Hello PhD show

Hello PhD

Summary: Science is hard work, but making it through a PhD program and into a rewarding career can seem downright impossible. Wouldn’t it be nice if someone shared the secrets for success at every stage? Admissions, rotations, classes, quals, research, dissertations, job-hunting – avoid the pitfalls and get back to doing what you love. It's like getting a PhD in getting a PhD!

Join Now to Subscribe to this Podcast

Podcasts:

 084: The 4 Keys to an Effective Grad School Application | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 52:39

In every episode of Hello PhD, we explore science training and life in the lab.  But for every scientist, that saga begins with a grad school application. Whether you’re ready to apply today, or would like to apply to a graduate program ‘some day,’ we share a few tips and tricks that will make the application process simpler and more effective. Grad School Application: Step by Step A grad school application has a few basic (but vital!) parts. The CV The core of your application is your Curriculum vitae (CV).  You’ll use it to list your educational experience, and more importantly, your research experience.  The admissions committee will want to see evidence that you’ve actually had some success in the lab before you enter grad school. Why is this so critical?  Look at it from the committee’s perspective:  You have a stack of qualified applicants and a limited number of spots. Would you take a chance on a student who claims to ‘love science’ but has never picked up a Pipetman? Or would you choose the student who has worked in a real lab for 3 semesters? ‘Loving science’ is not the same as ‘loving lab work,’ and the committee knows the difference.  You’ll need to get some lab experience before you apply.  That will also help you on the next section of your application… The Personal Statement This section strikes fear into the hearts of applicants.  Is this supposed to be a story about getting your first chemistry kit when you were nine? A detailed description of the experiment you did last summer?  A love-letter to science? An effective personal statement contains three essential elements: * An overview of your research experience and your personal contribution to the project (sound familiar?) * A description of why you believe graduate school is the vital next-step in your training * A description of why this particular school and graduate program are a good fit for you academically and personally We unpack each of these ideas in this week’s show, but keep in mind that your statement must be specific to the program – a form letter will not catch the committee’s attention. Letters of Recommendation Hey, remember when we talked about how important research experience is in your CV and personal statement?  Well, it’s important in your letters of recommendation too! Make sure at least one of your letters comes from your research advisor.  It’s great that your chemistry professor, dentist, and Aunt Mary think you’re a wonderful student (and devoted flosser), but the committee wants to hear what your lab supervisor saw in your work and your potential. Transcripts and Tests Unfortunately, you can’t take a ‘do-over’ on that terrible semester Freshman year.  Your transcripts are fixed, but more important than the GPA is the trajectory of your grades.  While you may have a bad semester, the committee will look for those grades to improve over time, and to see that you took, and succeeded, in classes related to your field. And while we don’t like it, the GRE is a requirement for admission to many programs. (Here are a few that don’t require it!).  In most of the science grad programs, your quantitative scores will count for more than verbal, so be sure to study before the test. Regardless, a middling GRE score shouldn’t preclude you from applying to, or entering, a graduate program.  They’re

 083: Preprint First, Peer-Review Later | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 52:35

Publishing your research in a peer-reviewed academic journal is an exercise in patience. You write and edit, wait for feedback from your PI, wrangle the figures into some esoteric format, and then submit.  That’s when the real patience begins. From submission to publication, the peer review process can take more than a year.  Meanwhile, you’re moving on to other work, and hoping a competing lab doesn’t scoop the science you showed at the last conference. Enter the preprint.  Though it sounds unassuming, it’s a source of real controversy in the biomedical sciences. Like Reprints, But Way Earlier Essentially, a preprint is just a manuscript submitted to an online repository before it has gone through peer review. The benefits are perhaps unexpected: preprints enable anyone to access your research, regardless of their budget for journal subscriptions.  Peers can comment on the work, and offer suggestions for follow-up experiments that may speed your research through the traditional review process. And preprinting can establish your lab’s primacy when another researcher tries to scoop your work. But preprints offer hazards as well.  Will the quality of research decline if experiments are not reviewed first? What if no one shows up to comment or collaborate? Launched in 2013, bioRxiv.org intends to answer these questions empirically.  Based on the longstanding ArXiv.org, a preprint server for physics and mathematics, bioRxiv “is a free online archive and distribution service for unpublished preprints in the life sciences.” In this week’s episode we talk with Jessica Polka, PhD. She’s the Director of ASAPbio where she works to promote the productive use of preprints in the life sciences. She explores the common concerns she hears from biomedical scientists, and how she believes preprints could revolutionize discovery and collaboration. The Tax Man Cometh As if you haven’t heard, the United States House of Representatives just passed a tax bill that could destroy graduate education as we know it. Think that sounds a bit hyperbolic? The plan would make graduate tuition waivers taxable, adding $1,800 to $9,000 to your tax bill on April 15th. Raise your hand if your stipend has an extra $9,000 you were just itching to spend! Luckily, there’s a lot you can do. * Educate yourself on the details of the plan and how it would impact your training. * Find the contact information for your representatives. (Senators are your best point of contact, as they have not yet voted and their version of the bill does not revoke tuition exemptions at the time of this writing.) * Make the call to let them know how important graduate research and science education are to our society.  For help, try this script, or take this advice from a former education lobbyist on how to make your voice heard. In other news, here’s a running list of graduate programs that no longer require the GRE! And if all of this is too much for you, why not kick back with the Pumpkin Pie Porter from Deep River Brewing Company in Clayton, NC.

