Exploration and exploitation: Which research strategy are you better at?

Abstract This study quantifies and analyzes the individual-level abilities of scientists utilizing either an exploration or an exploitation strategy. Specifically, we present a Research Strategy Q model, which untangles the coupling effect of scientists’ research ability (Qα) and research strategy ability (Eαπ) on research performance. Qα indicates scientists’ fundamental ability to publish high-quality papers, while Eαπ indicates scientists’ proficiency in terms of exploration and exploitation strategies. Five research strategies proposed by our previous study are employed. We generate synthetic data and collect empirical data as our experimental data set. We show that these research strategies present different benefit and risk characteristics. Adopting some exploitation strategies tends to stifle research performance, while exploration strategies are high risk and high yield. Qα and Eαπ have predictive power for research performance. Moreover, we find that, first, scholars who prefer to execute a research strategy, π, may not necessarily be better at executing π. Second, some scholars have differences in their abilities towards different strategies, while other scholars have differences in their abilities towards the same strategy. Third, exploration and exploitation are not contradictory but complementary from the perspective of proficiency, while they are mutually exclusive from the perspective of selection preference.