Would you still work so much?
One insight I've gained through reading blogs is that the ferocity of competition in a field like mine is very different from say, the biomedical sciences. Jobs and fellowships are really competitive, but publications aren't by comparison. I'd say it's extremely rare to be scooped, largely because the nature of our field research means people have a pretty good sense of what others are doing. If you know someone else is working on a particular problem in a particular system, you don't pursue that question. It's a waste of resources.
I think this reduces some of the urgency for publishing results. I'm dying to get my paper submitted, but it's not because I'm worried someone else might publish the same thing first. I wonder if this is what allows me to get away with working a reasonable number of hours (for now, at least).
So, for those of you in really competitive fields, do you think you would work fewer hours if you weren't afraid of getting scooped? For those of you who aren't so worried about the distinctiveness of your research, feel free to speculate.
14 comments:
I realized upon publishing this that responses 2 and 3 are pretty much the same. Whatever - I can't be bothered to redo the poll. Please consider 3 to be more extreme than 2. kthx.
I'm also in a field where it rarely if ever happens that someone gets scooped. For me the pressure to work on publications is more in terms of being competitive for jobs, grants and to keep a good standing within the institution (i.e to be competitive for my own job). We don't have a tenure system, but if we did I suppose tenure pressure would also be a major issue. I also think being in a field where all research depends on weeks and weeks in the field there is more pressure on one's time for the rest of the year because we only have 9 months or less in the office a year (without counting breaks)
Fear of being scooped makes me work on certain projects more than others, or at least makes me feel guilty for not working on those with higher scoopability.
However, I really think I would work this much even if I were absolutely sure no one else was interested in my work (and therefore not tempted to scoop me). For one, I agree with saxifraga -- there's pressure to get papers out regardless of how hot/scoopable they are. For another, the variety and novelty of new projects get me so excited, I often spend very long nights working on new ideas... most of which don't pan out. And finally, a lot of what I do doesn't relate to publications at all (reading/editing grants and papers for friends and colleagues, attending seminars, giving talks, reviewing grants, reviewing papers).
As a graduate student, you have a more limited number of data sets to push out into the literature, you might not have the freedom to pursue a wide range of projects, and you have fewer service responsibilities than a postdoc or faculty member. So, I can see how scoopability could have a larger influence on the number of hours a graduate student works than postdocs and TT faculty... who just work all the time, anyways...
I also thought my research area was not much for scooping, but then 2 things happened. First one of my friends was working on his data when one day a series of papers was published on the exact same thing he was working on, more or less a series of papers that he had envisioned himself to become his PhD thesis in a couple of years ... Secondly a reviewer of my first paper kindly send me his newest paper that had very recently been accepted for publication, telling me "this might interest you". In fact, that was exactely the experiment I had just finished and wanted to publish, only he/his group had done it better/longer ...
In both cases, my friend and me were/will be still able to publish, but it is as you can imagine difficult to "create" a newer angle to your study.
Anyway to answer your poll: I don't think I would work less hours, it is going slow enough with the amount of time I put in it at the moment ;)
My PhD thesis subject was scooped in the year I started to get into it. I don't think that if I had worked harder, I would have been the "first", only more miserable. In my case, if I would have been earlier, these other people still would have contributed more to the field, because they are renowned scientists, and I am a mere PhD....
I believe that if you have something worthwhile to say, a scoop of another institute does not make your work useless, it makes your work contributory (I hope…). But that of course also says a lot of the research phase I am in….I need the previous to be true, or I lose hope ;-)
I am not scoopable -- but ya know, sometimes I've wished that I was, for my own sake. I have some coauthors who have or are now receiving tenure, are overcommitted, and like to put off writing as long as possible. As in, several years if they can get away with it. As an early-career faculty member this sucks for me, because I need those publications. I like these people in general, but I like them less when I've had to beg them repeatedly to get some writing done.
But it's not all bad - this type of thing has led me to develop some less interdisciplinary (and therefore less other-dependent) projects that I can write up without significant contributions from those who hate to write.
Great question. Two thoughts. First for me, the requirements of getting a job and then getting tenure dictate the amount I work far more than any fear of being scooped. That said, even in a subject where field sites are unique to a PI or group of PIs, there is the risk of having a novel idea scooped. For example, I've been slowly tooling away at a project (and its idea) that I started to develop as a post-doc. Recently, I've seen a couple of indications that other people are interested in the same idea and planning to work on it in a major way (e.g., advertising for a post-doc). If I don't get my work out before they do, I will have to work much harder to establish it's novelty. So, even with a different field area or even methodological approach, they could scoop the novelty (hence, impact factor) of my project.
If you were to change the poll, (but why bother, the thoughts are all in the comments), you might add that concern about jobs/tenure as a reason to work the number of hours.
I guess I feel like I am not very likely to get scooped in the first place....who the heck wants to work with lipids other than sadomasochists like myself??
For me, I work the hardest when I am super excited to see how the experiments turn out. I feel like you will prove yourself over time...and if you get scooped once it will hurt short term, but not forever...as long as you still love your job and work hard at it. (maybe im naive...i donno...)
I don't feel a huge amount of pressure on the scooping front...very few other people actually care about Loogly-flooglies so it's unlikely that they're going to publish this particular kind of study...however, there is this nagging doubt that there may be some other insane grad student out there who works in a Shiny Balls Lab, with a passing interest in the origins of Loogly-flooglies (a small subset of Shiny Balls)...and they just might figure out that there is some work to be done in this department. Unlikely, but not impossible.
I would probably work the same hours if I knew I couldn't be scooped but with much less stress and guilt over the hours that I am NOT working...which is really the point after all.
Great question EGF!
Great question EGF!
What great comments. It's interesting to learn what motivates people to work so much.
After reading these comments, I feel a little less secure about the scoopability of my work. Thanks, guys. :(
My first paper was scooped while in review... which took 3 months. That was terribly frustrating, but that paper wasn't 100% identical to mine, so I just had to focus on highlighting the novelties in my own research; it took another year but I still got it published. The fear of being scooped is there, and it does happen, but that isn't what motivates me; it's the science itself that really drives me.
Post a Comment