 082: The Science of Comedy with The Peer Revue’s Niki Spahich | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 44:32

Two scientists walk into a bar. One steps on stage and delivers ten minutes of raucously funny stand-up comedy.  The other enjoys an evening of laughter as enterprising STEM professionals share their science. Scientists doing stand-up may sound like a joke, but it’s actually the latest innovation in science communication. Weird Al Einstein Begun in 2016, The Peer Revue is a program designed to make scientific research accessible by making it funny. This week, we talk with Niki Spahich, one of the co-creators of The Peer Revue, about how the idea began and what it’s like to turn scientists into comedians. The process starts with a workshop to train STEM professionals in the basics of joke writing and story telling.  They pair with practicing comedians to review their material and work on timing and delivery.  Once they’ve developed a routine, they get to step on stage in front of a live audience to deliver their set. Most get laughs, but they all get the chance to share their work with a broad audience.  Making cutting-edge research accessible to people outside the lab is certainly no laughing matter. Worst Dissertation Project Ever Every day since February 24, 1988, someone in Richard Lenski’s lab has seeded the same 12 Escherichia coli cultures into new media to shake overnight.  A new Nature paper describes the genetic evolution of these bacteria over the last 68,000 generations. Aren’t you glad you weren’t the grad student tasked with a 30-year dissertation project? Also in this episode, Daniel and Josh travel to Mystery Brewing in Hillsborough, NC to sample the hard-to-find Dromgoole Pumpkin Ale.  It’s made with whole pumpkin pies, but will its fall flavors register on tastebuds already saturated with Pumpkin Spiced Everything?  Tune in to find out!      

 081: Data Science Will Accelerate Your Research – with Joel Schwartz, PhD | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 57:15

As a graduate student, Joel Schwartz developed an immunofluorescence assay for neurotransmitter transport. To quantify his results, he needed to circle the cells in each image so the computer could measure the intensity. By the time he graduated, Joel had circled over 10 million individual cells. Over the years, Joel discovered a better way: he taught computers to do the repetitive, complex, and confounding parts of data analysis. And now he trains other scientists to do the same. Datum If You’ve Got ‘Em A typical research lab churns out hundreds of different kinds of data in any given year.  There are Western blot bands, gene sequences, patient surveys, micrographs, mass spectra, and myriad other images, spreadsheets and documents. All of this data must be analyzed, but it’s often a painful process for the researcher. Opening multiple spreadsheets, ‘cleaning up’ missing or erroneous values, and manipulating thousands of rows to form meaningful groups can take hours or days. We recognize these as repetitive tasks that a computer could do, but not every scientist has the skills to leverage those resources.  What is a biologist to do? The answer may be: ‘learn to code.’  Tech-savvy scientists can use online resources to learn the basics of programming in languages like Python and R. This approach is great because it’s self-paced and can fit within your existing lab schedule.  But it can be frustrating when you hit the limits of your understanding, or you try to debug your code without help. For those who could use a bit more guidance, data analytics bootcamps are great way to race up the learning curve in a few short weeks. Joel Schwartz, PhD is an instructor at the LEVEL program at Northeastern University, where he provides hands-on experience in data analysis and computer programming. This week, we ask Joel how learning to code can help bench scientists turn their data into papers even faster. He tells us how he’s using these skills in his own work on autism assessment and how the next big scientific questions may be elucidated by computers. Cry It Out As any parent will tell you, kids don’t come with an instruction manual.  And if they did, they’d probably have chewed, torn, or burned it to ashes before you got the chance to read it. Instead, raising a child in the modern age means hearing competing bad advice from other parents and the internet.  The sheer volume of terrible ideas can overwhelm even the most earnest of caregivers. Enter Parentifact.org, the Politifact of… um… parenting facts. We review the great new resource so you can sleep easier at night. That is, as soon as Jr. stops waking you up every forty-seven minutes. And if he doesn’t stop screaming, you may want to help yourself to an Octoberfest Beer from Bell’s Brewing in Comstock, MI.  It’s only available for a limited time, and just in time for our IPA-free fall.  Cheers!

