one vs. two research publications?

[418865]

I’ve been working in my lab for almost 2 years and is about to finally get co-authored (in a peer reviewed journal with high impact factor and all). I was planning on wrapping up my research experience this semester and focus on studying for MCAT next. The issue is: I’ve another opportunity of guaranteed publication (and this one is 1st authorship!) which will require me to sort of work really hard in my lab for the next couple months and spend a little bit of time early next semester to finish working on it. Do you think it will make my research experience stand out by a whole lot? I will get a great LOR from my PI either way. At this point I’m just really exhausted working in labs and trying to convince myself that one publication is enough and that I should just call it off.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[XCourtSmash]

A publication as a 1st author is huge as an undergrad. Keep that in mind when you make your decision.

 

[418865]

A publication as a 1st author is huge as an undergrad. Keep that in mind when you make your decision.

hmm..thanks for your response. In my first publication, I'm the 2nd author. But I guess being a 1st author is simply on a different caliber?

 

[cortana431]

Also in a slightly related question, I'm working on a project which will hopefully be published and it will be done by the end of the spring semester... once projects are finished about how long does it take for it to get published (assuming it is indeed published) ?

 

[Soulstice]

Also in a slightly related question, I'm working on a project which will hopefully be published and it will be done by the end of the spring semester... once projects are finished about how long does it take for it to get published (assuming it is indeed published) ?

Longass time. I'd say, in my experiences, about 6-9 months. It'll take a while for them to get back to you, then you'll go through several rounds of revisions, then finally they'll accept it (hopefully) and it'll be slated for publication in a future issue.

 

[Aerus]

I’ve been working in my lab for almost 2 years and is about to finally get co-authored (in a peer reviewed journal with high impact factor and all). I was planning on wrapping up my research experience this semester and focus on studying for MCAT next. The issue is: I’ve another opportunity of guaranteed publication (and this one is 1st authorship!) which will require me to sort of work really hard in my lab for the next couple months and spend a little bit of time early next semester to finish working on it. Do you think it will make my research experience stand out by a whole lot? I will get a great LOR from my PI either way. At this point I’m just really exhausted working in labs and trying to convince myself that one publication is enough and that I should just call it off.

If worst comes to worst, take a gap year for your MCAT. A first author publication is huge and these opportunities don't come around too often. If you don't totally despise research yet, I would do it.

 

[ClemsonFirst]

If you are hoping for a research heavy school like Duke or any other top notch school, doing the extra research will definitely strengthen your application, especially with a primary authorship on the second. If you can put in the work without burning out, go for it and get that second publication. The big dilemma would be burning out and not putting in enough effort for MCAT, but since you are studying next semester for it, you can always take a month or two to relax and enjoy yourself before you fully immerse yourself in MCAT studying. Most recommendations for MCAT studying are 3 months, so if you take it in May, beginning to study in February should plenty of time to prepare.

The real question is can you motivate yourself to keep up your grades and finish your research. If that is the case, and you really want a top notch school, go for the research. If you just want to get into whatever school you can, then as long as your GPA is in order, don't bother with the research; enjoy yourself in undergrad so you are mentally prepared for medical school. People get in without any research experience at all.

 

[mimelim]

First, there is never such a thing as "guaranteed" publication. There are always things that can potentially get in the way, many of which are not in your control. To present two options as, "1st author publication" vs. "time to study" is very dangerous.

As someone who lived int he lab for most of his undergrad, there is no diminishing of publication. The act of going through the process alone is a worthwhile exercise, even if the content of the paper is complete garbage. First authorship takes that a step further and states that you took the lead on a project and took an idea and made it into a product worth reading about. It is generally a mark of a reasonably high level of accomplishment. Keep in mind that you should have a LOR talk about the project, you should at least mention in your PS and be ready to defend it in interviews to maximize it's impact on your application.

All of that having been said, this question is more about YOU than it is about the research. Have you already burned out on the research front? Do you enjoy it? Is it something that at the end of the day you would do for yourself or is this just for the publication recognition? Let me say up front, there is nothing wrong with getting publications for the sake of getting it. Just realize that it comes at a cost and it isn't always what it is cracked up to be. Publishing is great and will make you attractive to places, but if you are working just to get the paper out and not to learn something or because you are interested, it will show in LOR, PS and interviews. That experience while on paper will certainly help you, will have diminished returns, especially if you are aiming to have this be a focal point of your application.

