affecting the cooperative research and (2) understanding the various communication channels of research cooperation in order to specifically present the behaviors that affect the research cooperation.
Factors of research cooperation: (1) the establishment of research cooperation relationship; (2) the factors affecting the development of research cooperation; (3) factors of searching for suitable cooperation partners; (4) reasons of continuing the cooperation with previous partners; (5) the effect of the number of people involved on the research process; (6) the effect of personal factors or characteristics on the development of research; (7) the factors that the researchers caring about during the cooperation; (8) the experience of research cooperation and networking relationship. Based on the eight research cooperation facets, twenty two factors affecting the research cooperation are 1. Complementarity; 2. Attitude; 3. Research target; 4. Interest; 5. Personality traits; 6. Research achievement; 7. Pleasure; 8. Seminar exchange; 9. Ability; 10. Literature; 11. Friend or Colleague or Recommendation from companion; 12. Learning; 13. Trust; 14. Research quality; 15. Budget; 16. Schedule; 17. Reputation; 18. Safety; 19. Policy; 20. Direct or Teacher-student relationship; 21. Visiting; 22. Internet search.
The communication channels of research cooperation: (1) cognition and combination of the knowledge of research cooperation; (2) change in the communication pattern of research cooperation. Through the two research communication facets, nine communication interfaces are as follows: 1. e-mail; 2. face-to face communication and special instrument operation and learning; 3. phone calls; 4. Skype; 5. Facebook; 6. LINE; 7. WebEx; 8.ResearchGate; 9.Dropbox.

Amabile, T. M., Patterson, C., Mueller, J., Wojcik, T., Odomirok, P. W., Marsh, M., & Kramer, S. J. (2001). Academic-practitioner collaboration in management research: A case of cross-profession collaboration. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 418–431. doi:10.2307/3069464

Azmitai, M. (1998). Peer interactive minds: Developmental, theoretical, and methodological issues. In D. Faulkner, K. Littleton, & M. Woodhead (Eds.). Learning Relationships in the Classroom, 207–233.

Barbieri, M. S., & Light, P. H. (1992). Interaction, gender, and performance on a computer-based problem solving task. Learning and Instruction, 2(3), 199–213. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(92)90009-B

Beaver, D. deB, & Rosen, R. (1978). Studies in scientific collaboration - Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(1), 65–84. doi:10.1007/BF02016840

Beaver, D. deB, & Rosen, R. (1979). Studies in scientific collaboration Part III. Professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(3), 231–245. doi:10.1007/BF02016308

Beaver, D. deB, & Rosen, R. (1979). Studies in scientific collaboration - Part II. Scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799-1830. Scientometrics, 1(2), 133–149. doi:10.1007/BF02016966

Chiu, M. L. (2002). An organizational view of design communication in design collaboration. Design Studies, 23(2), 187–210. doi:10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00019-9

Davis, M., & Small, H. (2004). Studying Scientific Collaboration.pdf. In Proceedings of the 67th ASIS&TAnnual Meeting, vol. 41 545 (pp. 545–549).

Goffin, S. G. (1987). Cooperative behaviors: They need our support. Young Children, 45(2), 75–81.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Chinn, C. A., Chan, C., & O’Donnell, A. M. (Eds. ). (2013). The international handbook of collaborative learning. New York: Routledge. Retrieved September 12, 2014, from http://books.google.es/books?hl=ca&lr=&id=tJhTQLecoIYC&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=mobile+learning+collaborative&ots=d0EqR-GeoS&sig=PXhjwhJzaPIfw4SuLyDTeDLZvbc
Hoekman, J., Frenken, K., & Robert, J. W. T. (2010). Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research Policy, 39(5), 662–673. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.012

Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.). The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology, 37–71.

Maglaughlin & Sonnenwald, D. H. (2005). Factors that impact interdisciplinary natural science research collaboration in academia. In Proceedings of ISSI 2005: 10th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. (pp. 57–63). International Society for Scientometrics and Informatrics.

Melin, G., & Persson, O. (1996). Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics, 36(3), 363–377. doi:10.1007/BF02129600

National Cooperative Research Program. (2014). Noaa. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/cooperative-research/

Numprasertchai, S., & Igel, B. (2005). Managing knowledge through collaboration: Multiple case studies of managing research in university laboratories in Thailand. Technovation, 25(10), 1173–1182. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2004.03.001

Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants of Interorganizational Relationships: Integration and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 241–265. doi:10.5465/AMR.1990.4308156

Ponds, R., van Oort, F., & Frenken, K. (2007). The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 423–443. doi:10.1111/j.1435-5957.2007.00126.x

Santoro, F. M., Borges, M. R. S., & Rezende, E. a. (2006). Collaboration and knowledge sharing in network organizations. Expert Systems with Applications, 31(4), 715–727. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2006.01.002

Schroeder, R. and Axelsson, A. (Eds). (2008). Collaborative Virtual Environments for Scientific Collaboration: Technical and Organizational Design Frameworks (Vol. 66). doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.08.005

Sonnenwald, D. H., & Iivonen, M. (1999). Collaborative Learning Using Collaboration Technology.pdf. Collaborative Learning Using Collaboration Technology: Report from the Field.

