Publish or Perish

[leavingprov]

As you know there's a lot of discussion on these forums about why people chose the programs they did and a lot of reasons given why people tend toward the 'producers-of-research' track, academia and the Ph.D. route versus the 'consumers-of-research' Psy.D. route. One aspect of this choice for me (attending Psy.D. program in the fall) that doesn't get mentioned as much is the competitive, insular, sometimes-egotistical nature of academia and the research world. I say this having had a number of RA experiences, presentations, etc., and having worked with several professors who have been very down-to-earth and noncompetitive. Yet, overall, there are aspects to the world of academia and the research world that have consistently left a bad taste in my mouth.

As I went through the application process, I really gave this a lot of thought, and it was one of a number of factors that led to me turning down a funded Ph.D. program for a less-funded Psy.D. program. I know there are a lot of researchers on this forum and I'm curious to hear everyone's perspectives on this, as well as any anecdotes you'd like to share or to write about how much this was a factor in your decision making process. I was prompted to write this post after reading the thread called "sharing research ideas" [http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=628373] which reminded me why (among other reasons) I'm no longer interested in going into academia as a career option.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[JockNerd]

Well, first off, this

...a lot of reasons given why people tend toward the 'producers-of-research' track, academia and the Ph.D. route versus the 'consumers-of-research' Psy.D. route...

Is just a lengthier way of saying "PhD = research, PsyD = practice" and is just wrong wrong wrong. Many of us wish this were never said on this board again. Most PhDs go into practice.

I haven't experienced academia thus far as being especially competitive. I know that some people have this perception of things being "cut-throat," but I've never experienced anything like that myself and, honestly, often question the emotional stability of the people with whom I am personally aquainted who say that (they seem really sensitive).

 

[Wildcat06]

I am one of those die-hard research oriented people (though I haven't started yet, so that could very easily change once I'm actually in school). And I have also not seen much of the competitive side of things and am more concerned about the "insular" aspect of academia.

My biggest fear is becoming part of the "Ivory Tower" (should I be so lucky to actually get a job in academia). Right now in my RA job we joke about how the people designing the assessments seem so out of touch with the reality of our population. (E.g. asking if our conduct-disordered substance-abusing kids are too involved in boy/girl scouts or band practice to participate in treatment.)

 

[Ollie123]

Definitely a die-hard researcher here. Haven't really seen it be cut-throat, most of the folks I've worked with have actually been really laid back. Good work-life balance for the most part, no one sleeps in the lab and everyone is still extremely productive and doing great work. For the most part these are pretty well-known folks at respected departments (not the Yale's and Stanford's but still T1 research universities), so its not like I've worked with folks who just don't care. I might be in for a rude awakening at some point, but so far I just haven't seen anything that extreme. I think it may depend on the department...I know of a few schools that have a reputation for just being nasty, horrible places to work.

I may be biased though. I was planning on corporate law/finance prior to settling on clinical psych. Let's just say...My business world can beat up your academic world I got out before I got too far into it but...yikes. In the course of a trip to Wall St. and lining up an internship on the stock exchange (that I backed out of to work in a psych lab!)...scary, scary stuff. Academia actually seemed like a pretty chill career path to me, I'm a pretty laid back person and I think I could have gone into the business world and done fine for myself, but I'd have been miserable.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I was planning on corporate law/finance prior to settling on clinical psych. Let's just say...My business world can beat up your academic world I got out before I got too far into it but...yikes.

I'm a corporate convert, and while some academic things can get thorny, I've seen people tank projects/companies because they were slighted in some way. Of course, there is still idea stealing, phantom 1st authors, people getting passed over for tenure because of politics, etc*.....so academic isn't exactly a cake walk.

*not at my current university, though I have enough friends in academia that I've heard some horror stories.

 

[PhillyPsych]

I chose to attend a PsyD program because of the experiences I have had at a research site that I worked at for about a year. Though I would have to say that overall my experience with university based researchers that teach as well as do research is very postive (infact I think I have only had one bad experience in all of my years as a student in the regard), I would have to say that moving from that environment to the research site that I mentioned above I was rudely awoken.

I think that working in a lab under a PI who had about 15 NIH funded studies running simultaneously really opened my eyes in terms of how the research world really works (as compared to helping a professor with thier one or two research projects). I witnessed countless "backstabs" (mainly pertaining to other lead researchers thwarting the easily suggestible and meek research assistants in data collection) between lead researchers and even many people listed on the authors lists that I had never even seen or heard of before, while others who toil over and put thier blood, sweat, and tears into the projects get ignored.

Thats just my 2 cents and I am sure that this is DEFINATELY not the way that all researchers are, but it really did solidify for me that my place in the world of psychology is sitting in an office directly impacting a patients life, not in front of a computer. I really do want to stress though that the people working at the lab mentioned above were almost all wonderful out of the context of work, it's just that what they had to do at work to be successful that gave me the bad taste in my mouth. When psychology is more about business than helping the common person it really makes you question the trajectory of your career, lucky for me it happened before I had committed to a path.