Do not take a gap year to study for the MCAT. That is just wasting time. Also, this whole, "being mentally prepared for medical school" is hogwash. Enjoying undergrad doesn't help you do better in medical school. Enjoy undergrad because you should enjoy life and the journey that is pre-med/MS/physician. You do not have to do research to get into medical school. But, if you enjoy it, you should do it, and do it well. You will learn something useful and you because of that you will be a more attractive applicant.

 

[angemon89]

Wow, I literally just wrote the exact same paragraph as the OP but didn't post the thread yet.

Great advice, mimelim. Thanks.

 

[Frazier]

First, there is never such a thing as "guaranteed" publication. There are always things that can potentially get in the way, many of which are not in your control. To present two options as, "1st author publication" vs. "time to study" is very dangerous.

This.

 

[418865]

#firstworldproblems

haha.

 

[418865]

First, there is never such a thing as "guaranteed" publication. There are always things that can potentially get in the way, many of which are not in your control. To present two options as, "1st author publication" vs. "time to study" is very dangerous.

As someone who lived int he lab for most of his undergrad, there is no diminishing of publication. The act of going through the process alone is a worthwhile exercise, even if the content of the paper is complete garbage. First authorship takes that a step further and states that you took the lead on a project and took an idea and made it into a product worth reading about. It is generally a mark of a reasonably high level of accomplishment. Keep in mind that you should have a LOR talk about the project, you should at least mention in your PS and be ready to defend it in interviews to maximize it's impact on your application.

All of that having been said, this question is more about YOU than it is about the research. Have you already burned out on the research front? Do you enjoy it? Is it something that at the end of the day you would do for yourself or is this just for the publication recognition? Let me say up front, there is nothing wrong with getting publications for the sake of getting it. Just realize that it comes at a cost and it isn't always what it is cracked up to be. Publishing is great and will make you attractive to places, but if you are working just to get the paper out and not to learn something or because you are interested, it will show in LOR, PS and interviews. That experience while on paper will certainly help you, will have diminished returns, especially if you are aiming to have this be a focal point of your application.

Do not take a gap year to study for the MCAT. That is just wasting time. Also, this whole, "being mentally prepared for medical school" is hogwash. Enjoying undergrad doesn't help you do better in medical school. Enjoy undergrad because you should enjoy life and the journey that is pre-med/MS/physician. You do not have to do research to get into medical school. But, if you enjoy it, you should do it, and do it well. You will learn something useful and you because of that you will be a more attractive applicant.

As much as I've thoroughly enjoyed working in my lab with the level of independence that an undergrad can only dream of, I also came to the realization that I can't see myself do research on a daily basis everyday for rest of my life. I guess that keeps on playing in my head when I'm working in the lab lately but yet I absolutely feel at home when working in the lab with one an amazing PI. Anyway, I think I will just stick it out for next two months since it's not a long term commitment plus I hate regrets and I know after I wrap up my research I'll keep regretting (whether or not this affects my med school application and whatnot) for not going for it.

 

[cortana431]

Longass time. I'd say, in my experiences, about 6-9 months. It'll take a while for them to get back to you, then you'll go through several rounds of revisions, then finally they'll accept it (hopefully) and it'll be slated for publication in a future issue.

Well the project is run by a professor and a Ph.D student and I'm doing nearly all the grunt work..... does that make a difference in the amount of time? I'm a freshman though so I guess it really doesnt matter but for future reference.

 

[XCourtSmash]

Well the project is run by a professor and a Ph.D student and I'm doing nearly all the grunt work..... does that make a difference in the amount of time? I'm a freshman though so I guess it really doesnt matter but for future reference.

The time for a publication has nothing to do with who's in charge 99% of the time. It's all up to the reviewers, how many edits you have to do, etc. Once you finish all the grunt work and have enough for a paper, write it, edit it, and submit it, it will still take around 6+ months for it to be finalized and published.

 

[418865]

The time for a publication has nothing to do with who's in charge 99% of the time. It's all up to the reviewers, how many edits you have to do, etc. Once you finish all the grunt work and have enough for a paper, write it, edit it, and submit it, it will still take around 6+ months for it to be finalized and published.

agreed..it's also more to do with the quality of the work as well. each discipline (and also each journal) has different timeline to how long it takes..but there definitely isn't any clear cut answer other than the fact that publication is a complicated process and most likely will take a while.