tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post7518201936664119770..comments2024-03-18T06:19:28.852+00:00Comments on NeuroChambers: Tough Love II: 25 tips for early-career scientistsChris Chambershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-28659272458353883322017-07-25T16:31:05.113+01:002017-07-25T16:31:05.113+01:00Sure Gerry, no problem. All of my blogs are in the...Sure Gerry, no problem. All of my blogs are in the public domain and can be used/reproduced freely.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-69747025726747660962017-07-25T14:32:42.273+01:002017-07-25T14:32:42.273+01:00Dear Chris - coming to these very wonderful tips l...Dear Chris - coming to these very wonderful tips late in the day (July 2017) - and huge thanks. I work at UEL - and am giving one of the BERA key note lectures for ECRs - and would love to mention your site (even though the lecture is for an education disciplinary community. Hoping that is ok (would plug your 'tips' and mention a couple of them). Is that ok? - all the best<br />Gerry CzerniawskiGerry Czerniawskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14744610669246069153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-66407753085993296092017-07-25T14:30:29.644+01:002017-07-25T14:30:29.644+01:00Dear Chris - coming to this very very late (in 201...Dear Chris - coming to this very very late (in 2017) but wanted to thank you for this fabulous list. I am doing a lecture for BERA in 2017 and, if you would not mind, like to mention a couple of these and recommend (to the educational community of ECRs) your fab 'tips' - if that would be ok?<br />best wishes<br />Gerry Czerniawski (Prof of Education at University of East London's Cass School of Ed). Gerry Czerniawskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14744610669246069153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-84669822717182261852016-09-30T13:28:49.765+01:002016-09-30T13:28:49.765+01:00Thanks for posting.
This is a real dilemma, unfor...Thanks for posting.<br /><br />This is a real dilemma, unfortunately with no easy answers. In any post doctoral position a balance needs to be struck between the needs of the project and the career needs of the post doc. A good PI will ensure that these are aligned as much as possible, but inevitably there are times when things don't go as planned and a project can require a significant investment of time that produces no obvious outputs. Sadly, more junior staff tend to be the proverbial "canaries in the mine" and can suffer significantly when a project goes awry.<br /><br />What I would say is that you shouldn't blame yourself or conclude on this basis that you are not cut out for academia. Certainly you might decide that a career outside the academy is best for you (and there is no shame in that), but regardless of whether you stay or leave I suggest taking the skills you have gained and explore what potential outputs could be generated from them and the work you have done (sometimes this could include a valuable technical paper, or a useful review). When problems strike, often the solution during the course of the project is for the post doc to think creatively (beyond what their PI can imagine) to create their own opportunities, e.g. by applying for small additional funds, taking on side projects, and maintaining a list of science ideas in their own time to pursue at a later date.<br /><br />I wish you luck!Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-2935488799367961522016-09-27T11:48:32.218+01:002016-09-27T11:48:32.218+01:00Hi Chris I wonder if you can provide some advice f...Hi Chris I wonder if you can provide some advice for how you handle the conflict between doing the science that you are there to do (i.e. producing publication-worthy results, achieving grant milestones, other day-to-day demands) and having any time or 'head space' for developing your own ideas or thinking about future career directions. It's something I really struggled with during my postdoc since the problem I was working on turned out to need a much greater investment of time and effort than either myself or my P.I. expected. What I'm left with is a lot of troubleshooting and "mechanistic"-type skills but few outputs. I'm taking this as a sign that I'm not cut out for academia and am exploring other options but I would be interested to hear your take on the problem.<br /><br />This is a really valuable advice page by the way so thank you! I wish I had found it at the beginning of my postdoc - things might have worked out differently.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-28978861443931931462016-06-11T16:35:04.798+01:002016-06-11T16:35:04.798+01:00ok thanks for this chris- I appreciate your honest...ok thanks for this chris- I appreciate your honesty! I will probably wait if it could deter future funders. Best wishes!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-7382529113242091692016-06-10T21:25:12.749+01:002016-06-10T21:25:12.749+01:00Hi - I agree broadly with your supervisor; you are...Hi - I agree broadly with your supervisor; you are probably better off waiting until your track record is more established. Fellowships are extremely competitive and you want to avoid too many misses, which some funders will take note of. In my view, it is best to apply for a fellowship when your track record is strong relative to opportunity. So, my advice would be to work hard in your new post doc position, build up your scientific contribution (and perhaps apply for some small grants during your post doc), and reconsider applying for a fellowship toward the end of it.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-5243593820990573862016-06-06T19:20:41.928+01:002016-06-06T19:20:41.928+01:00Hi Chris,
