How to explain publications during interview?

[osprey099]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Last summer I worked in a lab and recently, my PI emailed me that he is going to be putting my name as a contributing author (one of the middle ones) on 2 manuscripts that are going to be sent for publication soon. I am very grateful for this but I am worried that during the med school interview in the future, the interviewer will be questioning me in great detail about the research in these publications. I know the basic background and what I did but a significant portion of the work was done by other people that worked for my PI. My PI is a family friend who wanted to help me out and included some of my staining pictures in the publications.

So my question is will the interviewer ask in great detail about the research even though I'm only one of the middle authors? I can explain the general process and the background info but I do not think I will be able to go into great detail in explaining the methods and results sections.

 

[Ismet]

Why don't you ask your PI for a copy of the manuscript, read it thoroughly, and try to understand it so you can talk about it better? You can explain to the interviewer what you did, but showing an understanding of the other parts of the project will show a greater interest in research. Adcoms understand that the majority of undergrads don't do all of the research that goes into a publication. They don't expect you to have done everything firsthand. You should have general knowledge of the background that lead to the research, the hypothesis, the results, and what it means for the future. And yes, the interviewer will most likely ask about this, especially if you are interviewing at a research-focused school.

 

[EBTrailRunner]

Last summer I worked in a lab and recently, my PI emailed me that he is going to be putting my name as a contributing author (one of the middle ones) on 2 manuscripts that are going to be sent for publication soon. I am very grateful for this but I am worried that during the med school interview in the future, the interviewer will be questioning me in great detail about the research in these publications. I know the basic background and what I did but a significant portion of the work was done by other people that worked for my PI. My PI is a family friend who wanted to help me out and included some of my staining pictures in the publications.

So my question is will the interviewer ask in great detail about the research even though I'm only one of the middle authors? I can explain the general process and the background info but I do not think I will be able to go into great detail in explaining the methods and results sections.

Honestly, there's no excuse for not understanding your lab's research. Get your hand on a copy of that manuscript, read it front and back, and be prepared to answer any questions related to your lab's findings. If there's a point of confusion, ask your PI or a postdoc to clarify. In all likelihood, your interviewer won't have extensive knowledge on the subject of your research, but you should feel confident enough to address any targeted questions thrown your way. It's expected that you know what your lab is doing regardless of whether you're doing the bulk of the work.

 

[235788]

I wasn't asked any specifics. Just a broad overview of the work. Chances are your interviewer will be less than thrilled to hear the minute details.

 

[BiopsychStudent]

I'm sure your PI would love to give you a copy of the manuscript. Its genuinely a courtesy to give one to anyone listed as an author. Read it enough that you can discuss it with confidence. Even if you don't go into the details, know what was done and why will help you sound like you did more than clean glassware.

 

[obgyny]

Last summer I worked in a lab and recently, my PI emailed me that he is going to be putting my name as a contributing author (one of the middle ones) on 2 manuscripts that are going to be sent for publication soon. I am very grateful for this but I am worried that during the med school interview in the future, the interviewer will be questioning me in great detail about the research in these publications. I know the basic background and what I did but a significant portion of the work was done by other people that worked for my PI. My PI is a family friend who wanted to help me out and included some of my staining pictures in the publications.

So my question is will the interviewer ask in great detail about the research even though I'm only one of the middle authors? I can explain the general process and the background info but I do not think I will be able to go into great detail in explaining the methods and results sections.

When I first got my name on a paper, my PI had me give a presentation on the entire paper to my lab, making sure that I knew the paper in and out (in preparation for med school interviews). His philosophy is that if your name is on it, you better know what it's about.

But of course, I wasn't asked about it in great detail in my interviews . I was asked about it, but they were just looking for a general explanation of what my research was and what my role was. Be able to concisely explain what your research is about and what it means. No need to go into great detail about each experiment, unless they ask you about it. They just want to see that you understood what you were doing... not just blindly running gels or washing dishes.

But you never know... I was paired up with a PhD in my research field for one of my interviews. It's better to be prepared just in case. 👍

 

[Double Trouble]

Last summer I worked in a lab and recently, my PI emailed me that he is going to be putting my name as a contributing author (one of the middle ones) on 2 manuscripts that are going to be sent for publication soon. I am very grateful for this but I am worried that during the med school interview in the future, the interviewer will be questioning me in great detail about the research in these publications. I know the basic background and what I did but a significant portion of the work was done by other people that worked for my PI. My PI is a family friend who wanted to help me out and included some of my staining pictures in the publications.

So my question is will the interviewer ask in great detail about the research even though I'm only one of the middle authors? I can explain the general process and the background info but I do not think I will be able to go into great detail in explaining the methods and results sections.

Was the fact that he was a family friend a major factor in you getting published? I know some dishwashers who got published, but then again, that's different than using a personal connection.

I'm not trying to flame the OP - I'm just wondering. Is it looked down upon to get published on the basis of personal acquaintance?

 

[EBTrailRunner]

Was the fact that he was a family friend a major factor in you getting published? I know some dishwashers who got published, but then again, that's different than using a personal connection.

