Is there any difference between these two kind of researchers? I tried to ask this question on Physics StackExchange because it's about physicists but it wasn't the right section, anyway the argument can be extended to almost every subject.
I am studying physics at university in Italy but I spent some months in Sweden and I found some differences in the teaching method.
In particular, in Italy everything is essentialy based on theory, we study models, theorems and formal proofs, the exams are mostly oral, and we just see some appliations of what we study.
In Sweden it is different, there are less theorems, and everything is more applicative. There are exercises sessions but less 'critical thinking' (that's what I think).
Said that, I just wanted to ask if, in research, you can notice a difference between people with these two different academic backgrounds and if it influences their work/researches.
Are you more likely to become a theoretical physicist if you study in Italy (or any other uni with this teaching method) and less if you study in Sweden (or any other...)?
Please share your experience!
Thank you! :)
P.S. I am not judging if one method is better than the other, don't get me wrong
Some physicists teach more mathematics.  Some physicists teach more applications.  It's just a matter of university, teacher, and student preference.  Yes, the way you are taught will influence your career.
I do not think these preferences have anything to do with the country.  A large portion of physicists have experience with multiple countries.  And within a country, you will find quite a range of opinions about how to do things.