 

[Cosmo75]

I'm a corporate convert, and while some academic things can get thorny, I've seen people tank projects/companies because they were slighted in some way. Of course, there is still idea stealing, phantom 1st authors, people getting passed over for tenure because of politics, etc*.....so academic isn't exactly a cake walk.

*not at my current university, though I have enough friends in academia that I've heard some horror stories.

As another corporate convert, I have to agree.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I've felt the "publish or perish" culture as an undergrad!

OTOH, there are some clinical faculty members here that haven't published (or at least not published in a way that shows up on PSYCInfo), and most of the grad student's haven't, either.

Working at an entirely "soft money" research institute (affilated with a university that provides benefits to FT employees but little else), the culture is more "get grants or perish." Everything is supported through grant money, so my research group is consistantly working on LOIs and grant applications in between actually working on our studies, posters, and manuscripts. On one particularly high stakes grant application we were working on, my PI sent out an email reminding us that "this is how we're getting paid next year, so work hard!" Fortunately, my PI has been fairly sucessful so far--knock on wood! (grant funding rate of 50%+)--but it's a lot of hard work and a lot of tension at times.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Grant writing will serve you well in the future. I was lucky enough (though I didn't feel like it at the time) to gain grant writing experience early on. I really wish there was just one grant form/style, as some that I've read have some ridiculous questions/requirements. I've found grant writing similar to legal writing, as both require a combination of technical writing and style (though the combination varies by grant application). To quote Justice Potter Stewart, "you know it when you see it."

 

[Thrak]

To quote Justice Potter Stewart, "you know it when you see it."

Are you suggesting the grant writing process is obscene? I can go along with that

 

[knowing]

Definitely a die-hard researcher here. Haven't really seen it be cut-throat, most of the folks I've worked with have actually been really laid back. Good work-life balance for the most part, no one sleeps in the lab and everyone is still extremely productive and doing great work. For the most part these are pretty well-known folks at respected departments (not the Yale's and Stanford's but still T1 research universities), so its not like I've worked with folks who just don't care. I might be in for a rude awakening at some point, but so far I just haven't seen anything that extreme. I think it may depend on the department...I know of a few schools that have a reputation for just being nasty, horrible places to work.

I may be biased though. I was planning on corporate law/finance prior to settling on clinical psych. Let's just say...My business world can beat up your academic world I got out before I got too far into it but...yikes. In the course of a trip to Wall St. and lining up an internship on the stock exchange (that I backed out of to work in a psych lab!)...scary, scary stuff. Academia actually seemed like a pretty chill career path to me, I'm a pretty laid back person and I think I could have gone into the business world and done fine for myself, but I'd have been miserable.

This is so true. I too, am a corporate convert from the private sector. Corporate real estate management and acqusitions is not a place for the thin skinned and faint hearted. I have seen it from both sides and there is a difference between healthy good natured competition and brutal deceptive "knocking each other off the ladder" and getting joy from watching the fall. For the most part in my few experiences with academia so far..it is not the same. Sadly, the private sector could eat academia for breakfast lunch and dinner and still want the dessert.

 

[Ollie123]

. . . that's hard to imagine. . . academia is full of smart people competing for limited funds (latest funding lines for nih grants are pretty bad). Though I have limited experience outside of academic professionally, it all seems the same to me. . .network, produce high quality work, meet deadlines, network, be at the right place at the right time. . .profit.

I think its mostly just about the personalities that go into it. I feel like for most academics, the competition is an unfortunate biproduct of the circumstances. People are motivated by their ideas, and willing to compete in order to pursue them.

I feel like the business folks tend to be motivated by the competition itself. What the company does is often secondary to "winning" the competition with other companies. I don't think most executives feel all that passionately about....light bulbs or staplers. Its the passion to be better than the neighbors that motivates those folks.

I don't think anyone would argue academia isn't competitive, but as a whole, I think the culture of the competition is very different. I picked academia because I think there's a bit more room to enjoy the game

Thought I admit soft-money positions scare me a bit for that reason. I feel like it would be too easy to get sucked into it.

 

[dd123]

My thoughts: I've been immersed in research and academia as far as a Bsci in a research-based university will allow, and I have none of the bad taste in my mouth that you speak of. It's never even crossed my mind. Especially when I started to get good at what I do.

Further, the grad program (experimental psych) that I'm going to in September, I'm quite sure, will be even further from that stereotype.

And, keep in mind that competition is not necessarily a bad thing. Yes, it can go to far, but I'd carefully assess your sources that have bad things to say about research, and then also realize that there are plenty of negative stereotypes about clinical psych, and psyD programs, etc.

 

[LM02]

take that nontenure track position at an academic medical center somewhere cool, open up a side private practice, learn the ropes of that. . . stop worrying about paperwork and cajoling folks into giving me necessary datapoints to finish manuscripts, or writing grants. . .

But that nontenure track job at the academic medical center is more often than not a soft money position, requiring you to be writing grants all.the.time. And it is competitive - not in a stabbed-in-the-back kind of way, but in a there's-limited-funding-and-you-don't-have-any-job-stability kind of way.