If several authors are cooperated to do a common research, is it more effective for them to be all in the same field of specialty or from different fields so that the outcome of their scientific efforts is translated into a mature and consolidated article?
Aouf Al-Tabbakh A research that have "et al." nickname (when all authors have the same field of research) will definitely have the same scientific value when compared to a research that have one author of the same field of research. Chief editors will commonly give a reviewer role to an author that makes researches by himself only. I prefer that authors should have different research fields when they share the same research.
Aouf Al-Tabbakh
Researchers with the same specialty make the research more mature.
There are perhaps some research questions that are best explored by researchers from strictly the same fields, but the value of cross-disciplinary input has become more and more recognized in the social sciences. In my experience, we gain from the intra-activity (cf. Karen Barad) between perspectives that build on and transform each other to produce new understandings. However, until journal editors and reviewers begin to value interdisciplinary thinking, researchers must continue to identify principally with one discipline in order to move up the career-in-research ladder. It's a balancing act.