Kind of a dilemma??

[diamedic17]

So I was approached by my current rotation advisor today and offered something that on the surface sounds pretty awesome. He has some data for a paper that needs to be finished. Basically, I need to do two or three experiments and then write a paper. Afterwards I would very conceivably have a paper in a pretty high impact journal (PNAS, Plos Pathogens etc). The problem is, he wants me to commit to joining his lab for the remainder of my PhD work. If this lab was my only choice I wouldn't be questioning it at all but I have a somewhat unique situation in that I have my own funding and a lot of experience so several labs want me. I have to do a 2nd rotation regardless of what I decide and the lab that I have set up for my 2nd rotation has some really interesting work. I don't want to make my decision before having all of the information but he doesn't want to give me this project unless I commit to joining his lab. The lab in question isn't well funded (supposedly some money is coming). The second lab is very well funded.  Basically what this boils down to is do I commit to a lab before I have the opportunity to see the other lab but also get a pretty high impact paper before the first year of my PhD is done or wait a bit and see which lab I like better and then make the decision.

 

Any advice????

[fuzzylogician]

I can't tell you what to do, but if it were me I would wait and see what the other lab is like. I don't really appreciate being pressured into a decision like that. If the PI is doing this now, I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to manipulate things to get his way in other places down the line as well, and at some point this may have dangerous consequences of different kinds that I'll leave up to your imagination because without knowing more it's hard to guess if/what it could be.

That said, is there a way to play the system a little and just tell this PI you are interested but at the moment can't commit to anything because you have to do a second rotation? Tell him you are interested in this paper and in his lab, but maybe it's best to put things off another semester, until you'll have the time to devote to this lab and project? If that's doable, it might be a good way to go in case this does end up being the lab you want to choose. But in the grand scheme of things, choosing one high-impact paper doesn't seem worth it to me if it leads to five years of inadequacy or manipulation at a lab that's not the best choice for you (but again, that's not something we know, you have the best knowledge about how likely that is to be the case). Another related question is about both PIs' reputations and placement records, how often students in their labs publish, etc. This decision needs to be placed in the context of the work you'll do in the next 5ish years of your PhD program, and in the context of the work you'll want to do once you graduate.

[TakeruK]

I agree with fuzzy. I would not pick a lab just on the potential of a single high impact paper in your first year. At this point of your grad career, there is no race/rush. By the time you finish, it won't matter if you had a high impact paper in year 1 or year 4. Sure, a high impact paper right away might help with external fellowships next year but you say you already have some!

Also, you are the only one that can make this judgement since you are actually there, but be warned that some people are guilty of "false advertising" when it comes to these kind of things. Whenever I hear someone say "oh you just have to do these 2 or 3 things and write a paper", I anticipate there to be a good deal of work involved. After all, after one or two experiments, maybe you'll find something that stumps you or needs even more work etc. The way I see it, if it's really that easy to get it done, it would already have been done (either by the faculty member or a postdoc or a grad student already there). There's no such thing, in my opinion, as a faculty member with all these almost-complete projects ready to farm out of students because they simply don't have time to do it. Many faculty members "recruit" lab members in this way and while it is a good way to jump into a project that will likely result in a paper, these offers are usually in the "too good to be (completely) true" category. So when you consider this "almost completed paper" as a factor, I'd recommend thinking of it as something that will be a paper in a year from now, and not any shorter timeline than that!

With that in mind, I don't really think you have anything to gain by committing to lab #1 now and lots to lose out on! I agree with fuzzy's advice as well to just tell lab #1's PI that you are interested but you would like to try out the other rotations first. Tell them you would be interested in the proposed project in the future and that you'll understand if someone else who is ready to commit will take that project.

[dr. t]

Do you have a rabbi in the department you can talk to? Someone you trust and who would know whether or not this professor was legit? I am likewise skeptical of the "CHOOSE NOW", but it's not asking to much to have someone commit to a long-term project, and the situation you describe could well be the latter.

