Research productivity criteria

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Noctámbulo

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Messages
283
Reaction score
91
In taking a retrospective look at my undergraduate research career, I have been questioning whether I would consider myself significantly productive. For some reason, the only criteria that immediately came to mind was publications. I am wondering what you all think about this. Are there other ways to truly measure productivity? Of course, one may have done graduate level/ consistent work, only to be disappointed with negative results in the end, so surely, there have to be other ways of looking at it. Poster presentations are next in the hierarchy, but even for that, anyone can easily make a poster, so we're back at my initial point.

Anyways, just curious for some feedback.

Members don't see this ad.
 
LORs are huge. Also things like Honors thesis and presentations at national meetings are significant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
My 2c. There is no consensus on these things.

In taking a retrospective look at my undergraduate research career, I have been questioning whether I would consider myself significantly productive. For some reason, the only criteria that immediately came to mind was publications. I am wondering what you all think about this.

Publications from undergrads are a great indicator of nepotism, not so much hard work. Time served, LORs, and interviews are what I think are the best measures. Most undergrads talk about their "publications", which are really middle author publications and again relate back to nepotism. It's impossible to know how much effort and thought they put into that project they "published".

Are there other ways to truly measure productivity?

As a grad student when you spend years full-time on research in a funded lab with appropriate background, publications become a good way to measure productivity. Before that, forget it.

Poster presentations are next in the hierarchy, but even for that, anyone can easily make a poster, so we're back at my initial point.

First author abstracts presented at real conferences with peer review matter. We generally know which ones those are.

LORs are huge. Also things like Honors thesis and presentations at national meetings are significant.

Honors thesis is a waste of time IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I can usually tell within a few minutes of an applicant talking about their research how involved they were with projects. Publications as an undergrad largely comes down to luck, so it is not the best metric for involvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
First author abstracts presented at real conferences with peer review matter. We generally know which ones those are.

I'm assuming you mean by the former conferences like annual meeting of the "American College of X" or the "American Academy of Y"? What would qualify as a not-real conference?
 
I'm so glad someone started this thread. I've been getting quite nervous about the subject and was hoping someone on her could shed some light on my worries.

I have now been working on a project for three semesters. The project, however, is very labor intensive in terms of the work required for one experiment. It takes two weeks to even prepare an experiment. And moving on to the next stage of this project requires a very finicky electrode that loves to malfunction. I once read on a blog of a scientistthat electrodes cause more headaches than anything else in science. Add to that the fact that I had a horrible, horrible partner this semester and spent a large portion of my time dealing with her, while she persistently caused experiment preps to fail (She's been kicked out of my lab now). No, my PI does not look down on me for any of this, so my LOR shouldn't be compromised.

I would really hate if MD/PhD programs would look down on my application because I haven't produced very much when these set backs are not of any fault of my own.

Should I be worried? Would a good LOR and being able to talk about my research curtail the lack of signposts of productivity?
 
I agree with Neuronix, and I too can tell very quickly how involved the student was with research very quickly in the interview. As for honors thesis and small poster presentations being a waste of time - I would say they are less important but still nice to see. It still demonstrates commitment and involvement. It is another sign that you understand what research is all about.

Just try and work hard, get involved in your research, learn techniques and most importantly understand the project in detail - this means you read articles, collect scrutiny at lab meetings, talk the project through with your advisor etc... It will show during the interview. Many interviewers may not probe your research or read your applications in great detail but I sure as hell do, and its clear when the applicant doesn't really understand the science in detail.
 
Top