what are the characteristics of scientists???

Answer 1

Here is a short abstract on the directed evolution of full professors. The sad/scary thing is that there is quite a bit of truth to it.

Success in academia is hypothesized to require specific phenotype. In order to understand how such unusual traits arise, we used human clones to identify the molecular events that occur during the transition from graduate student to professor. A pool of graduate student clones was subjected to minimal money media in the absence of dental insurance. Students surviving this selection were further screened for the ability to work for long hours with vending machine snacks as a sole carbon source; clones satisfying these requirements were dubbed "post docs." In order to identify assistant professors from among the post docs, this pool was further mutagenized, and screened for the ability to turn esoteric results into a 50-minute seminar. Finally, these assistant professors were evaluated for their potential to become full professors in two ways. First, they were screened for overproduction and surface display of stress proteins such as Hsp70. Assistant professors that displayed such proteins (so-called "stressed-out" mutants ) were then fused to the M13 coat protein, displayed on phages and passed over a friend and family members column to identify those that were incapable of functional interactions. These were called full professors. Although these mutants arose independently, they shared striking phenotypes. These included the propensity to talk incessantly about their own research, the inability to accurately judge the time required to complete bench work, and the belief that all of their ideas constituted good thesis projects.

The linkage of all of these traits suggests that these phenotypes are coordinately regulated. Preliminary experiments have identified a putative global regulator. Studies are currently being conducted to determine if overexpression of this gene product in post-docs and grad students can speed up the grad student-full professor evolutionary process.

Answer 2

It varies. I doubt if any two scientists have all the same characteristics, they are people just like everyone else. But if I had to name one primary trait, I would say the most important would probably be Curiosity.

Answer 3

Here is what I've seen for GOOD scientists:

curious, enjoy a challenge, hard-working, extremely creative, lots of common sense, smart but not so smart that they can't explain something, somewhat outgoing (doesn't hide in a lab), can apply their knowledge, can design their own experiments, always questioning the world around them, extremely detailed, and organized

Not so good scientists:

The opposite of above

Answer 4

Definitely curiosity.

Again, it varies, but good scientists should be a little bit anal in that they have to follow strict protocols and keep all their data well organized.

Other possible traits:
enthusiastic
cooperative
motivated
diligent
respectful - of other scientists and of sciences, in general
careful
humble, in that they can accept that their hypotheses may be incorrect

Answer 5

An ability to make observations, record those observations, draw conclusions from repeated observations, and finally to get all this into the hands of others.

Answer 6

a GOOD scientist, should be attentive, careful, honest, patient, selfless, self-motivated, observant, they also need to be able to grasp complex systems of statistical analysis and specialist software

Answer 7

Scientists attempt to measure nature.

Answer 8

An appreciation for Far Side cartoons.

Answer 9

Everyone's different. However, I'd say organized, curious, intelligent, hard-working.

Answer 10

complete knowledge of particular field he/she is working .showing patience and
hard work