"Can you expand on this? I'm at an AMC and contemplating a jump to a psyc department in the next few years."
This depends on the psych department. If they are more in the liberal arts mold, heavy medical stuff probably isn't going to work. You need to be doing research that is feasible with the resources at the university. Involvement in teaching and with undergraduates is probably smart to demonstrate your interest in that. It's all about telling a story that matches you up perfectly with their environment and that you add something to it and can compliment other resources in their space.
As far as dollars, my current income is about twice as much as an assistant professor position would pay in a typical psych department. That's a hard sell from both directions. Thus, you start to become limited to higher end psych departments which tend to be just as competitive if not more so than the AMC environment. If I were to move, it would probably have to be after/if I make associate professor and I'd probably have to bring grants. That would be my guess.
I'd agree with this scenario for a lot of folks making the decision, with some qualifiers.
First, salary must be evaluated as a whole. Depending on your R1 AMC job, you probably have a noncompete agreement, and you probably work on rolling one year contracts. In a psych department, you probably are on a 9 month contract, and you may be able to do some side clinical work with more ease. Speaking from my own experience, I'd imagine that Jon Snow's AMC salary is twice than mine (Assistant Prof at an R2), but we probably make the same amount on our tax returns at the end of the year. That's because I've got 3 months off that I use to do other stuff, and found a great side clinical opportunities part time for a lot more money than I had originally anticipated (effectively doubling my salary).
So what Jon Snow does sounds incredibly interesting in some ways, and a bit monotonous to me in others. As someone functioning outside of an AMC context, I still write grants and collaborate with people in other disciplines, study clinical populations at facilities I have made partnerships with, publish papers at a steady clip, and mentor students both from a research standpoint as well as from an instructional standpoint (as I do teach at least 2 classes each term). I don't have as many resources and have to work hard to develop a network without the context of a medical institution, but in some ways it allows for some other autonomy (e.g., more creative longitudinal designs, easier to prioritize community partnerships when you aren't tied down, etc). It is a mixed bag. I'd guess we both put in similar hours - I would also guess that I've got a little bit more independence about deciding when I want to work and when I don't - also with less pressure but also less prestige.
The context is really important. I've seen some stellar AMC operations during my training and some second-rate AMCs. When I left my postdoc (at what I'd consider a Tier 2 AMC), I was a bit baffled at how unimpressive the research coming out was (mostly pharma, minimal imaging, no useful longitudinal techniques) - probably not unique to that place, but also not representative of better AMCs where I've been blown away at what gets accomplished.
I think the ceiling is really high (highest) in AMCs, both from a salary and from a research resources standpoint. There is also the prestige factor. What is lacking is job security at most of those places, which is what I view as one of the bigger tradeoffs. Where I am at, the standards aren't as high to advance, the salary is not as high, but it is steady and there is protected time for me to do outside work. If you value more independence and security, then a psych department might be a better place for you. If you value more opportunity (both salary and probably research resources) and prestige, then you probably are drawn to an R1 setting. People who are successful in those settings ultimately have great influence on the direction of the field. I probably won't have as much influence, although I find it interesting that my AMC colleagues sure like collaborating with me on the studies I run - as I access samples that wouldn't be as easy or intuitive for them to access. But maybe they just need to get to that 25 pub mark to get promoted, too
🙂
100% agree.
Most faculty are perfectly content to see some patients and collect a pay check, but they are very unlikely to push for Associate Professor, Full Professor, etc. The ones who are pushing to advance want more lab space, more funding, and more say over their domains. I'm in the second group because if it was only about the work and/or the money I'd be in private practice. I want to have similar flexibility with my schedule, comparable money, and the ability to shape direction/emphasis within a department. The only way to make that happen is to jump through the hoops and move up the totem pole. If it ever becomes too much of a hassle, there is always the option to relocate to a small office near a beach.
Agreed, although I'll say that my own bias against predominantly clinical faculty positions is that the revenue sources for a person to fund themselves could be very frustrating and erratic (or have the potential to be given reimbursement and political issues). I had a supervisor at a major AMC with that type of arrangement, and that person just never has time to do the amount of research they want because of the "clinical rut" as they describe it. That person also happens to be a huge player in the field - indeed, even at top tier places, it seems like the grass is greener sometimes for one reason or another. And while I have no doubt that you T4C could find that perfect beach and small office location if you got sick of what you were doing, I'm not sure that is a given either for most folks.
There are plenty of downsides to a academic psych department career. Some people get burned out on teaching and university service work. Sometimes those department climates can be even more toxic depending on who's running the show. Often there is less prestige, slower rise in salary over time. Tenure is a great thing but also can feel like a prison if working conditions change much over time and the job ceases to be what you had hoped for - or if you decide you want to do something different and have to determine whether to give up what you've worked for. Just a few things that came to mind.
