Hello PhD

We weren’t sure what to expect when scientists planned a protest march on Washington, D.C. and other world capitals.

Would this politicize the scientific process? Would enough scientists show up to make an impact? And what should happen after the march to continue the momentum?

Ms. Frizzle Supports Science

To answer these questions and others, Josh took to the streets at our local march in Raleigh, NC. He wanted to hear from other scientists first-hand about what motivated them to leave the lab and march on the capital.

The atmosphere was festive, and the crowd was passionate.  In this episode, you’ll hear directly from the the marchers in their own words.

Some came out of concern over environmental policy.  Some were advocating fact-based governance.  And some came to show their kids that science matters and it’s worth fighting for.

As this episode posts, the organizers of the science march are mid-way through a “Week of Action” to continue the work begun at the march.  Even if you couldn’t join a march on April 22nd, there’s time to get involved.

Join the conversation – email us your photos or stories from the march YOU attended, or tweet them to @hellophd. We’ll share as many as we can on this page or in a future episode.

Science with a Stink

Also in this episode, Josh shares some recent research on the physics of defecation.  Yup, you read that right, so think twice before tuning in…

If you made it this far, you might be interested to read more about the Bristol Stool Scale or to see the equation that explains it all:

In better news, we also sampled the Left Hand Brewing Milk Stout Nitro.  It’s dark brown and smooth and you can finish it in 12.6 seconds, so it’s almost exactly like… oh… never mind.

 

Imposter syndrome might make you feel all alone in the world, but ironically, many graduate students, postdocs, and faculty members experience the same feelings of inadequacy.

This week on the show, we interview Dr. Maureen Gannon, PhD, about the sources of imposter feelings and the practical steps you can take to work through them.

By every objective measure, Dr. Gannon’s career has been an unqualified success.  She went from private high school through a Masters degree with full scholarships, finishing her undergraduate training in just three years.  She completed a PhD at Cornell and is now a tenured faculty member at Vanderbilt University with appointments in several departments. She leads and chairs multiple organizations and committees, and is invited to speak internationally about her work.

And yet, for much of her training, Dr. Gannon didn’t feel successful.  She sometimes attributed her personal wins to outside forces or good luck. She wondered when others would discover her shortcomings as a scientist.

Then, she attended a workshop that put a name to the feelings: imposter phenomenon.  With the name came a realization that many of her peers were experiencing the same thing.

Now, she speaks to students, faculty, and professional groups about her experience of overcoming imposter syndrome and getting on with her career.

In this episode, Dr. Gannon shares some of the common triggers for imposter feelings and the steps you can take to work through them.

Here are the books and resources she recommends:

Take the test yourself: The Clance Imposter Scale

The Impostor Phenomenon: Overcoming the Fear That Haunts Your Success

The Secret Thoughts of Successful Women: Why Capable People Suffer from the Impostor Syndrome and How to Thrive in Spite of It

Creative Visualization: Use the Power of Your Imagination to Create What You Want in Your Life

Man vs. Machine

Science in the News brings us another reminder that computers are going to take our jobs.  This week, machine learning algorithms outperform human doctors on predicting which patients will suffer from heart disease.

Now, when the robots rise up to kill us, they’ll be able to make it look like ‘an accident.’

We also sample a tropical ethanol with the Big Wave Golden Ale from Kona Brewing. It’s not clear why this allegedly Hawaiian beer was featured on a cruise in the Caribbean, but it’s best not to argue.  Any port in a storm, as they say…

Like the show?  Support us on Patreon!

Meeting a new cohort of graduate students on your first day of class can be intimidating.  These are the brightest students from their undergraduate programs. Some of them have years of research experience, first-author publications, and a depth of knowledge that seems encyclopedic.

Feeling intimidated by your new colleagues is normal, but some of the people you meet will suffer a more insidious type of anxiety. Some students actually see themselves as charlatans who are just play-acting at a scientific career. So far, they feel, they’ve successfully bluffed their way through college, entrance exams, and interviews.

But they fear that at any moment, they will be discovered as frauds and rejected from the program.

This daily battle is the emotional reality for people suffering from “Imposter Syndrome.”