I am a young researcher having passed my...Hi Chris,<br />I am a young researcher having passed my PhD at the end of last year, and will be starting a post doc abroad next month. I would really like to apply for fellowships to come to the new lab- I feel that we have a really interesting project, and that I have some good ideas to shape the research. However, currently I have only published 2 first author papers (one as a co-author) in relatively low impact journals. I am currently writing another 2 papers that should go into better journals (again as a co-author), but I doubt that these will be submitted by the fellowship application deadline. Whilst I know how competitive these fellowships can be, I am tempted to apply anyway- even just to obtain some experience in writing a proposal. My PhD supervisor thinks it may be a bit early in my career. Would you apply? Hope you don't mind me asking- would be good to get an outsider's advice!<br />Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-52541884614579326972013-11-08T15:36:39.408+00:002013-11-08T15:36:39.408+00:00Dear Chris, PIs want passionate slaves. And life i...Dear Chris, PIs want passionate slaves. And life is too short to work on weekends (all 7 days a week). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-88159858093885153152013-01-01T10:35:43.868+00:002013-01-01T10:35:43.868+00:00This sounds like a difficult situation with a comp...This sounds like a difficult situation with a complicated background. I don't know about the legal side of things (I suspect it would be very difficult and not worthwhile challenging such decisions through legal avenues). My advice would be to consult with a trusted mentor in your department who your PI respects, and then see if this person can arbitrate. Check for your university's guidelines on academic authorship and see if they can help reach a solution.<br /><br />Based on what you've said here, it seems perfectly justified for you to be the first and corresponding author for the paper. I disagree with your PI's position that post-docs cannot or should not be corresponding authors. In my opinion the opposite is true, indeed essential.<br /><br />I should add that it is possible to have multiple corresponding authors for a paper, so perhaps a compromise would be for both you and your PI to be listed. I would use this as a fallback position in any negotiation.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-26224980125374432682012-12-30T18:40:17.597+00:002012-12-30T18:40:17.597+00:00Hello. I have a question about the "correspon...Hello. I have a question about the "corresponding author". I have developed project on my own, designed all experiments, performed and analyzed all experiments. I also entirely wrote a paper on my own- that has been sitting on my PIs desk for over a year, since “he doesn’t have time to read it". There is lot of issues here however the one I am really concerned with is that my PI says he will be a sole corresponding author, claiming me as a post-doc cannot be. He has no clue about the project and he acknowledges it was my project. Where do i go and find whether it is LEGAL for me to be a corresponding author??? Please any advice.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-54388351320470391342012-07-23T19:57:07.167+01:002012-07-23T19:57:07.167+01:00I'm about to embark on my doctoral journey nex...I'm about to embark on my doctoral journey next month, and I have to say, after looking all over the web for advice, yours is the best I've seen. <br /><br />I'm coming out of industry (where I was a biomedical grant writer) and have a couple of bachelor's degrees in different disciplines, so I do feel I have racked up some relevant experience and graduated from the school of hard knocks. My enthusiasm for academia started to wane last semester when I was finishing a B.S., however, due to a terrifying situation with a person I recognize now as a "dementor"... I can see clearly after reading your advice that I, too, played a role in the disaster, because I allowed my attitude to go sour and took my eyes off the prize. A negative feedback loop formed quickly, and it was impossible to get out.<br /><br />The good news, I suppose, is that I already went through this, and now feel ready to meet any challenges I face with a PI much more constructively. I now realize that asserting yourself early, and asking for necessary help, but without flinging poo or complaining to other students about the dementor, is the proper way to handle that kind of situation. Refusing to take the ooze that emanates from a toxic personality personally is key. If they're crazy to you, they're probably known to others for the same behavior; keep your chin up, make rational choices, and you'll come out ahead.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-11272974625644367702012-07-12T08:11:31.804+01:002012-07-12T08:11:31.804+01:00Most PIs I know also do at least some work on week...Most PIs I know also do at least some work on weekends. I see it as less a 'slave culture' and more an expression of how self-driven scientists are. Like I say above, PIs don't want slaves, they want post-docs who are like them. The best scientists I know are the ones who don't see their working lives as jobs, but as a calling. Life is too short to waste time on professional jobs that you aren't passionate about.