 080: Postdoc Straight Talk – Where Are They Now? | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 55:31

Uncertainty is a defining feature of postdoctoral training: * Q: Is a postdoc a student or an employee? (A: Neither. Both?) * Q: Should you continue in your PhD research field, or try something new?  (A: Yes) * Q: How are you supposed to find a job while you’re ALSO doing research and writing papers? (A: Pray that the Career-Fairy leaves one under your lab notebook while you’re at seminar.) * Q: How long should a postdoctoral fellowship take? (A: Now you’re just being mean!) Getting There To help us understand the zeitgeist of postdoctoral training, in 2015 we interviewed eight postdocs at different universities and life stages.  Some were finishing up, others were just getting started.  We learned what they loved (“The freedom to pursue an intellectual passion.”) and what they hated (“The salary!”) about this career stage, and what they planned to do with their degrees. Well, it’s been a full two years since that original interview, and many things have changed.  We caught up with seven of the original interviewees to ask some new questions. This week on the show, we find out ‘where are they now?’ and more importantly, what steps they took to progress in their careers.  Their experience may help you take the next step on your own career path. South Paws Plus, we explore the murky and often unsettling depths of feline behavior. Specifically, some researchers argue that members of Felis silvestris catus not only exhibit right- and left-handedness, but that it’s gender specific! Is this a #catfact, or #fakenews?  Test your own kitty companions and let us know on Twitter @hellophd. We also try out the elusive Baked Goods Hoppy Pale Ale from Clown Shoes Brewing in Ipswich, MA. Like its clown namesake, this beer makes you feel a little uncomfortable when you first see it, but you’ll be glad you gave it a chance. Unlike its clown namesake, it won’t try to murder you when your back is turned. At least I don’t think so. Hmm, now where did that can get to….  I’m sure I set it down right over….

 079: The Insider’s Guide to Industry – with Randall Ribaudo, PhD | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 59:57

If you’re an academic scientist, applying for an industry job is a bit like traveling to a foreign country. First, there is paperwork. Will they accept your Curriculum Vitae as is, or do you need to crunch it down into a résumé? And how on earth do you get through the screening software that filters through the 1000+ applications? Next, there’s the language barrier. You’ll need to communicate your qualifications in an interview that may last just a few minutes.  You might describe a key experiment you designed with six controls and twelve replicates, but what the interviewer needs to hear is that you have experience in ‘quality control and quality assurance.’ Don’t expect them to make the translation. Last, there can be culture shock when you actually get the job and start to work. There are aspects of your academic training that you will need to un-learn if you want to be successful. You can either begin the job with a sensitivity to these new cultural norms, or you can learn them the hard way… This week, we talk with a scientist who acts as travel guide for academics who want to make the leap into industry. “Scientists are leaders…” Randall Ribaudo has experience on both sides of the bench.  A PhD immunologist, Dr. Ribaudo began his career as an academic scientist and PI at the National Cancer Institute.  Through connections he made as a researcher, he went on to a series of industry jobs, including five years at Celera Genomics where he wore many hats from academic liaison to product manager. His unique experiences in both academia and industry led him to his current role at SciPhD, and his insights could make your own transition easier. In our interview, Dr. Ribaudo answered some of the burning questions that may be on YOUR mind: * How are industry labs different from my university lab? Will I like that work style? * How do I write a resume that will get noticed? * Every job listing seems to require three years of prior experience. How am I supposed to get that if they won’t hire me? * I already know I want to work in industry – what can I do as a grad student or postdoc to get myself ready? Even if you’re on the tenure track, you’ll want to listen closely to Dr. Ribaudo’s advice for improving academic labs. His industry experience with team building, project management, and strategic planning have direct parallels in the university laboratory. For more insights, you can check out a handful of free videos from SciPhD or see if one of the Onsite Training Programs is available in your area.  You can also reach Dr. Ribaudo directly via the website or on Twitter @SciPhD.   For more episodes on building better teams in the lab, check out: 056: Team Up for Speedier Science 077: Google discovers five keys to a productive lab The Early Squirrel Gets The Bean Hey – remember the GRE?  Sadly, so do we. But this week, Josh shares some good news about two major universities that have dropped their GRE requirement.  Both the Michigan Program in Biomedical Science and Berkeley Molecular Cell Biology hav...

