Dear all, what is your opinion in the question above? Do you think a scientist would have a better reputation when he is known for his punctual specialty or when he has a deep analytical capacity because of a great knowledge and convergent experiences?
I think a scientist with diverse knowledge and convergent experiences is more valuable to the community. We have enough specialists who are experts in their subject matter. Thus, to improve the scientific profile a scientist can diversify in terms of their knowledge and skill base. From my own experience I can tell that I get more reads and recommendations in RG due to diversity.
Dear Adil - I think that both types of scientist are equally important to the development of a discipline. Both specialists and generalists have a role to play. Much of today's research is cross-disciplinary. This requires people with specialist expertise and also people with the ability to synthesise and forge links. In practice, I don't think that one can exist without the other, and I do not think that one is necessarily more prolific than the other.
Dear Adil,
First is important to focus on your main interest .
But once you are clear and experienced about it , I recommend to move into other matters to complement your initial interest . Eventually you will become a scientist with several focus .
Thank you Dr José Cabello Lechuga for your opinion which, actually, I share with you.
Kind regards
I think a scientist having a diverse knowledge is better for his community. M. Konaté
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research