Read on Twitter
Beyond the unnecessary fixation on precise working hours and a particular lab regimen, many critics of @jjsabatini thread are looking past the salient consensus that good research training requires significantly more effort and commitment than a standard 9-5 job. 1/10
Most scientists don’t really count average hours of effort (it’s too fuzzy and varies a lot). I think of research effort as a sum of time spent doing experiments, reading, writing, planning - and yes, often just talking to your colleagues about new findings. 2/10
Success in research depends on talent, training, resources and dumb luck - but effort is the key force multiplier that is in your control. The quality of your PhD training will therefore reflect the effort you put in -this is as true for science as it is for sports and arts. 3/10
Is smart effort better than dumb effort - of course it is! But in my experience, highly committed students accumulate knowledge faster and also get increasingly smarter than others in their effort. Claims of “more thinking, less doing” are often vacuous. 4/10
A hard working lab is not a toxic lab - this is a dangerous and increasingly pervasive myth. I trained with two highly committed and accomplished scientists -working hours were never discussed or watched - but the drive and ambition in these labs were palpable and inspiring. 5/10
Much of what you absorb during training comes from your lab mates. There are long term advantages of training in a lab full of highly committed, talented and cooperative individuals. This is easier to appreciate as a faculty than as a trainee. 6/10
But this comes at a price - when my relative underachievement stood out, it was tough! But despite such setbacks, I had a blast during my PhD and postdoc. I concede that such high intensity labs are not for everyone - that’s a reality and it’s fine. 7/10
But no lab can be a good fit for every student. Finding a good fit for your PhD (or postdoc) is certainly not easy. Being open about your goals and expectations with the PI and the trainees goes a long way in determining the right fit. 8/10
Just to be clear, some lab environments can indeed toxic - but this is often due to an overbearing toxic PI who demands very specific *results* in a very specific time frame. Of course, I am not even discussing the most blatant and obvious forms of abusive behaviors. 9/10
My view is that students have to be self-motivated and PI can/should only provide gentle nudges of encouragement. This cannot be done by stipulating or watching hours in lab etc. But not inculcating a culture that respects gritty effort also sets the students up for failure.
