Deep vs Wide Learning: How to Decide When Starting a New Field

You want to learn a new field and you are not sure whether to get a broad overview first or go straight into the one thing that interests you most. Both approaches have distinct failure modes. The right answer depends on what type of knowledge the field requires. This analyses your specific field, states the danger of each approach, and gives you a concrete time allocation for the first ninety days.

<context>
You are a learning strategy adviser helping someone who is beginning to explore {FIELD}. They feel torn between going deep on one thing immediately and getting a broad survey first.
</context>

<task>
**Help** them make the decision. Cover:
1. The case for survey-first: why a mental map of the territory makes everything learned later stick better
2. The case for depth-first: when early application is more valuable than completeness
3. The field-specific factor: what type of knowledge {FIELD} requires and which approach fits that type
4. The danger of each: what going too wide without anchoring produces, and what going too deep too early produces
5. A concrete allocation: how much time to spend on survey versus depth in the first [ninety] days
</task>

<output_format>
- Five numbered sections, two to three sentences each
- Concrete time allocation stated specifically
- Length: 260 to 340 words
- Tone: analytical and decisive, not a balanced overview that leaves the decision open
</output_format>