Conducting research in a field that interests you can be daunting and exciting. Since you’re trained in that field, you get accustomed to popular hypotheses, proposed mechanisms and accepted results. However, this can be a double edged sword. Even though this extensive training and immersion can turn you into an excellent researcher, I do think that it can make you narrow minded. You’ll view papers, your research and others research through your particular lens. This narrow mindedness is glaringly present on a macro scale by which I mean that science is entirely confined to scientists. You’ll never see a finance researcher sitting in on a neuroscience presentation. I think this may be a bad thing.
Why am I talking about this? Well, recently I was hanging out with my good friend who does some heavy duty finance research. I was talking to him about some radiology research and my friend wondered if this one particular finance model would be applicable to the radiology problem I was describing. This interaction got me thinking about how many ideas/concepts/models that exist in one field that may be applicable to others. It’s hard enough to get researchers from different fields of science together and so I understand why this would probably be a daunting task.
One huge hurdle to overcome would be jargon. Trying to explain a niche neuroscience concept that is dependent on science experience would be absolutely difficult and frustrating. However, in my opinion, the mark of a great presenter is someone who can take difficult concepts and make them approachable!