 078: Knowing When to Leave Academia – Feat. The Recovering Academic Podcast | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 37:36

Maybe you’re in love with science, but you just can’t imagine your life as a PI.  And maybe you’ve had a string of experiments fail and you’re just ready to put the entire ‘lab thing’ behind you. You have a choice – you could leave academia and try to find your way in industry, publishing or some other career. Or you could try to revive your research in the hope that lab life will eventually improve. But how do you know which choice is right for you? What happens if you make a mistake? Uncharted Territory Knowing when to leave academia is a perilous choice. After all, your colleagues and mentors will tell you that there’s no turning back and that you’re throwing away an amazing career in an academic lab.  You’ll regret it! And yet, people survive and thrive in the transition every day – they just don’t always talk about it. The Recovering Academic Podcast is here to break that silence.  The hosts, Amanda Welch (@LadyScientist),  Cleyde Helena (@Doctor_PMS), and Ian Street (@IHStreet) share their real-time experiences with transitioning out of the lab and into careers from publishing to sales. This week, we talk with the Recovering Academics about the tell-tale signs that it’s time for you to abandon the faculty track in favor of an ‘alternative career.’ It’s never an easy decision to leave academia, but it also doesn’t have to be fraught with fear and regret. Taking stock of your skills, goals, and options early is the best way to ensure you have somewhere safe to land when you finally decide to make the leap. For more help on this topic, check out HelloPhD Episode 027 The Road More Travelled: Stepping Off of the Tenure Track. Wayfinding In the true spirit of science, we share a beer with our new friends Amanda, Cleyde, and Ian.  It’s the Unfiltered Sculpin Extra-Hopped India Pale Ale from Ballast Point Brewing Company.  Though it’s one of their limited edition beers, we were able to locate it in no fewer than four different cities so that we could raise a glass on this week’s show. Find some for yourself before it’s gone!

 077: Google Discovers Five Keys to a Productive Lab | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 56:12

Google is data-obsessed, so it should come as no surprise that the company sought to apply its analytical expertise inside the organization. In an endeavor dubbed “Project Aristotle,” Google sought to answer a vexing question: What factors are important for a successful, productive team? Their findings may have profound impacts not just at Google, but in a lab near you… Hi, My Name is Norm Google’s HR department approached the problem with an eye toward data: Over two years we conducted 200+ interviews with Googlers (our employees) and looked at more than 250 attributes of 180+ active Google teams. We were pretty confident that we’d find the perfect mix of individual traits and skills necessary for a stellar team — take one Rhodes Scholar, two extroverts, one engineer who rocks at AngularJS, and a PhD. Voila. Dream team assembled, right? What they found surprised them.  It wasn’t the backgrounds or individual talents of team members that made the difference.  They found that teams with a similar mix of individuals could perform in vastly different ways. Instead, it was the team’s culture and accepted norms that helped to predict their success. The five key features are revealed in five questions you can ask about your team: Can we count on each other to do high quality work on time? Are goals, roles, and execution plans on our team clear? Are we working on something that is personally important for each of us? Do we fundamentally believe that the work we’re doing matters? Can we take risks on this team without feeling insecure or embarrassed? This week on the show, we unpack these critical features of a high-performing team, and relate them to the research lab environment. We tell you how to assess a new lab before you join, and how to make improvements if you’re already committed to a lab that is underperforming. Sunshine and Sarcasm This week, Science in the News brings us three stories in rapid succession. First, it’s almost time for the solar eclipse to pass over North America. You still have time to get (the right) goggles and find a spot to watch the show.  As usual, NASA has you covered. Next, we hear about how some researchers are trying to teach computers about sarcasm.  Hey.  Great idea guys.  That’s going to be SOOOOO useful. Said no one ever. </sarcasm> And a Coal Museum in Kentucky finds that solar panels might actually be a useful and affordable energy source.  Who would’ve guessed? </sarcasm> We sample a special ethanol that is bargain priced for the inner grad-student in all of us.  It’s the Boatswain Double IPA (Twin Screw Steamer) from Rhinelander Brewing Company and sold by Trader Joe’s for just $4.99 for a six-pack! Is this the best beer ever?  No.  But is this the best tasting beer you can get at this price?  Almost certainly, yes. Last, but not least: concrete.  They just don’t make it like they used to.

