I'm sick of The Race. I'm both irritated and bored by the rush to finish projects and write papers and not get scooped (which almost never happens in my field anyway) and all the rest of it. I want to just relax and enjoy what I'm doing. If I do it right, then presentations and papers should come naturally as part of the process.
I want to do science because it’s interesting and fun and valuable. There are lots of other jobs I could be doing that would get me more money with less education. If science isn't fun or interesting, then there's little point in doing it for me. Sure, there's the benefit scientists provides society. But I feel like I could do as much or more good in another profession. It would just be a very different sort of good.
The other day, my carpool buddy was fretting about some deadline that he didn't think he could meet. Ecogeoman and I are constantly doing the same, both for external deadlines and the ones we set ourselves for motivation. But I suddenly realized how arbitrary our deadlines are. No one is going to die on an operating table or starve in the immediate future if we don't meet our deadlines.* My research is very important, but not it’s just not that urgent.
That thought brought on a welcome sense of relaxation. I have been thinking about how all this worrying about meeting goals takes mental energy away from actually doing the work. I want to focus on the parts of my job that are fun and interesting. I'm tired of spinning my wheels, planning and replanning my future, both immediate and distant. I need a break from all the fuss to just do my work and enjoy it for what it is rather than doing to meet an arbitrary deadline or because it's good for my career. I want to do it because it's good for science. My career will follow.
I hope that this change of attitude will provide some renewal of my motivation. But rather than renewing my fortitude to meet an arbitrary goal, I hope to renew my excitement about my research, and that’s all.
*I know some of you work in fields where this might be the case.
scientiae-carnival
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Type A timesheet
We got another winter storm last night into this morning, so I worked from home until noon. I'm usually not very successful working from home because I goof off too much. I really want to be able to work at home sometimes (that's work, not "work"). And I want to be able to plan to do so with the confidence that I will actually get something done. So today I signed up with Slimtimer.com after seeing Dr. Shellie's comment on one of Saxifraga's posts, along with references to similar programs on other blogs. It's a website that lets you track how much time you spend doing particular tasks. You can add tags in order to group tasks by topic. I think it's possible to download daily or weekly logs of your activity. Good for seeing how you really spend your time.
I only used it for a few hours this morning, but seeing the clock ticking away helped keep me on track. I haven't logged enough hours to try out some of the features, but I bet that my totally anal retentive, structure loving personality will thrive on this sort of rigidity. Bring it on!
I only used it for a few hours this morning, but seeing the clock ticking away helped keep me on track. I haven't logged enough hours to try out some of the features, but I bet that my totally anal retentive, structure loving personality will thrive on this sort of rigidity. Bring it on!
Monday, February 25, 2008
Pour out that beer if you want to publish
I thought “networking” was good for my career.
Alas, a Czech researcher has found that beer consumption is negatively related to number of publications and their citation rate (Grim 2008). Grim, an avian ecologist rather than a social scientist, surveyed the beer consumption habits of other avian ecologists working in Czech Republic, a country with very high per capita beer consumption, in 2002 and 2006. Controlling for both age and years since first publication, he found that the more beer the scientists reported drinking, the fewer publications they had. Furthermore, the survey results from 2002 predicted results in 2006 (r2=0.90, F1,9 =6.15, p<0.0001). Thus, he couldn’t test how changes in beer use influenced publication rate (i.e. he couldn’t address the hypothesis that drinking decreases with age with a concomitant increase in publishing). The study also compared a high-consumption region with a lower-consumption region and found a similar relationship; scientists in the high-consumption region published less and had fewer citations. This was not related to age, time since first publication, or funding biases among regions.
The median beer consumption among one study group was 200 liters per year. That’s eight pints per week, every week. That’s way more than I drink. So maybe my beer drinking still falls within the good-for-your-career, networking-over-drinks, helping-relax-among-colleagues-and-superiors-so-as-to-not-feel-intimidated-and-inhibited variety. Let’s hope. Because I am not about to give up beer in the name of science!
Cheers!
Grim, Tomas. 2008. A possible role of social activity to explain differences in publication output among ecologists. Oikos. doi: 10.1111/j.2008.0030-1299.16551.x
Alas, a Czech researcher has found that beer consumption is negatively related to number of publications and their citation rate (Grim 2008). Grim, an avian ecologist rather than a social scientist, surveyed the beer consumption habits of other avian ecologists working in Czech Republic, a country with very high per capita beer consumption, in 2002 and 2006. Controlling for both age and years since first publication, he found that the more beer the scientists reported drinking, the fewer publications they had. Furthermore, the survey results from 2002 predicted results in 2006 (r2=0.90, F1,9 =6.15, p<0.0001). Thus, he couldn’t test how changes in beer use influenced publication rate (i.e. he couldn’t address the hypothesis that drinking decreases with age with a concomitant increase in publishing). The study also compared a high-consumption region with a lower-consumption region and found a similar relationship; scientists in the high-consumption region published less and had fewer citations. This was not related to age, time since first publication, or funding biases among regions.
The median beer consumption among one study group was 200 liters per year. That’s eight pints per week, every week. That’s way more than I drink. So maybe my beer drinking still falls within the good-for-your-career, networking-over-drinks, helping-relax-among-colleagues-and-superiors-so-as-to-not-feel-intimidated-and-inhibited variety. Let’s hope. Because I am not about to give up beer in the name of science!
Cheers!
Grim, Tomas. 2008. A possible role of social activity to explain differences in publication output among ecologists. Oikos. doi: 10.1111/j.2008.0030-1299.16551.x
Friday, February 22, 2008
Hackneyed
Lately, a few phrases keep coming up again and again. They are starting to get a little meaningless and more than a little annoying. Some examples:
Related to work
- The paper/presentation/proposal needs to tell a story.