<br /><br />Personally I quite like working intensively for a period of time (including weekends) and then taking time off completely - rather than the conventional drudgery of cycling between working weekdays and non-working weekends.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-49302749301120661202012-07-12T05:12:11.176+01:002012-07-12T05:12:11.176+01:00The whole postdoc system works because of cheap la...The whole postdoc system works because of cheap labor supplies. At most, after Ph.D one should expect basic minimum rights. In my university, postdocs are required to work on weekends (non-official, but you get the sense). Isn't just totally unfair?.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-50153718363217313462012-06-01T22:11:06.358+01:002012-06-01T22:11:06.358+01:00Thanks to share your opionion. I found your post r...Thanks to share your opionion. I found your post really interesting and helpful somehow. Being in my first year of postdoc I can just say that it's a difficult period since the pressure is so high that sometimes I have the feeling I'll never see the end although I'm working on several projects which will lead (I hope) to some good papers. But often I start wondering if we can really experience meritocracy in science. Sometimes it looks like you need to be the right person at the right moment in the right lab...all the rest doesn't really matter. Unfortunately I saw clever and skilled postdocs giving up and others, which were not really qualified but just sharks or even worst fakers, able to go on. There's something pathological/hysterical in our system and really few scientists take the risk to make a change.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-74005561905016662492012-06-01T16:08:37.632+01:002012-06-01T16:08:37.632+01:00I am in a similar situation. PI is untimely in con...I am in a similar situation. PI is untimely in control of what gets submitted, and when if ever. My PI has decided that we are combining all the data we have collected over the year into some grand publication that will go to a high profile journal. I am skeptical for various reasons, the data isn't that good, combining it doesn't actually make sense and would take years to figure out. Basically it's a bad move. PI thinking it's a great move and will be a high impact paper some day. I think PIs ego is getting in the way and there's no way to remove it.<br /><br />Luckily PI let's me work on 'side projects' that he does not control. That's the only reason I'm not totally screwed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-20690590111036528632012-06-01T08:37:15.897+01:002012-06-01T08:37:15.897+01:00Hi. The first scenario you describe can often happ...Hi. The first scenario you describe can often happen in large multi-site collaborations. There's no easy answer that I know, but a few thoughts…<br /><br />First - it's always best to find this information out before you start the position (see pt 5). Then you can prepare for it and work out a mutually acceptable approach in advance.<br /><br />One approach that can work is to negotiate for a joint authorship position including a statement of equal contribution; so, for example, if you are listed as second author you could then note this in your CV as a joint first-authored paper. And/or you could take turns being the corresponding author.<br /><br />If a lot of the experiments in your post-doc fall into high impact multi-experiment (or multi-disciplinary) papers, then I suggest negotiating rotation of the authorship order between papers so that you get your share of 1st authorships. It’s important to avoid being stuck in the middle repeatedly because there is a danger of becoming invisible.<br /><br />You might also want to think strategically about how much is gained in terms of the impact of the article by combining the experiments. For instance, if merging many experiments could lead to a Nature Neuroscience paper in which you are middle author, but splitting them could still lead to 2-3 solid Journal of Neuroscience papers in which several contributors have a chance for first authorship, I think it is fairer and more supportive of junior researchers to split the work. But if splitting the individual papers threatens to make them obscure and low-impact, then obviously this would be a bad choice. What this amounts to is a difficult, subjective, discipline-specific weighting of quality vs. quantity, so your PI’s experience should be a useful guide.<br /><br />Also, if you find that as a result of this arrangement you’re publishing very few (or no) first-authored publications, then a meeting with your PI is needed in which you spell out your concerns and perhaps instigate some additional projects that you can put your stamp on (see pt 11, for instance).<br /><br />Regarding your second question about post-docs being given responsibilities that don’t lead to publications, it depends a lot on the context. If you think the work is unnecessary and not what you signed up for, and you are unable to convince your PI to offer more opportunities that lead to publications, then it may be time to consider jumping ship. Of course, doing this can also create bad blood with your PI - and possibly a negative reference - so it’s not something to be done lightly. Sometimes it may be better to stick it out and make the most of it you can, particularly if you haven’t got long left on the contract anyway. And if your PI is a jealous sort, be careful jumping ship early for positions with his/her colleagues (or colleagues of colleagues). Word travels fast and, in my experience at least, ‘confidential’ job applications are a myth.