 076: Should I choose a research focus BEFORE I apply? | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 43:33

Applying to grad school means making a series of difficult decisions: university location, reputation, lifestyle, and program. But do you need to pick out a specific research topic before filing an application? Is it better to nail down a project and lab before you apply, or is it okay to keep your options open? Listener April writes: Hi Josh and Dan – I recently found your podcast and am really enjoying it! I am planning to apply to social psychology PhD programs later this year (to hopefully start fall of 2018), and I’m already taking notes as I listen to you guys. Anyways, my question is — How specific do your research interests need to be when applying? Also, how closely do your research interests need to align with potential faculty advisers? I realize that social psychology programs are probably quite different from the “harder” science programs you’re familiar with, but I assume that this issue spans across all fields. I’m worried that if I’m too specific, I’ll box myself out from potential advisers; but I also don’t want to be too general and appear unfocused. Do you have any tips? Of course we have opinions!  We share them this week, including advice on how to avoid the very common mistake of being TOO focused when applying to school. Toddle with a Bottle Hello PhD turned 2 years old this week, and to celebrate we break into the Blanton’s Single Barrel Bourbon Whiskey from Buffalo Trace Distillery in Frankfort KY.   As a single barrel bourbon, no two batches are alike, so if our sample sounds nice to you, be sure to check out Barrel 59 from Warehouse H.  We’ve got bottle number 107! Science in the News covers the incredible shrinking kilogram.  It’s a serious problem for science, but one with a seriously scientific solution! We also learn the etymology of Agkistrodon contortrix, or the copperhead snake.  If you can see its fishhook teeth, you’re definitely too close!  

 075: When Research Sucks | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 47:43

It’s inevitable.  At some point in your research career, you’re going to get that sinking feeling. Your experiments will all fail, your PI will get on your case about finishing that paper, and your graduation date will drift maddeningly out of reach. So what can you do when your research starts to drag you down? Coming Up for Air This week on the show, we share some practical advice from the Academic Mental Health Collective on ways graduate students can get going when the going gets tough. Stress, anxiety, and depression are inevitable in your graduate training. At least they were for us! At the same time, these painful emotions can be a valuable signal that it’s time to step back, take stock of your situation, and ask for help.  There are resources on, and off, campus to help you through the hard times. By thinking ahead, you’ll meet your training challenges with a tactical plan and a team of supporters to help you through. It does get better, we promise! The Check is in the Mail Science in the News brings us the story of a New York court’s $15 million judgement against Sci Hub, the online research paper pirate ship.  We explore the legal and moral implications of the action, and make bold predictions about the future of scientific publishing. If you’re interested in the history of academic publishing and how we got into this quagmire in the first place, we highly recommend Stephen Buranyi’s Guardian piece titled: Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science? We also celebrate the beginning of summer by breaking our IPA fast. We’re drinking the Nectar IPA from Humboldt Brewing Company. This golden beauty has a sweet start and a bitter finish, sort of like my first marriage!* (*Yes, this is a total lie, but the setup was perfect and impossible to resist.  Sort of like my first marriage!**) (**Okay, I’m done.)

 074: Does Science Have an Income Inequality Problem? | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 31:34

