What this subject area covers
General and interdisciplinary studies covers degrees built on combining disciplines rather than specialising in one from the start. Course titles include liberal arts, liberal arts and sciences, liberal studies, general studies, interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary studies, integrated studies, humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, applied sciences, human sciences, science and technology studies, science in society, complexity science, and philosophy, politics and economics (PPE). The titles sound alike, but they ask for different evidence. A statement that only says you like many subjects will not fit any of them well.
The point common to all of them is integration. Breadth on its own is a list. What these courses study is how methods, questions and kinds of evidence from different fields bear on the same problem. Your evidence should show you doing that, even in a small way.
How the branches differ
Liberal arts, humanities and interdisciplinary studies
These degrees usually combine humanities, social sciences and sometimes sciences, often with a lot of choice in how you build your programme. Strong evidence shows that you can move between ways of knowing. For example, you might read a historical source as a historian would and then ask what a sociologist or philosopher would make of the same material. Useful material includes:
- A question you followed across subject boundaries, such as how a novel and a census record describe the same industrial town differently.
- Reading that sits between disciplines, and what you took from the method as well as the content.
- Some sense of how you might shape your choices. If a course offers freedom, saying which combination interests you and why shows you have thought about that freedom.
A common weakness is naming five interests with no link between them. Two connected interests, explained properly, are worth more than a wide but disconnected range.
Natural and applied sciences
Natural sciences and related courses usually let you study several sciences before narrowing. Applicants can treat breadth as a way of postponing a decision. Admissions readers are more likely to be persuaded by evidence that the links between sciences interest you. Examples include:
- A problem that needed more than one science, such as how the chemistry of a reaction explained a biological result in a practical.
- Mathematical work, such as using calculus or statistics on real data, and why you want it as a tool across disciplines.
- For applied sciences, an interest in using scientific principles on practical problems such as materials, measurement or environmental monitoring, while staying clear that this is study, not engineering practice.
Name the sciences you are currently weighing up and say what draws you to their overlap, for instance the physical chemistry of biological molecules. Vague enthusiasm for science in general reads as if you have not chosen a course yet.
Philosophy, politics and economics
PPE uses three distinct methods: philosophical argument, political analysis and economic modelling, which usually involves mathematics. Strong evidence engages with at least two of these on a single issue and shows you understand each method. For example, you might discuss a minimum wage debate in terms of what an economic model predicts, which political interests shape the policy, and what fairness requires. Pitfalls specific to PPE:
- Writing only about current affairs opinions. Holding a view on a news story is not analysis.
- Leaving out economics or treating it as common sense. If quantitative reasoning interests you, show it.
- Presenting the degree as preparation for a political career. The degree is the study of these disciplines, not training for a profession.
Specialist guides for economics, politics or philosophy may suit you better if one discipline clearly dominates your interest.
Human sciences, social sciences and science-in-society courses
Human sciences typically combine biological and social approaches to people. Science and technology studies and science in society examine how science is produced, funded, communicated and governed. Complexity science looks at systems whose behaviour arises from the interactions between their parts, and leans heavily on mathematics and modelling. Pick evidence that matches the particular combination. For human sciences, this might be a question needing both biology and anthropology. For science in society, it might be a scientific controversy in which the evidence and the public argument diverged. For complexity, it might be simple modelling or programming of interacting systems.
Choosing and explaining evidence
For each piece of evidence, ask three things:
- Which disciplines were involved? Name them specifically.
- What did combining them show that one alone would have missed?
- What were the limits? Say where the approaches conflicted, or where you lacked the method to go further.
Reflection works best when it names a tension. Examples include economists and philosophers defining “wellbeing” differently, or a statistical result that a historical case appears to contradict. Noticing that disciplines disagree, and saying why, is the core intellectual skill these courses build. Concluding that “everything is connected” adds nothing.
School and college work
Most applicants’ best evidence comes from their current subjects:
- Unusual subject combinations. Mixing, say, chemistry with history is relevant only if you explain what one subject has changed in how you approach the other.
- Extended projects or independent research. These are strong when the topic needed sources or methods from more than one field. Describe how you handled evidence of different kinds.
- Coursework and practicals. A single lab result or source analysis, discussed in depth, is better than a list of topics.
- General studies, critical thinking or similar. These are useful if they gave you a framework you applied. Do not present them as proof of breadth by themselves.
If you have no directly relevant experience
No placement exists for interdisciplinary study, so everyday experience is often the honest source of evidence. Use it only where you can describe a real question it raised.
- Part-time retail or hospitality work. You might have noticed how pricing, staffing rotas or customer behaviour involved economic incentives and human psychology at once. This fits PPE or social sciences. Its limit is that you observed one workplace and did not analyse a market.
- Caring for a relative. This may have shown you how medical, financial and bureaucratic systems interact for one person. It suits human sciences or science-in-society courses. Write about the questions it raised. Do not claim expertise in health or social policy, and share only what you are comfortable sharing.
- Volunteering. A food bank, environmental group or community project might have shown a gap between a policy aim and what happened on the ground. The limit is that one organisation is a single case, not a pattern.
- Hobbies. Coding small simulations links to complexity science. Gardening raises questions in soil chemistry and ecology. Strategy games involve decision-making under constraints, which relates to economics and politics. A local history society brings together archives and social change. In each case, explain what you tried to understand, not just that you enjoy the activity.
None of these show academic mastery. What they can show is that you noticed a problem that one discipline could not fully explain and wanted the tools to go further.
Optional preparation
None of these are requirements. They are possible ways to produce something you can reflect on:
- Choose one issue, such as housing or antibiotic resistance, and read about it from two disciplines. Note where the accounts differ.
- Use free introductory lectures or course materials in a discipline you have not studied, and test it against something you already know.
- For science-based or PPE courses, practise applying mathematics or statistics to real data, since you may need these methods.
- Read something on how knowledge is made, such as the philosophy of science or the history of a discipline. This helps you write about method.
Pitfalls specific to this area
- Indecision presented as breadth. “I couldn’t choose” is a weak reason. Give a positive reason for combining subjects.
- A catalogue of interests. Ten topics with a sentence each show nothing. Choose a few and connect them.
- Ignoring the course’s actual combination. Liberal arts, natural sciences and PPE are different degrees. Make sure your evidence matches the subjects the course actually combines.
- Claiming expertise through exposure. Watching documentaries, reading the news or working in a shop gives you questions to ask. It does not make you knowledgeable in the field.
- Avoiding the harder method. Applicants sometimes leave out the most demanding element, often mathematics or close textual analysis. Show that you can engage with it.
- Writing only about the future. Career plans can support your statement, but most of it should concern the study itself.
For general advice on planning, structure and editing, read our personal statement writing guide.
General and interdisciplinary studies personal statement examples