Research w/out Adviser

[ufdoc11]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Is it possible to conduct your own research and have it published w/out the guidance of a PhD/adviser?

 

[GoSpursGo]

As an undergrad? No way- where exactly would you get the funding?

 

[DOquestions]

Is it possible to conduct your own research and have it published w/out the guidance of a PhD/adviser?

Research with humans has to go through a review board. Research in a lab requires supervision, for your level of education.

Translation = you can't do independent research as an undergraduate student (meaning run your own research with no PI or mentor).

 

[ufdoc11]

the research that i would be interested in would require very little funding/resources.

 

[DOquestions]

Is it possible to conduct your own research and have it published w/out the guidance of a PhD/adviser?

Why not just sign up for an independent study course and do some research with a personal mentor? I did that twice in college.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Also, DOquestions' points.

 

[virusgirl]

I'm assuming you're an undergrad... I would say almost certainly not. For one thing, you have no funding (but you say you wouldn't need it). But there is another issue here, and that is the matter of legitimacy/public perception, for lack of a better phrase. Research is almost always conducted as a team effort, with a seasoned scientist at the helm. If you submit a manuscript and you have no doctorate-level advisor on your list of authors, I think people are going to question the validity of your work. They are going to wonder how you, alone and with your relative lack of knowledge and experience, managed to execute a good study. Also -- and I mean no offense by this, because I really have no clue about you as a person -- I find it highly doubtful that any undergrad, without an advisor, could put together a study of sufficient quality that it would be considered for publication by any respectable journal. People don't just have advisors as a formality (usually); they have them so that they can benefit from their superior knowledge/experience/funding. You will not have any of those advantages, and frankly, I don't think you'll be able to compete with those who do.

 

[shindotp]

^There are definitely undergrads with the ability of conducting scientific research at a publication level quality. I have seen high school students who have conducted research on their own at publication level quality (they go on to win Siemens).

 

[Mobius1985]

There is an additional consideration that you are expected to have a Letter of Recommendation from a research mentor if you list a research experience on your medical school application. I do think it's possible for an undergrad student to complete substantive research on their own, but I agree with the above point, that as an unknown person with no academic credentials, you need some oversight to lend the project legitimacy. Otherwise, what would keep folks from just making up something?

 

[Agoldb7]

you are the intellectual property of your university. It is unethical to attempt to publish research as a student of a university without consent/guidance of a faculty member

 

[thegetupkid]

I don't see what's wrong with doing research on your own. For example, I think it'd be absolutely feasible to do social science/humanities research without much funding.
But for science, I can't see where you'd get the money/materials/clout for publication...

 

[Excelsius]

As an undergrad? No way- where exactly would you get the funding?

You write a grant and get approval.

Ok, I think we need to define what you mean by "without guidance." First of all, if you are doing scientific research, it will likely require access to tools and a lab. So if you work in a lab, you CAN do your own independent research, but you will technically be part of the lab. You would write your proposal to NIH, as an example, and propose your methods. If it is granted, you will get the funding to do the research as part of the lab. Some of the funds will go to the PI and other lab members who will help you with your work.

A little advice: if you have no research experience, you might not have enough knowledge to write a successful grant. I say you should work in a lab for a while, really learn about the area you are interested in, and only then write the grant. You have a total of three attempts of getting your point across. If you fail three times, your idea is out. Any worthwhile idea requires a deep understanding that almost always goes far behind what you learn in a classroom. I know some PhDs who have been doing research for many years but have yet to get a single grant. There are also undergrads who already have grants. It can be done, but it's not easy to write a 20 page, detailed, well-organized scientific paper.

 

[Neuronix]

Is it possible to conduct your own research and have it published w/out the guidance of a PhD/adviser?

If you need none of the resources of the University, you can conduct whatever research you want. It's unlikely you're going to come up with something so interesting, so novel, so well conducted that you'll be able to publish it without the guidance and blessing of a PhD mentor, but strange things do happen.

If you don't need University resources you can do whatever research on plaster volcanos with fake lava you want in your apartment/basement/garage.

Any patient-oriented research must have an IRB in a faculty member's name. So you're out there.

University space is given to faculty or to undergrads for specific purposes (e.g. science labs). Unless your U gives open, unrestricted lab space to undergrads you're out on that one.

But if you want to go out to the pond and count spots on toads and show that toads in lake 1 have more spots than toads in lake 2, take a bunch of pics of said toads, and then test the water for some random things... Sure, you could probably get it accepted to Journal of Something With a Total of Five Names or J Local Undergrad Res.

I'd recommend you actually get a mentor though. It's a good thing for your career development.