On May 2nd, NIH Director Francis Collins announced a plan to limit the total amount of grant funding awarded to an individual investigator or lab. According to Collins, “the distribution of NIH grant funding is highly skewed, with 10 percent of NIH-funded investigators receiving over 40 percent of NIH funding.” The funding proposal would limit an individual lab to the equivalent of 3 RO1-sized grants, and free up an additional 1600 funding opportunities that could go to early and mid-career scientists. On June 8th, the plan was scrapped… Addressing the 90% This week on the show, we cover the contentious and somewhat confusing reversal of Collins’ plan to spur innovation by spreading around the money. Did the plan change due to criticism from the labs with the deepest pockets? Or was there evidence to support the replacement plan that earmarks money for early-career scientists? At the heart of this issue, we discuss whether basic research would benefit from a shift in investment strategy. Do science and innovation advance faster when the ‘best’ labs get all the money, or is there value in making many smaller bets? Tell us what YOU think in the comments below. Everybeer Some beers sing with complex aromas, malty bitterness, and just-right effervescence.  And then there’s brown ales. This week, we sampled the Legend Brown Ale from Legend Brewing in Richmond, VA.  Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great beer.  Very tasty.  It just tastes like every other brown ale ever.  If you sneakily replaced the contents of this bottle with some other brown ale, I promise no one would notice. I don’t know whether that makes us beer snobs or beer newbies.  Either way, we’re just counting down the days before we get back on our IPA kick…    

 073: Stop Telling Me My Project is Going to Fail! | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 31:54

Is your lab is filled with compassionate, positive individuals who offer nurturing support and gentle guidance to help you achieve your full potential as a scientist? We didn’t think so. While you may encounter a handful of Positive Pollyannas throughout your career, you’re also likely to run into a few Negative Nancys. Rather than encouraging you to keep trying when an experiment fails, they’ll take every opportunity to throw shade on your emerging research project. Everyone’s A Critic This week, we heard from Amygdala (not her real name…), who was getting nothing but discouragement from one of the postdocs in her lab.  She writes: There is a postdoc in my lab who is tangentially involved in the project that I’m working on. This postdoc has extremely negative views regarding the project. This negative view spans from the amount of time it takes to train animals on this task to the variable results that we get with each animal, etc. While I agree about some points that this postdoc is making and that there is always room from improvement, it’s hard for me to not get down about this project. I’m the one directly training the animals and obtaining the results. Given that training animals takes 6 days a week and at least four hours each day, I’m trying to remain positive and not think that I’ve wasted all of this time. My PI and the postdoc whose project this is remain positive and encouraging. However, the tangentially-involved postdoc is someone who I interact more frequently with. This is a very long-winded way of asking: How does one remain positive regarding their own project while still showing respect to other people’s views regarding the project? And is it appropriate for people to comment negatively on other people’s projects? We address her concerns and offer some (hopefully) helpful advice for dealing with negativity from your lab mates. Cloudy Waters For Science in the News, Josh celebrates Healthy and Safe Swimming Week with a story about Cryptosporidium in pool water.  It’s a serious water-borne illness that you can prevent by not drinking where you swim. Or you can get YOUR test strips today! We also try an unfiltered sour beer from Sierra Nevada.  It’s the Otra Vez Gose-Style Ale brewed with cactus and grapefruit.   Since the trendy flavors have shifted from intensely bitter IPAs to intensely sour Goses, we predict the next big hit will be beers that taste like cigarette butts and cat urine! And soon after that, the hipsters will complain about those flavors being ‘mainstream.’ Sigh…

 072: Voices from the Front Line of the Science March | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 34:58

We weren’t sure what to expect when scientists planned a protest march on Washington, D.C. and other world capitals. Would this politicize the scientific process? Would enough scientists show up to make an impact? And what should happen after the march to continue the momentum? Ms. Frizzle Supports Science To answer these questions and others, Josh took to the streets at our local march in Raleigh, NC. He wanted to hear from other scientists first-hand about what motivated them to leave the lab and march on the capital. The atmosphere was festive, and the crowd was passionate.  In this episode, you’ll hear directly from the the marchers in their own words. Some came out of concern over environmental policy.  Some were advocating fact-based governance.  And some came to show their kids that science matters and it’s worth fighting for. As this episode posts, the organizers of the science march are mid-way through a “Week of Action” to continue the work begun at the march.  Even if you couldn’t join a march on April 22nd, there’s time to get involved. Join the conversation – email us your photos or stories from the march YOU attended, or tweet them to @hellophd. We’ll share as many as we can on this page or in a future episode. Science with a Stink Also in this episode, Josh shares some recent research on the physics of defecation.  Yup, you read that right, so think twice before tuning in… If you made it this far, you might be interested to read more about the Bristol Stool Scale or to see the equation that explains it all: In better news, we also sampled the Left Hand Brewing Milk Stout Nitro.  It’s dark brown and smooth and you can finish it in 12.6 seconds, so it’s almost exactly like… oh… never mind.  

