Bruce, Catherine D.Davis, BrentSinclair, NathalieFrancis, KristaHawes, ZacharyMcGarvey, LynnMoss, JoanOkamoto, YukariHallowell, David A.Drefs, Michelle A.Mulligan, Joanne T.Whiteley, Walter J.Woolcott, Geoff W.2018-10-092018-10-092015-12-30Bruce, C. D., Davis, B., Sinclair, N., McGarvey, L., Hallowell, D., Drefs, M., . . . Woolcott, G. (2017). Understanding gaps in research networks: Using “spatial reasoning” as a window into the importance of networked educational research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 95(2), 143-161. doi:10.1007/s10649-016-9743-21573-0816http://hdl.handle.net/1880/108799The final publication is available at link.springer.com. Bruce, C.D., Davis, B., Sinclair, N. et al. Educ Stud Math (2017) 95: 143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9743-2 This research was supported in part by federal funding through the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Bruce, Davis, & Sinclair).This paper finds its origins in a multidisciplinary research group’s efforts to assemble a review of research in order to better appreciate how “spatial reasoning” is understood and investigated across academic disciplines. We first collaborated to create a historical map of the development of spatial reasoning across key disciplines over the last century. The map informed the structure of our citation search and oriented an examination of connection across disciplines. Next, we undertook a network analysis that was based on highly cited articles in a broad range of domains. Several connection gaps—that is, apparent blockages, one-way flows, and other limitations on communications among disciplines—were identified in our network analysis, and it was apparent that these connection gaps may be frustrating efforts to understand the conceptual complexity and the educational significance of spatial reasoning. While these gaps occur between the academic disciplines that we evaluated, we selected a few examples for closer analysis. To illustrate how this lack of flow can limit development of the field of mathematics education, we selected cases where it is evident that researchers in mathematics education are not incorporating the important work of mathematicians, psychologists, and neuroscientists—and vice versa. Ultimately, we argue, a more pronounced emphasis on transdisciplinary (versus multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary) research might be timely, and perhaps even necessary, in the evolution of educational researchenUnless otherwise indicated, this material is protected by copyright and has been made available with authorization from the copyright owner. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission.Spatial reasoningNetwork analysisMathematics educationTransdisciplinary approachjournal articledoi:10.1007/s10649-016-9743-210.11575/PRISM/35657