Research dilemma

[Arjuna]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hey guys,
So by some fortunate occurrence (lady luck has been smiling lately) I am now in the position of being able to choose between two labs; one is in the government, (FDA) and is quite high profile; the PI told me that he expects to have the data incorporated in National Publications/presentations and promises to work closely with me. The other position is in a university NCI funded lab, and the PI promised to get me many awards and both are willing to pay me. They only ask that I give them unbridled commitment-which is my dilemma. They both are too good to pass up-seeing that I still have 4 semesters before applying to med school, do you think I should work in both? I am genuinely interested in both and contacted the PIs after a huge amount of work and research (over four months). They were genuinely impressed and somehow I couldnt believe that after a year of toiling to get a research position (something I am passionate about) I finally found people who had confidence in my abilities. So I just want your opinions on what you think should be done in this case. Thanks a lot guys.

PS: Is it advisable to let each of them know and ask their opinions about the matter? I have a bad feeling about doing this...

 

[VoiceofReason]

do you know either of the PIs better? You might consider working for the one you already know (and who already knows you) so as to get the strongest possible letter of recommendation.

 

[jawndice]

I wouldn't advice doing both. Being in one lab takes up a huge time commitment as is. Which lab will give you more versatility and options in the future? Which lab are you more passionate or feel more strongly about? Which PI is more approachable? Which lab environment is more conducive to your growth and learning? How are the other people in either lab?

These are only a few questions you should be asking yourself. I'm sure they're both amazing labs. Good luck!

 

[austinap]

If you do both, you won't get a good letter of rec from either. That's almost a guarantee.

Also, be careful about PIs that promise to get you awards, etc. That sounds incredibly fishy to me. I've been a grad student at one of the best schools in my field for two years, and have never heard of PIs offering those sorts of things.

Here's what I would look at:

1. Do you get along with your PI? What sort of a lab environment do you want to work in for two years? How many other people are in the lab? Will you be able to find help if your PI isn't available?

2. What is your PI's publication record? Do they put out a lot of small papers, a few big papers, etc? While as an undergrad I know you're probably just concerned about getting published, but all publications are not created equally. If your PI is only interested in the big papers, you have a lower chance of being published as an undergrad in two years, but if you do it will be significant. If your PI likes putting out a lot of smaller papers, there's a good chance you'll be published but it won't necessarily stand out that much on an application.

3. Is the project you're working on cool? I mean... really cool? If you aren't in love with it now, you'll hate it in a year and a half. That's kind of the way research goes.

4. Does the PI have affiliations or collaborations with other labs? Those can be great 'ins' down the road.


As far as the awards, promises, etc I would be careful. Your PI can tell you to apply for awards, but you're the one that has to get them. As far as 'having your data incorporated into national presentations' I ask you this: who cares? It sounds cool on paper, but it really doesn't do anything to help you unless you get your name on the talk, which you likely won't. I'm sure my boss uses my data all of the time in national talks. She probably uses my exact figures. I'll hear about it once in a while, but usually I never find out. I don't really care either - her giving the talks leads to our lab staying in business.

Anyhow, sorry if that was a bit long-winded. It sounds like you have one of those problems that's good to have!

- AP

 

[Red Leader]

ehhh govt labs? I hear they don't work as hard as private labs because they get funding from the govt, aka less motivated to publish.

Austinap covered it all...solid post.

btw, 2 labs...impossible top get pubs like that. Stick with 1 lab --> pubs

 

[Arjuna]

If you do both, you won't get a good letter of rec from either. That's almost a guarantee.

Also, be careful about PIs that promise to get you awards, etc. That sounds incredibly fishy to me. I've been a grad student at one of the best schools in my field for two years, and have never heard of PIs offering those sorts of things.

Here's what I would look at:

1. Do you get along with your PI? What sort of a lab environment do you want to work in for two years? How many other people are in the lab? Will you be able to find help if your PI isn't available?

2. What is your PI's publication record? Do they put out a lot of small papers, a few big papers, etc? While as an undergrad I know you're probably just concerned about getting published, but all publications are not created equally. If your PI is only interested in the big papers, you have a lower chance of being published as an undergrad in two years, but if you do it will be significant. If your PI likes putting out a lot of smaller papers, there's a good chance you'll be published but it won't necessarily stand out that much on an application.

3. Is the project you're working on cool? I mean... really cool? If you aren't in love with it now, you'll hate it in a year and a half. That's kind of the way research goes.

4. Does the PI have affiliations or collaborations with other labs? Those can be great 'ins' down the road.


As far as the awards, promises, etc I would be careful. Your PI can tell you to apply for awards, but you're the one that has to get them. As far as 'having your data incorporated into national presentations' I ask you this: who cares? It sounds cool on paper, but it really doesn't do anything to help you unless you get your name on the talk, which you likely won't. I'm sure my boss uses my data all of the time in national talks. She probably uses my exact figures. I'll hear about it once in a while, but usually I never find out. I don't really care either - her giving the talks leads to our lab staying in business.