 071: Practical Advice for Overcoming Imposter Syndrome with Dr. Maureen Gannon | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 44:54

Imposter syndrome might make you feel all alone in the world, but ironically, many graduate students, postdocs, and faculty members experience the same feelings of inadequacy. This week on the show, we interview Dr. Maureen Gannon, PhD, about the sources of imposter feelings and the practical steps you can take to work through them. By every objective measure, Dr. Gannon’s career has been an unqualified success.  She went from private high school through a Masters degree with full scholarships, finishing her undergraduate training in just three years.  She completed a PhD at Cornell and is now a tenured faculty member at Vanderbilt University with appointments in several departments. She leads and chairs multiple organizations and committees, and is invited to speak internationally about her work. And yet, for much of her training, Dr. Gannon didn’t feel successful.  She sometimes attributed her personal wins to outside forces or good luck. She wondered when others would discover her shortcomings as a scientist. Then, she attended a workshop that put a name to the feelings: imposter phenomenon.  With the name came a realization that many of her peers were experiencing the same thing. Now, she speaks to students, faculty, and professional groups about her experience of overcoming imposter syndrome and getting on with her career. In this episode, Dr. Gannon shares some of the common triggers for imposter feelings and the steps you can take to work through them. Here are the books and resources she recommends: Take the test yourself: The Clance Imposter Scale The Impostor Phenomenon: Overcoming the Fear That Haunts Your Success The Secret Thoughts of Successful Women: Why Capable People Suffer from the Impostor Syndrome and How to Thrive in Spite of It Creative Visualization: Use the Power of Your Imagination to Create What You Want in Your Life Man vs. Machine Science in the News brings us another reminder that computers are going to take our jobs.  This week, machine learning algorithms outperform human doctors on predicting which patients will suffer from heart disease. Now, when the robots rise up to kill us, they’ll be able to make it look like ‘an accident.’ We also sample a tropical ethanol with the Big Wave Golden Ale from Kona Brewing. It’s not clear why this allegedly Hawaiian beer was featured on a cruise in the Caribbean, but it’s best not to argue.  Any port in a storm, as they say… Like the show?  Support us on Patreon!

 070: Imposter Syndrome | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 45:03

Meeting a new cohort of graduate students on your first day of class can be intimidating.  These are the brightest students from their undergraduate programs. Some of them have years of research experience, first-author publications, and a depth of knowledge that seems encyclopedic. Feeling intimidated by your new colleagues is normal, but some of the people you meet will suffer a more insidious type of anxiety. Some students actually see themselves as charlatans who are just play-acting at a scientific career. So far, they feel, they’ve successfully bluffed their way through college, entrance exams, and interviews. But they fear that at any moment, they will be discovered as frauds and rejected from the program. This daily battle is the emotional reality for people suffering from “Imposter Syndrome.” Imposter Syndrome, Up Close and Personal First described by Pauline Rose Clance & Suzanne Imes in 1978, “Imposter Phenomenon” is the belief that despite one’s achievements and academic success, the sufferer doesn’t feel successful.  She believes she has ‘gotten lucky’ or ‘fooled everyone’ into believing she has talent, but at any moment the facade could come crashing down. To cope, “imposters” often turn into workaholics, attempting to maintain their position through diligence and hard work. They set their sights on perfection, and then turn a self-critical eye on every outcome. The constant cycle of unachievable goals, long work hours, and self deprecation leads to burnout, anxiety, and depression. This week on the show, we explore the signs and symptoms of imposter syndrome and how it manifests in graduate school and beyond.  By talking candidly about this decidedly lonely struggle, we can remove the stigma and begin dealing with the effects on scientists at all stages of their careers. Resources Here are some imposter syndrome papers and assessments we mentioned in the show: Impostor syndrome and burnout among American medical students: a pilot study Validation of the Impostor Phenomenon among Managers The dangers of feeling like a fake – Harvard Business Review Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale Young Imposter Syndrome Quiz Hands Off These Eggs On a slightly lighter note, we hear the fascinating story of how one graduate student stayed up late to challenge everything we know about amphibian parenting: Under a Flashlight, a Eureka Moment About Frogs Patterns of parental care in Neotropical glassfrogs: fieldwork alters hypotheses of sex-role evolution We also sample the Old Chub Scotch Ale from Oskar Blues.  Careful – that sweet maltiness is hiding an unhealthy amount of ethanol.  You’ve been warned!

Comments

Login or signup comment.