Sundaresan, S., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Parallel teams for knowledge creation: Role of collaboration and incentives. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 109–121. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.04.008

van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463–472. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.001

van Rijnsoever, F. J., Hessels, L. K., & Vandeberg, R. L. J. (2008). A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers. Research Policy, 37(8), 1255–1266. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.020

Verba, M. (1994). The Beginnings of Collaboration in Peer Interaction. Human Development, 37(3), 125–139. doi:10.1159/000278249

MBA智庫百科 (2009)。上網日期：2013 年10 月12 日。取自： http://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/知识螺旋

工業技術研究院 (2014)。上網日期：2014 年11 月13 日。取自： http://webarchive.ncl.edu.tw/archive/disk22/16/35/86/61/64/201104123036/20130119/web/itri.org.tw/chi/rd/Collaborations/index4e6f.html?RootNodeId=02A&NodeId=02A1

中央研究院地球科學研究所-簡介 (2014)。上網日期：2014 年11 月18 日。取自：http://www.earth.sinica.edu.tw/IES-Brief-Final_Chinese.pdf
中華國際交流協會 (2007)。上網日期：2013 年10 月12 日。取自： http://www.ciai.org.tw/

王吉亮、鄭惠卿 (1993)。論文寫作學。北京：經濟科學。

林慶隆、彭佳宣 (2012)。學術名詞學科領域之探討6－地球科學。國家教育研究院。上網日期：2014 年10 月6 日。取自： http://epaper.naer.edu.tw/index.php?edm_no=43&content_no=1189
洪蘭 (2009)。大腦當家。台北市：遠流。

胡湘玲 (2001)。科學與社會的對話 – 從德國「2000-物理年」談起. 物理雙月刊，23(1)，1–6。

翁啟惠 (2007)。學術研究與社會責任。余紀忠講座。上網日期：2013 年11 月6 日。取自： http://www.sinica.edu.tw/manage/gatenews/showsingle.php?_op=?rid:2391

袁大鈺、唐牧群 (2010)。跨領域學術社群之智識網絡結構初探：以臺灣科技與社會研究為例。圖書資訊學刊，8(2)，125–163。

馬奎特的學習型組織系統模型 (2010)。上網日期：2014 年4 月9 日。取自： http://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/马奎特的学习型组织系统模型

國立臺北大學 (2010)。上網日期：2013 年11 月20 日。取自： http://s8.ntue.edu.tw/web/01_06/國立臺北教育大學自然科學教育學系學術研討會暨專題演講活動實施要點1010111.doc

國立臺灣師範大學公共關係室 (2008)。結合僑生先修部資源 發展我國國際與僑教領域研究重鎮。上網日期：2013 年10 月8 日。取自：http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/scr/PDF/97_241.pdf

國防管理學院 (2009)。上網日期：2013 年11 月4 日。取自：http://www.ndmc.ndu.edu.tw/editor_model/u_editor_v1.asp?id={7F274EC6-1D05-4171-8482-C41E03924CD7}

張家成 (2008)。探勘合作式學習社會網路支援問題導向學 習之學習伙伴推薦 Mining Cooperative Learning Social Networks for Recommending Learning Partner in a Problem-based Learning Environment.

戚國雄 (2008)。「跨領域」協同教學─概念與議題。上網日期：2013 年12 月23 日。取自： http://www.mcu.edu.tw/department/genedu/plan_c.asp?ser=8
畢恆達 (2010)。教授為什麼沒告訴我－2010全見版。新北市板橋區：小畢空間。

組織間學習(Inter-organizational learning)。(2013)。上網日期：2014 年4 月2 日。取自： http://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/组织间学习

訪問學人 (2014)。維基百科。上網日期：2014 年3 月11 日。取自： http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/訪問學人

陳伯璋 (2010)。臺灣國民核心素養與中小學課程發展之關係。課程研究 Journal of Curriculum Studies，5(2)，1–25。

彭文正 (2003)。運用知識管理以提升企業競爭優勢之探討 The Study of Strengthening Business Competition by Using the Knowledge Management, 223–245。

彭信坤 (2009)。與國外學者跨國合作之經驗分享。人文與社會科學簡訊，11(1)，107–112。

黃心怡 (2007)。資訊科技對協同合作網絡的學術生產力 影響：弱連帶優勢？強連帶優勢？。pdf. 資訊社會研究，13，167–191。

楊仁壽、卓秀足 (2013)。組織理論與管理：個案．衡量與產業應用. 台灣: 雙葉書廊。

維基百科-學科列表 (2014)。上網日期：2014 年5 月28 日。取自： http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/學科列表

學術傳播 (2013)。維基百科。上網日期：2014 年1月7日。取自： http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/學術傳播

謝珍妮 (2010)。科技機構研究人員協同合作與資訊行為之研究。臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，台北市。