I think that the reason the question needs to be asked is that academia has become overspecialized in many fields. Most people work in very narrow parts of a discipline - though not all.
So, the short answer is yes, you cite the work that supports your own, no matter where you find it.
But the situation is a bit more complex from your standpoint starting out on your studies. You don't say whether you have an advisor or not. Your work will need to be acceptable to the advisor, including the breadth of the field you want to pursue. That may be easy or hard, but don't neglect to consider it.
The other issue is finding a place to publish your work. The academic marketplace seems to value specialization over generalization, I think/fear. Frankly, I have no experience finding such a publishing venue. It may be easy or hard. But your advisor should be able to answer questions like that. If it is hard to publish (no appropriate journals/conferences) you can do great work but be invisible to the world at large. I've done some work of a different kind that wasn't really publishable, but it satisfied a need of my own, so was worth it, but not for reputation building.
My personal view is that work that brings together disparate ideas from across a broad spectrum is both very interesting and very valuable. Not many are willing or able to integrate ideas from across disciplines. Some public scholars have achieved success at this, but it is usually after building a reputation in a narrow field.