Anyhow, sorry if that was a bit long-winded. It sounds like you have one of those problems that's good to have!

- AP

Thanks for the enormous post (and help). I just wanted to add that one of these labs is only a half year long commitment and the other is as long as I want. So, knowing this, what would you suggest? It is so hard to choose! I feel like I am cheating myself by letting go of either opp. I only say that because I have seen people, both on SDN and in real life that have multiple lab experiences and publications from each, and I am stunned. THANKS for your advice!

 

[Arjuna]

ehhh govt labs? I hear they don't work as hard as private labs because they get funding from the govt, aka less motivated to publish.

Austinap covered it all...solid post.

btw, 2 labs...impossible top get pubs like that. Stick with 1 lab --> pubs

THANKS Red. You may be right abt the govt. lab thing. I am not aware of this, as I am only starting out in this field. BTW, I wanted to ask you, how has research been for you, and how (if you have published) did you go about getting published? I dont want to sound selfish/naive but I really am passionate about research and I would love to see my name on something I worked on.

 

[Red Leader]

THANKS Red. You may be right abt the govt. lab thing. I am not aware of this, as I am only starting out in this field. BTW, I wanted to ask you, how has research been for you, and how (if you have published) did you go about getting published? I dont want to sound selfish/naive but I really am passionate about research and I would love to see my name on something I worked on.

Excellent question. My story goes like this: I started out as a freshie 2 weeks after starting college because I contacted PIs in the summer after high school grad.

After that, I got 3 replies from profs at my uni and interviewed with all of them. I dressed up, had a resume from high school (just basically my college app stuff), formal stuff. They were all pretty surprised, said it showed I gave a damn and all accepted me. I made it clear I was also looking at 2 other labs. In the end I chose the lab that interested me the most, and where I saw the most opportunity (aka where the PI had a lot of resources, and most importantly, had time to meet w/me 1 on 1 frequently and was interested in my progress. I also knew this lab recently got funding and the prof was stable so I wouldn't get shafted 3 years later when asking for a recc).

Anyways, I started off pretty enthusiastic, making friends with the grad students first, then post docs, and showed curiosity + knowing my bounds. After observing a procedure a few times I'd ask if they trusted me enough to help them on the next one and they said "of course." And the first time I did that it was nervous stuff...I probably sweat a bucket and looked nasty, but my results were near perfect and the next day the PI was like "heard you did some good work, I think you need a project to work on." And so I got a project, finished it, and gradually accumulated more responsibilities.

So now I'm a 3rd year and I've been putting around 30 hours a week for real independent research including winter/spring/summer breaks. I stuck with 1 lab, because I realized those 10 week REU programs can't get me a significant pub ever since experiencing how long research takes. I also had multiple projects to juggle and constantly aware that if I took 10 weeks off in the summer I'd lose my rapport so to speak and get my project taken over by someone else.

In any case, some days were great, some were frustrating, some seemed impossible to get through, but overall I'd say research is the most important and rewarding experience I've had in college. I was LUCKY, I repeat, LUCKY to find such a great lab, PI, mentors, grad students to work with and to them I owe a great deal of my success. But great opportunities are only fruitful if you put in the work. Compared to your ave. college kid I'd say I lived more of a grad student-ish life, basically spending all my free time in lab (sans volunteering time and what not), no parties, no road trips, just lab. Sacrifices, yes, but it has paid off for me so far in the form of 6 journal pubs (low to mid impact maybe 2-7ish), 14 conference pubs, 4 conf abstracts, and 2 conf talks/posters. About 1/5 of those are first author, rest are 2nd/3rd author. About 1% of them are somewhere after 3rd author. So that is what you hope to gain from an undergrad career in research.

Now is probably a good time to disclose that I'm applying MD-PhD only next year, so if you're MD only what I did is overkill and might hurt you since you won't have time to do as much shadowing/volunteering compared to your peers.

Finally, yeah I started off like you thinking it was selfish to want my name on something, but I think the best mindset to have is to go into whatever lab you choose being (a) humble, (b) respectful, and (c) eager to learn. Many postdocs I've worked with said they liked me because I was eager to learn and not just there for a recc or name on a paper. I never asked for my name on any papers, but I did good work and was recognized. Many times I had feelings about "hmm will I get my name on this," but that's when you need to mentally slap yourself and remind yourself that you are there to learn as much as you can and gain experience. Anything else is just the icing on top so to speak. Because the research you do is pointless if you do not learn and know what you are doing. Someone with no pubs, but heavily involved will be stronger and better off than someone who split cells for 3 months and got their name on a big journal paper but isn't aware of the big picture.

Ultimately, the recipe for publishing is: (a) LUCK, (b) hardwork.

One without the other = no pubs. But above all, the experience you have in performing research...your successes/failures and being able to speak about them in a captivating way...is the most important. Hope that helps.

edit: by the way, I joined more of a chill lab, but other labs you join may be less relaxed, so you may have to be more aggressive to get what you want.