<br /><br />It’s perhaps easier to avoid this situation altogether by checking out the productivity of former post-docs in your lab and where they ended up afterward (see my response to Maria above); and by making your expectations clear in any job interview.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-40473355768880353812012-06-01T04:13:25.622+01:002012-06-01T04:13:25.622+01:00Interesting post and some good advice. A couple of...Interesting post and some good advice. A couple of questions<br />Maximal impact publications with an interdisciplinary element (or just multiple types of experiments) can leave authors providing vital results in 2nd, 3rd or even later authorships. Is there a good way to avoid this?<br />Minimal publishable units can be a lab policy in some groups, and result in pressure to publish small results very quickly regardless of the career needs of the post docs. Similarly post docs can be given roles in a group which don't lead to publications but require large amounts of time. Some of these are legitamate but again can slow you down; are there ways you can recommend to avoid such issues outside of careful negotiation with the PI? If you are in this situation, is the best course to keep your head down, or get out (if negotiating doesn't work)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-87752043465743045772012-05-31T22:29:08.966+01:002012-05-31T22:29:08.966+01:00Hi Maria
Thanks for your question. This is a trick...Hi Maria<br />Thanks for your question. This is a tricky situation. On the one hand, as I say above, productivity is crucial as a post-doc. Yet, quality is even more important (and see Dorothy Bishop's comment below).<br /><br />Unfortunately, once you’re in a situation like the one you describe, there isn’t a whole lot you can do about it. All authors of a paper, including the PI, must believe the findings before committing a result to the literary record. I personally think PIs should be realistic about the certainty in any set of data and so should help their post-docs publish, at least so long as quantity of papers is judged as a marker of success in the academic community. But others see things differently.<br /><br />Where this situation could be prevented is before you start your post-doc. My advice is to study your potential PI’s CV carefully and take note of how productive and successful the previous post-docs have been. What journals did they publish in? How many papers did they publish? Where did they go after their position ended? If they only published a few papers but ended up getting great jobs then that tells you that the PI is a smart operator who knows how produce high-impact science in small quantities. But if the post-docs publish little and go nowhere then it could be red flag. In my opinion, being a perfectionist is never healthy, as a PhD student, post-doc, or PI.<br /><br />This, by the way, is one reason conferences are so useful for PhD students. It is extremely valuable to learn about the working styles of different PIs in your field so you can find one that is the right fit for you.<br /><br />My other bit of advice would be to ensure that you don’t bank everything on high risk projects. I’ve made this mistake myself occasionally and it can cost you a lot. It's far better to build a balanced portfolio of low and high risk experiments, much like you would manage a financial investment. Then your bases are covered.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-54579112522857462902012-05-31T22:11:58.060+01:002012-05-31T22:11:58.060+01:00Hi Dorothy, thanks so much for commenting. It'...Hi Dorothy, thanks so much for commenting. It's great to hear your views on this, which are of course based on a lot more experience than mine.<br /><br />I think we agree completely on the big issues here, but I think it’s important to clarify a few points where I may have given the wrong impression.<br /><br />I’m certainly not arguing that anyone should publish poor quality science. When I use the term “potboiler”, I don’t mean weak or pointless papers. I mean specialised papers (including technical articles) that are simply not publishable in more prominent journals. A lot (perhaps the bulk of) science falls into this category. This was the advice I received time and again from the BBSRC fellowships committee; in fact I remember a slide from the induction session of my David Phillips fellowship in 2006 which stated “Publications: ensure a balance between Nature and potboilers”. And when I went for my mid-term assessment, they made a point of warning me that because I was transferring institutions, I should guard against a drop in the *quantity* of publications.