.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Conservative adventurers have more future academic impact
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
X
Z
X
柯
F
H
DOI：10.1007/s11192-026-05722-x.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Some scientists explore unfamiliar topics, while others exploit existing ones, yet the link between these choices and academic performance remains unclear. Prior studies offer conflicting evidence, often relying on single metrics and overlooking confounding factors. To address this, we complement the traditional switch frequency metric with switch distances, control for confounders, and establish a clear connection between past switching behaviors and future performance. We identify a group, ‘conservative adventurers’, who frequently switch topics within close domains, excelling in future performance compared to others (up to 19% more citations per future paper). This rare behavioral pattern suggests an effective balance between exploration and exploitation. Beyond correlations, we question whether conservative adventuring can be intentionally adopted as a strategy. While proving intentionality is challenging, individuals who drastically transition to conservative adventurers likely do so purposefully, achieving significant performance gains. Our findings, based on three datasets covering 31,780,857 papers in physics, biomedicine, and chemistry primarily since the twentieth century (1976–2015 for physics; 1900–2021 for biomedicine and chemistry), provide insights for scientific career understanding and planning, particularly for junior scientists.
Keywords:
Science of science
Scientific careers
Research topic choice
Conservative adventurers
Journal
IF:
3.5
Papers:
8.0K
Citations:
2.2W
Organization
Cited Papers