- It depends on the question.
and the perennial favorite,
- When will you be finished?
- You'll understand when you have kids.
- It's different when you're married.
and the seasonal favorite,
- There's a 90% chance of "wintry mix" tomorrow.
What are your (least) favorite science and life cliches?
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Bullets
This blog has been a tad serious lately so I wanted to lighten up a little. I couldn't think of anything both chipper and coherent, so here are my disjointed thoughts for the day:
- I forgot to put on deodorant this morning. After a few hours at work, I remembered I had some in my desk and slapped it on. Unfortunately, it was like, rancid or something. At a minimum there was no fragrance left. It smelled terrible and made me feel queasy all day.
- Advisor has lots of time for lengthy impromptu conversations, but has trouble scheduling an hour to discuss my paper draft. I highly value these unarranged chats, as I learn a heck of a lot and really enjoy them. It's just a little frustrating when I want to talk about something specific. And it's all about me, right?
- Someone asked me this question as sort of a quasi- pseudo- personality test, "would you rather give up eating or sleep, knowing that you wouldn't be physically harmed by the loss?" Really, I'd like to give up pooping, but since that isn't an option, I choose eating. I *heart* sleep. However, I hate putting myself to bed, even when I'm tired. I think there are few things as decadent as falling asleep on the couch, which I've been doing pretty often lately. This question is supposed to give some insight about your personality, but I don't know what that might be.
- Do you ever listen to the radio show This American Life? I play the podcasts while I do this super tedious task at work. It makes the time fly by. The one from last week about "tough crowds" was really good and funny.
- The spellcheck in Blogger is working again!
- Lost was awesome tonight!
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Another thought on anonymity
A good thing about anonymous blogs is that they reduce anxiety that stems from rank/success inequalities among bloggers, particularly those in science. Since I don't know the identities of most bloggers, I can't be intimidated by their real-life greatness. Even when people clearly state on their blogs what level of career achievement they have attained (e.g. my profile says I am a student), it doesn't sink in the way it does when I know who they are. For example I recently stumbled upon a non-anonymous blog by a prominent scientist broadly in my field. I don't think I would leave the same sort of comments there that I leave at other blogs, even ones I know to be written by senior level people.
This observation is a small example of how the Internet can eliminate barriers. Things that might stop people from interacting in real life are irrelevant here. It doesn’t matter if in real life you have a heavy accent or smell bad or can’t make eye contact or have an appearance that is often the subject of bias. If you write an interesting blog (and I know about it), I’ll read it. Not that I would purposely avoid you in real life if you have the above traits. I’m just saying that we get boiled down to the message we transmit on our blogs, without the confounding effects of race, appearance, number of publications, funding, etc.
I know these are not novel ideas, but I still find them interesting.
This observation is a small example of how the Internet can eliminate barriers. Things that might stop people from interacting in real life are irrelevant here. It doesn’t matter if in real life you have a heavy accent or smell bad or can’t make eye contact or have an appearance that is often the subject of bias. If you write an interesting blog (and I know about it), I’ll read it. Not that I would purposely avoid you in real life if you have the above traits. I’m just saying that we get boiled down to the message we transmit on our blogs, without the confounding effects of race, appearance, number of publications, funding, etc.
I know these are not novel ideas, but I still find them interesting.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Guaging writing productivity
As I have said before, I am a member of two labs. Neither of them are very prolific, but for somewhat different reasons. The one I consider my primary lab is super slow getting papers out mainly because nothing is ever considered final. There are always a few more samples to analyze, more statistical tests to run, or other ways to look at the data. Add to that the slow internal review process in our group, and papers just never seem to get submitted* (my frustrations with this will probably expand into future posts).
This lab culture makes me feel like it is a Herculean task to write and submit a paper. I think writing one’s first paper is often a battle. But it seems to be a particularly huge deal in our lab and that makes it ever more intimidating to complete a draft and give it to my advisors.
I worked exclusively on this paper for the first few weeks of the year, which included reworking stats and figures. Since then, I have interspersed lab work with writing, either working part of the day in the lab and part at my desk or alternating whole days. I find that I feel much more productive when I’m in the lab, which adds to the psychological difficulty of writing. I know exactly how long it takes to do different bench tasks, so I can plan the time I need to complete them. If I finish what I set out to do, I feel productive and good. Unfortunately, I have no idea how long it should take me to write sections of a paper, so it’s hard for me to tell if I have worked efficiently at writing. It’s a little frustrating.
I think this will change as I gain experience. I welcome suggestions or advice from your vast experience, readers.
*The papers are undoubtedly better for it. When they do get published, they are awesome and highly cited.
This lab culture makes me feel like it is a Herculean task to write and submit a paper. I think writing one’s first paper is often a battle. But it seems to be a particularly huge deal in our lab and that makes it ever more intimidating to complete a draft and give it to my advisors.
I worked exclusively on this paper for the first few weeks of the year, which included reworking stats and figures. Since then, I have interspersed lab work with writing, either working part of the day in the lab and part at my desk or alternating whole days. I find that I feel much more productive when I’m in the lab, which adds to the psychological difficulty of writing. I know exactly how long it takes to do different bench tasks, so I can plan the time I need to complete them. If I finish what I set out to do, I feel productive and good. Unfortunately, I have no idea how long it should take me to write sections of a paper, so it’s hard for me to tell if I have worked efficiently at writing. It’s a little frustrating.
I think this will change as I gain experience. I welcome suggestions or advice from your vast experience, readers.
*The papers are undoubtedly better for it. When they do get published, they are awesome and highly cited.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)