Asking questions at an interview

[foremma]

Hi all, I was wondering how those who have interviewed before for lab positions have asked questions at the end of the interview.

I have questions about where the research is headed and whether or not the PI is addressing limitations that they have discussed in previous publications, but I am worried about coming across as a know-it-all. For example, if a common limitation is sample size, is an appropriate thing to ask "I've noticed this is a limitation, is anything being done to fix that?". It seems like I am grilling them (I'm neurotic!) but I'm not sure if it is okay. If not, I am curious if it is acceptable to say something like "I've noticed this is a limitation, would I have the chance to become involved in working on that?".

Also, how many questions should I prepare? I was thinking of 5 detailed and thought-out questions unless something came up on the spot, as I find it gets uncomfortable after that.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[syzergy]

Definitely ask questions. It shows you've actually looked in the projects and are interested in the topic. I've done a ton of undergrad interviews where it's obvious they just want research experience and don't actually care. I'd much rather take someone who can consume literature and wants to apply their knowledge to the project. That would definitely impress me.

 

[foremma]

Definitely ask questions. It shows you've actually looked in the projects and are interested in the topic. I've done a ton of undergrad interviews where it's obvious they just want research experience and don't actually care. I'd much rather take someone who can consume literature and wants to apply their knowledge to the project. That would definitely impress me.

I am definitely going to be asking questions, but my issue is more concerned with how to bring up ideas or address whether or not limitations will be addressed in a constructive way without coming across as pushy.

 

[syzergy]

I don't think it's pushy. If limitations are noted in previous articles, they should be addressed in future studies.

 

[Ollie123]

If you come across as an informed and prepared researcher, I think its great - if its not its probably a sign the PI is either a jerk or someone too delusional about their work to offer good research mentorship.

Just be respectful about it. Not every study is perfect and not every mistake can be corrected in the next study as practical limits sometimes prevent that. Don't reviewer #3 it and you'll be fine...

 

[CheetahGirl]

I am curious if it is acceptable to say something like "I've noticed this is a limitation, would I have the chance to become involved in working on that?".

Also, how many questions should I prepare? I was thinking of 5 detailed and thought-out questions unless something came up on the spot, as I find it gets uncomfortable after that.

I think this is a great question. But, maybe de-emphasize the "limitations" of their research because it initially puts any researcher on the defensive. For example, if you noticed that PI's original research did not highlight ethnic differences, you could suggest that this is an interest of yours (if it is) and wonder (aloud) how the PI's variables would look across different self-identified ethnic groups. They'd love that! And it's what the NIMH & APA promote. But if ethnicity is not one of your main research interests, extrapolate to what you're keenly interested in.

I once interviewed with POI whose main focus was anger management (and I was interested in trauma), so we had a brief conversation about how the two could be related based on initial questions on how I could link the two interests. He seemed to love the question. I decided to go somewhere else, but I would've worked with him had I decided to go there.

I say 3 to 5 questions are fine. You want to allow them enough time to answer your questions and then build on their answers with more questions (thus becoming more engaged).

Edit: I just realized you meant interview for researcher in a lab, but not doctoral program lab interview. If this is a paid job, you could ask what the extent of your involvement will be with the participants (i.e. will you gain face-to-face contact with participants or will you be entering their results into a database - What kind of database? Will you get to create fields and modify the database? Probably not, but shows you're thinking about helping to make improvements.). Although, study administration is not the same as clinical experience, it is beneficial to gain experience working with participants in research. It will help your own research but also build on your personal style of dealing with others (especially if they are bored or anxious by the research). If you are crunching numbers, will you be able to (silently) sit in on the data analysis meetings with the statistician? This is another good way to show your support and interest on a deeper level. If it's clinical research, how often does the team meet to discuss the on-going progress? What is the duration of the projects? Will you be able to be on presenations or manuscripts of this research? Will you be able to first-author a presentation or manuscript if you notice a unique aspect of the research, provided you thoroughly discusses with the PI? Like Ollie said, always be respectful of the PI. Show your keen interest, unique contribution and dedicated support, and you'll come out on top. These are all things that I did as research coordinator and really helped inform my own research.

Good luck!

 

[foremma]

Wow, thanks for the helpful reply! I really appreciate it.

One off-note but relevant question: Does anyone know the proper way of recognizing that you are "IRB Certified" to run experiments? I am out of room on my resume but was advised by a mentor in the field that I should put it there, but it could only go next to my title as RA as that is my only space. Is IRB-Certified such a thing? I'm trying to figure out what to put...

 

[Ollie123]

I can't speak for your university but here we couldn't care less. It means nothing (I assume this is just the required "Human Subjects Training")? Some people's first day of work involves sitting down to hammer that out along with HIPAA training, and our hospital-specific training. Some already have it, which knocks an item off their to-do list. Its not exactly an impressive credential.

Maybe I'm missing something and you are referring to something else, but I cannot imagine that factoring into any decisions.

 

[foremma]

I can't speak for your university but here we couldn't care less. It means nothing (I assume this is just the required "Human Subjects Training")? Some people's first day of work involves sitting down to hammer that out along with HIPAA training, and our hospital-specific training. Some already have it, which knocks an item off their to-do list. Its not exactly an impressive credential.

Maybe I'm missing something and you are referring to something else, but I cannot imagine that factoring into any decisions.

Nope - it's exactly what you said. I never even thought about including it until a PsyD informed that it was important. Interesting. I guess I'll keep it off.

 

[Ollie123]

Does that person do research and do they have solid academic qualifications though (I ask because of the variance in this among PsyDs)? I don't know you or where you are at so maybe its customary there. Given you can get in a heap of trouble for not doing it, its one of those things I think its safe to assume people have done if they are listing any prior research experience. If they haven't, it adds one trivial thing to do.

 

[CheetahGirl]

I can't speak for your university but here we couldn't care less. It means nothing (I assume this is just the required "Human Subjects Training")? Some people's first day of work involves sitting down to hammer that out along with HIPAA training, and our hospital-specific training. Some already have it, which knocks an item off their to-do list. Its not exactly an impressive credential.

Maybe I'm missing something and you are referring to something else, but I cannot imagine that factoring into any decisions.

Nope - it's exactly what you said. I never even thought about including it until a PsyD informed that it was important. Interesting. I guess I'll keep it off.

You could always add a line in your cover letter saying "you are prepared to jump head-on into the position because you've obtained & are familiar with the NIH certification in protecting the rights of human participants" (in your own words, of course...this is too verbose). And if you're anxious in the interview, bring it up again by saying that you are familiar with the rules and regulations that govern clinical research and your ready to do the work at those standards.

However, it's a requirement for anyone working with human subjects as Ollie noted and usually done on your first day, but again your enthusiasm and advance preparation is what you want to convey.