[TakeruK]

Do you have a rabbi in the department you can talk to? Someone you trust and who would know whether or not this professor was legit? I am likewise skeptical of the "CHOOSE NOW", but it's not asking to much to have someone commit to a long-term project, and the situation you describe could well be the latter.

When there is a system in place for students to try out different labs/groups before committing (i.e. rotations), I do think it's a little strange that a professor is trying to circumvent this at the beginning of the year! 

But I do agree that it's not unreasonable for a prof to say "If you want to work on specific project X, I want you to commit because I want to save this project for someone who will remain in my group". 

If the prof still would like the student to be part of the lab for rotation (but on a different project) then I'd say everything sounds above board. But if the prof insists on commitment instead of the typical rotation system, then it might (but not necessarily) be a sign of something weird.

[lewin]

Basically, I need to do two or three experiments and then write a paper. Afterwards I would very conceivably have a paper in a pretty high impact journal (PNAS, Plos Pathogens etc).

^^Frankly this sounds like the academic equivalent of a get rich quick scheme. High impact journals are that way for a reason, and it's not so easy as just running some experiments (will they work?) and writing the paper (rejection rate at good journals is >80%).

 

ETA: when I started grad school my advisor had a manuscript with a revise and resubmit at the top journal in our field but it just required one more experiment of pretty-much-sure-thing data. That's as close to a sure thing as one can get; your situation is not.

Edited September 18, 2015 by lewin

[diamedic17]

Thank you everyone for your input

I am pretty much decided to just say that I'm interested in the project but I want to experience the other lab as well without making a commitment. Hopefully he takes it okay. After thinking about it I think it has something to do with his tenure. I can't confirm that but that's my opinion. Unfortunately the only person I could talk to about the situation is the professor for my next rotation and I don't want to cause any problems as I feel like one of two things would happen (I'd be burning a bridge in that lab by not giving it a chance or I'd cause a problem between the two professors which wouldn't be good for me either).

All of that said, I don't think he is trying to be malicious in the recruiting, I think he's just trying to get his lab situated and make sure he's in a good spot, unfortunately i'm stuck in the middle haha.

Another thought I had after my original post was it is pretty unethical to be the first author on the paper after doing a 2 pretty simple experiments. The other two students involved are no longer in the lab so that's why he says it would be my paper but they did the work and found the bulk of the findings. I'd be the person that actually wrote it and did two quick confirmatory experiments.

I think tomorrow my conversation is basically going to be "I'd love to start work on it, maybe do one of the experiments but I can't commit to joining a lab until I have all the information available to me to make a decision"

[TakeruK]

 

Another thought I had after my original post was it is pretty unethical to be the first author on the paper after doing a 2 pretty simple experiments. The other two students involved are no longer in the lab so that's why he says it would be my paper but they did the work and found the bulk of the findings. I'd be the person that actually wrote it and did two quick confirmatory experiments.

Author order and inclusion is something that varies a lot between fields and maybe even subfields. In mine, it's pretty normal for the person to actually be writing the paper to be the first author, even if they did not do the bulk of the analysis. This person is also generally the "leader" that actually puts everyone's analyses together to form a coherent story. For example, a paper might have 5 separate pieces and maybe 3 or 4 other students did their own analyses that contributed to the paper, however their level of contribution is likely to be something like: someone told them what to do and then they ran their analysis on the data and provided the results and interpretation. If you came and did the "last 2 experiments" and also did all of the work to write the literature review section, consolidate all the methods, and collect all of the existing analyses to form a coherent and strong scientific argument, in the norms of my field, you would certainly earn first authorship. 

As I alluded to above, all of this work is actually a lot more time and effort required than what has been completed so far. That's why I really don't think opportunities like "oh it is just missing 1 or 2 experiments" to be as close to completion as people seem to imply they are!

[Char Tutor:Mentor]

Do you want an opportunity of highly likely getting published, or definitely exploring other interesting labs...?

gotta let go of the shore to get to the horizon. both directions sound adventurous ~:-)