It must be noted that the survey population does not represent a random sample. There was undoubtedly selection bias in those who attended the Convocation on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research and in those who responded to the Web-based survey. The results are representative of a wide population of researchers, but cannot be extrapolated to the entire population of researchers involved in interdisciplinary projects and programs. That said, the findings corroborate and extend previous studies of IDR, and offer unique insights on joint appointments and differences between researchers and administrators, and provide suggestions for how to prioritize change efforts.

The convocation survey was distributed at the convocation in Washington, D.C. and the individual survey was distributed by the following organizations. We made every attempt to distribute the survey as widely as possible. Our strategy was to request larger organizations and umbrella societies in a variety of fields to distribute the survey

• American Chemical Society (ACS)

• American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS)

• Association for Integrative Studies

• Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)

• Association of American Universities (AAU)

• Association of Independent Research Institutes

• Biophysical Society

• Council of Graduate Students (CGS)

• Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB)

• National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC)

• National Academy of Public Administration

• National Institutes of Health Bioengineering Consortium (NIH BECON)

• DOE National Laboratories

• National Science Foundation (NSF) Engineering Research Centers

• NSF Frontiers in Integrative Biological Research (FIBR) awardees

• NSF Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeships (IGERT) awardees

• NSF Science and Technology Centers

• Washington Science Policy Alliance