I'm not trying to flame the OP - I'm just wondering. Is it looked down upon to get published on the basis of personal acquaintance?

Of course, but how would an interviewer know that?

 

[Double Trouble]

Of course, but how would an interviewer know that?

He probably wouldn't find out. I was just wondering if it was considered wrong to do. But I guess if no one finds out that you did something wrong, it's ok to do.

 

[osprey099]

Was the fact that he was a family friend a major factor in you getting published? I know some dishwashers who got published, but then again, that's different than using a personal connection.

I'm not trying to flame the OP - I'm just wondering. Is it looked down upon to get published on the basis of personal acquaintance?

The fact that he was a family friend was a major factor in me getting published. However, I did have to do a lot of work for my mentor over the course of my stay. My PI helped me out by using some of my staining pictures in the publication. If your work is in the paper, then your name has to be included.

 

[EBTrailRunner]

The fact that he was a family friend was a major factor in me getting published. However, I did have to do a lot of work for my mentor over the course of my stay. My PI helped me out by using some of my staining pictures in the publication. If your work is in the paper, then your name has to be included.

Not necessarily, but that was kind of your PI to do. Milk that primary authorship for all it's worth.

 

[chiapet874]

The fact that he was a family friend was a major factor in me getting published. However, I did have to do a lot of work for my mentor over the course of my stay. My PI helped me out by using some of my staining pictures in the publication. If your work is in the paper, then your name has to be included.

Oh, if only it were that easy...


In any case, depending on the school you are interviewing at, the interviewer may ask for specific details or not.

 

[Ismet]

If your work is in the paper, then your name has to be included.

LOL wrong.

 

[Calvinball]

If your name is on a paper as an author, then you share the responsibility for the content. You should get an idea of what's in the paper regardless of medical school interviews, because you'll be held partly responsible for any mistakes.

 

[Ebola4Breakfast]

Oh, if only it were that easy...


In any case, depending on the school you are interviewing at, the interviewer may ask for specific details or not.

LOL wrong.

Not necessarily, but that was kind of your PI to do. Milk that primary authorship for all it's worth.

Bingo. Authorship implies you contributed intellectually to the paper, which is an incredibly murky, ambiguous definition. This is why the ability to get authorship is hit or miss from lab to lab. It seems that every PI has a different definition of "intellectual contribution".

Anyway, back to the OP. Whether it's right or wrong, my philosophy for interviews was that if I claimed something on the AMCAS or secondary application, I held myself responsible for knowing the content. What's the point otherwise? The above suggestions were spot on. You're an author of the paper. Get a copy of the publication and do your homework. You should be safe being able to describe the work in general terms. No one ever grilled me on the details of my publications. In fact, most people seemed hesitant to go beyond the most basic explanations. I'd say, to be safe, be able to explain the background of your project, the importance of why the experiments were performed, what the results were and what that means, and what are some future directions. If you're feeling adventurous and are working in a biomedical sciences field, maybe understanding how your findings can impact the current disease field you're working on. Good luck.

 

[JJMrK]

When I interview applicants and ask about their research, I usually just ask broad questions about the nature of the work. Sometimes I'll ask what their role in it was. If it's interesting I'll ask about the specifics, but usually my purpose is not to quiz.

YMMV from school to school and even interviewer to interviewer. I think some of my classmates do the whole quizzing thing. Just always remember that nobody outside of your lab has been thinking about your research as much as you.

Was the fact that he was a family friend a major factor in you getting published? I know some dishwashers who got published, but then again, that's different than using a personal connection.

I'm not trying to flame the OP - I'm just wondering. Is it looked down upon to get published on the basis of personal acquaintance?

Nope. Nobody is ever going to know. If I can search google scholar and your name comes up, that's 👍.

 

[osprey099]

LOL wrong.

My bad. The term "work" is too vague. I meant to say if some of your pictures/results are in the paper, then your name has to go on it.

 

[Narmerguy]

He probably wouldn't find out. I was just wondering if it was considered wrong to do. But I guess if no one finds out that you did something wrong, it's ok to do.

Authorship is largely political anyway. There's a research hierarchy, and certain people have to be fed first. As an undergrad, your inclusion or exclusion will often depend on someone's grace.

 

[JJMrK]

My bad. The term "work" is too vague. I meant to say if some of your pictures/results are in the paper, then your name has to go on it.

This is not really true either. It's up to your PI.

 

[Ismet]

My bad. The term "work" is too vague. I meant to say if some of your pictures/results are in the paper, then your name has to go on it.

Wrong again. Your name could have just as easily gone into the acknowledgement section. Your PI was nice/helping you out.

 

[EBTrailRunner]

As an undergrad researcher, you're at the bottom of the totem pole. I worked like a slave for my PI and was never published, but I was part of a big-name lab and my PI ruled with an iron fist. It's completely YMMV between labs because whatever you do is technically not your work. It's the property of your PI, much like if you were to work at a biotech company, anything you discover is not yours to keep. So, consider yourself lucky to get listed as a primary author. Most undergrad researchers aren't fortunate enough to get published.