Research questions

[rajp98]

I am currently in the process of looking for and accepting a research position and I had a few great questions,

1. Is it possible to work in 2 different labs at a time?

2. Is it more ideal to engage in various different research experiences with different PI's and topics, or stick to 1 for a long time?
(If I do research for a summer, and a different one during the fall- will this hurt me?)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dandine]

1. It is possible, although it is rare and, from what I've heard on here, involves very keen time management and effort. I'll let other posters who've been through elaborate because I have not been in this situation before.

2. The summer research and then switch to the fall would likely not hurt you since it is normal for people to switch labs (due to changing interests, etc.). When it comes to research, though, long-term projects are definitely looked at positively, as it shows interest and commitment. But it really depends on A) what you want out of research and B) the amount of time you have to dedicate to a certain topic. I think that if you're more interested in a research-oriented medical path (e.g. MD-PhD), being long-term would be necessary, or more so than not. Otherwise, what's more important is that you can communicate your projects in your applications/interviews and what you learned from them.

 

[Verity]

It definitely depends on your responsibilities in the lab. If you're on two separate, time-intensive independent projects, I'd say probably not the best idea unless you have very few/easy credits, little to no other commitments, and want to spend most of your day in a lab.

I work in two labs... however, one is longer-term and basic science, while the other "lab" is more clinical in nature. While the longer term project is going on, I have participated in three shorter, well-defined time-wise projects (clear start and end so I could budget time). This was manageable, especially because I have a wonderful fellow undergrad lab partner, and we share lab responsibilities/help each other out during busy times well.

If at all possible (if both labs don't need an answer ASAP), I'd at least do a few weeks in the lab you're most interested first to see if you would still like to take on another one after seeing how much time it really entails (and if both PIs are okay with you being in multiple labs). If both labs used similar techniques/the research questions overlapped/played into one another, that would be easier to manage than two completely different projects, too. It's tough to say.

 

[rajp98]

It definitely depends on your responsibilities in the lab. If you're on two separate, time-intensive independent projects, I'd say probably not the best idea unless you have very few/easy credits, little to no other commitments, and want to spend most of your day in a lab.

I work in two labs... however, one is longer-term and basic science, while the other "lab" is more clinical in nature. While the longer term project is going on, I have participated in three shorter, well-defined time-wise projects (clear start and end so I could budget time). This was manageable, especially because I have a wonderful fellow undergrad lab partner, and we share lab responsibilities/help each other out during busy times well.

If at all possible (if both labs don't need an answer ASAP), I'd at least do a few weeks in the lab you're most interested first to see if you would still like to take on another one after seeing how much time it really entails (and if both PIs are okay with you being in multiple labs). If both labs used similar techniques/the research questions overlapped/played into one another, that would be easier to manage than two completely different projects, too. It's tough to say.

When you mention the other one is more clinical, what do you mean by this?

 

[JustAPhD]

1. It's possible, but it depends on what you'd be doing in both labs. I know I'd prefer someone who has had more responsibilities in one lab than someone who has had less responsibilities spread over two labs. And 2. as Dandine said, longer projects in a lab show dedication and an interest in what you are doing. Multiple short projects makes it seem like you don't know your research interests (which is completely fine!) but you'll probably get less out of these shorter experiences, especially if you're aiming for a publication. Also keep in mind a LoR from a PI in a lab you've been in for a while would undoubtedly be stronger than from a PI who's lab you did a brief stint in.

 

[mimelim]

I am currently in the process of looking for and accepting a research position and I had a few great questions,

1. Is it possible to work in 2 different labs at a time?

2. Is it more ideal to engage in various different research experiences with different PI's and topics, or stick to 1 for a long time?
(If I do research for a summer, and a different one during the fall- will this hurt me?)

Donald Trump fan are we? Don't see that many people patting themselves on the back for the quality of their own questions...

It is possible to work in two labs concurrently. It is generally ill advised as the quality of the individual experience is far more important.

The best student researchers spend a lot of time in a single lab. The only way to be productive is to put in the time and the effort. Research is a slow process. It is an unpredictable process. Those that do well are those that put themselves in the best position to get lucky. After having a dozen or so students working with me, in the clinical realm, I would say that you really don't hit your stride until you hit 200-300 hours. Assuming that you have reasonable mentors and some scientific aptitude, that is enough time to really start getting more involved. Most students float around and try out a few places and then end up sticking with the one that they like. I worked in 3 different labs during undergrad, but the bulk of my time and thus my productivity was in only one of them.

 

[rajp98]

Donald Trump fan are we? Don't see that many people patting themselves on the back for the quality of their own questions...

It is possible to work in two labs concurrently. It is generally ill advised as the quality of the individual experience is far more important.

The best student researchers spend a lot of time in a single lab. The only way to be productive is to put in the time and the effort. Research is a slow process. It is an unpredictable process. Those that do well are those that put themselves in the best position to get lucky. After having a dozen or so students working with me, in the clinical realm, I would say that you really don't hit your stride until you hit 200-300 hours. Assuming that you have reasonable mentors and some scientific aptitude, that is enough time to really start getting more involved. Most students float around and try out a few places and then end up sticking with the one that they like. I worked in 3 different labs during undergrad, but the bulk of my time and thus my productivity was in only one of them.

Haha, no I'm not a fan, I just thought to mention it since they are pretty good questions.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Quality > quantity. You will not have deep achievements nor experiences if you divide your time.

 

[rajp98]

Donald Trump fan are we? Don't see that many people patting themselves on the back for the quality of their own questions...

It is possible to work in two labs concurrently. It is generally ill advised as the quality of the individual experience is far more important.

The best student researchers spend a lot of time in a single lab. The only way to be productive is to put in the time and the effort. Research is a slow process. It is an unpredictable process. Those that do well are those that put themselves in the best position to get lucky. After having a dozen or so students working with me, in the clinical realm, I would say that you really don't hit your stride until you hit 200-300 hours. Assuming that you have reasonable mentors and some scientific aptitude, that is enough time to really start getting more involved. Most students float around and try out a few places and then end up sticking with the one that they like. I worked in 3 different labs during undergrad, but the bulk of my time and thus my productivity was in only one of them.

Even though you worked in 3 different labs, did you record all three on your application/resume, or did you just record the one where you spent the most time?

 

[mimelim]

Even though you worked in 3 different labs, did you record all three on your application/resume, or did you just record the one where you spent the most time?

I published in all of them and had letter offers from all of them, so yes. It would be odd not to.

 

[rajp98]

I published in all of them and had letter offers from all of them, so yes. It would be odd not to.

Wow, thats amazing. How exactly does the publishing work? Do they put you down as a co-author and how often do they publish?

 

[mimelim]

Wow, thats amazing. How exactly does the publishing work? Do they put you down as a co-author and how often do they publish?

Authorship is typically assigned based on your role in the project. Anyone who has made intellectual contributions to what is being published should be included as an author. How often labs publish is largely determined by what field they are in, whether they are basic science vs. clinical and who they are. It is not atypical for a basic science group to publish every few years. In contrast, large clinical groups will publish a dozen papers in a year without breaking a sweat.