<br /><br />I’m also not for a moment suggesting that papers should chopped up into minimal publishable units and churned out. Actually, quite the opposite (see my point 2) – where possible, experiments should be combined to create more convincing, higher-impact papers; “maximal impact units”, if you like. This is certainly the approach I have followed in my career. <br /><br />Having said that, if you are a junior researcher facing a scenario in which you have two studies that, when combined together, would make a minimal additional impact to being published separately then strategically I believe it makes sense to get the runs on the board and split them. It’s important to build a body of work. <br /><br />I’m also not suggesting that scientists should ever publish something they don’t believe. Replicability is of course crucial in science. But perhaps where our views differ slightly is in where one should set the bar for early-career researchers. As I see it, one of my responsibilities as a PI is to help support my post-doc’s career and develop their publication profile in the process of doing excellent science. In my relatively safe employment position, I could easily set a very high bar to publishing anything at all, unless I had replicated it say 3 or 4 times. That’s a luxury I may be able to afford, but it isn’t one that my post-doc can. They need to show evidence of productivity, and it would be very big gamble indeed to publish only 1 or 2 papers in a three year period and hope that, as certain as the findings are, they are also seen as significant enough to overcome the fact that there are only 2 of them. <br /><br />Some labs, like Nancy Kanwisher’s, achieve this very effectively and have built a reputation for doing superb science with a determined focus on internal replication. It’s a great way to do things if you can, but I guess I’m more of a realist; until we change the way science is valued across the board and completely zero the importance of publication *quantity*, scientists (and particularly early-career researchers) will need to publish before they are as certain in their findings as a senior tenured researcher would prefer. I guess that’s what I mean when I say I’m offering advice on the real (as I've seen it) vs. the ideal (as I'd like it); from my experience, at least, quantity of output is still regarded as an important gauge of individual success in science. I'm not saying it should be.Chris Chambershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437328364681252945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-17432571972276723472012-05-31T19:48:50.354+01:002012-05-31T19:48:50.354+01:00Thanks for this, Chris. While I agree with much of...Thanks for this, Chris. While I agree with much of your advice, including the importance of publishing, I am uneasy with the recommendation to publish 4 papers per year, and to write up as much as possible of your thesis. I think you should publish when you have done something important enough to communicate to the rest of the world. As someone who looks at lots of postdoc cvs on grants boards etc, I can confirm that not only does quality definitely trump quantity, but that weak, pointless, pot-boiling papers can actively harm your c.v. I’d rather see a c.v. with one really carefully-done, thoughtful, original paper every year, than one with ten papers per annum, none of which is memorable in any way. It’s a balance that’s not always easy to get right, but my advice is, remember that if you write stuff, editors and reviewers have to read it, and they may form a negative impression of you if it’s trivial or pointless stuff, or if you have clearly been chopping up a decent study into minimal publishable units. Quite a few funding agencies, search committees, and indeed the REF, ask people to specify their 4-5 best publications. This means that little is gained by writing oodles of papers. Yes, if I’m employing a postdoc I want to know they can write and can navigate their way around getting things into print. But if they appear to churn stuff out, then it’s a turn-off.<br />I am sure that’s not what you intended to recommend, but the pressures on postdocs in these hard times are such that it’s easy to feel you are just playing a game, and it can have a very detrimental effect on science if people publish stuff they don’t really believe in. It’s hard to know how far Maria’s situation is a case of an obsessive PI holding her back, or a PI behaving like a good scientist should: ensuring that the work is replicable and solid before rushing into print. If you respect your PI as a scientist, then I’d go with their judgement, and you will benefit in the longer run by being associated with a good piece of work. And it’s a dismal business finding you have published something that later on you come to regret.deevybeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15118040887173718391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-30053705756269885902012-05-31T17:16:20.810+01:002012-05-31T17:16:20.810+01:00Thanks a lot for your post. it's really intere...Thanks a lot for your post. it's really interesting. But I have a question for you that worries (and happens to many postdocs). And it's about a specific situation. What do you you think about the problem of having a PI who is "controlling" the papers you do/don't publish? I mean, what happens when a postdoc doesn't publish because for her/his PI the data is not enough for a paper? And the PI is always asking for more experiments. This happens often with "risky" projects. And sometimes your postdoc period finishes without papers not because you didn't work hard or follow your PI's advise, but because it was never enough for her/him.<br />I would really appreciate your advise. I know it's not a tip to succeed as a postdoc, but I'm pretty sure many postdocs are wondering about this<br />ThanksMarianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5747401412673787565.post-51547083331771591452012-05-31T15:32:52.422+01:002012-05-31T15:32:52.422+01:00A lot of good stuff in there.A lot of good stuff in there.RAEEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07036509466612728748noreply@blogger.com