Imposter Syndrome, Up Close and Personal

First described by Pauline Rose Clance & Suzanne Imes in 1978, “Imposter Phenomenon” is the belief that despite one’s achievements and academic success, the sufferer doesn’t feel successful.  She believes she has ‘gotten lucky’ or ‘fooled everyone’ into believing she has talent, but at any moment the facade could come crashing down.

To cope, “imposters” often turn into workaholics, attempting to maintain their position through diligence and hard work. They set their sights on perfection, and then turn a self-critical eye on every outcome.

The constant cycle of unachievable goals, long work hours, and self deprecation leads to burnout, anxiety, and depression.

This week on the show, we explore the signs and symptoms of imposter syndrome and how it manifests in graduate school and beyond.  By talking candidly about this decidedly lonely struggle, we can remove the stigma and begin dealing with the effects on scientists at all stages of their careers.

Resources

Here are some imposter syndrome papers and assessments we mentioned in the show:

Impostor syndrome and burnout among American medical students: a pilot study

Validation of the Impostor Phenomenon among Managers

The dangers of feeling like a fake – Harvard Business Review

Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale

Young Imposter Syndrome Quiz

Hands Off These Eggs

On a slightly lighter note, we hear the fascinating story of how one graduate student stayed up late to challenge everything we know about amphibian parenting:

Under a Flashlight, a Eureka Moment About Frogs

Patterns of parental care in Neotropical glassfrogs: fieldwork alters hypotheses of sex-role evolution

We also sample the Old Chub Scotch Ale from Oskar Blues.  Careful – that sweet maltiness is hiding an unhealthy amount of ethanol.  You’ve been warned!

Traditionally, spending time on social media was a great way to make your PI angry. Your job is to finish experiments, read papers, and present your work at conferences, not to upvote and share the latest blue-dress illusion.

But there are some unexpected benefits to the Twitter network that could help your science and your career.

#JustAScienceThing

This week on the show, we explore the weird world of Twitter, and how real-life scientists are using it to their advantage.  Here are some benefits you may not have considered:

1. Keep up with the research in your field

Raise your hand if you’ve ever missed out on an important paper in your field because your PubMed filter wasn’t precise. Or if you ever missed an advance because you decided you’d rather watch a Netflix series than flip through that stack of journals.

Scientific research moves quickly, and having a social network of like-minded scientists means you’ll have many more eyes on the literature. Follow the researchers in your field and rest assured you’ll never miss that big breakthrough.

2. Promote your own work

It’s a dirty fact that citations make your journal articles more valuable (Impact Factor, baby!).  Would you be surprised to learn that Twitter references correlate with early citations in other articles?

If you’re not sharing your research on Twitter, you’re missing a wider audience that may benefit from your findings.

3. Build your network and find a job

Most scientists I’ve met don’t like the word ‘networking.’ It feels awkward to ‘cold call’ a PI or collaborator, asking for reagents and inquiring about jobs.

But what if you had a rapport BEFORE you even met?

Follow the researchers you respect, reply to their tweets with your own perspective, and after awhile, you’ll recognize each other at that next conference and have a basis for conversation.

No cold calls necessary.

4. Attend the conference behind the conference

If you’re still not ready to dive into the Twittersphere, dip in your toe by participating in a conference.  Most meetings will define a hashtag that allows attendees to filter on tweets stemming from the conference.

You’ll discover a rich conversation happening in and around the talks and events. As one scientist presents her findings, others can ask questions or summarize the results on Twitter for follow up later.

There’s no reason to be passive just because it isn’t your turn on the dais.

5. Support the causes you believe in

We interview Dr. Stephani Page, who launched an unexpected hashtag revolution one snowy day. Stephani wanted to find other black scientists and engineers on Twitter, so she tweeted:

“Role” call. #BLACKandSTEM what do you do?

— Stephani Page, PhD (@ThePurplePage) February 13, 2014

Little did she know, that seemingly innocuous tweet would lead to articles in magazines like Fast Company, interviews on Al Jazeera and NPR, invitations to speak at conferences, and a supportive network of other STEM professionals.

She shares her amazing story and how it’s affected her career this week on the show! You can find her @ThePurplePage.

And of course, you can always find US on Twitter @hellophd.  Come join the conversation!

Good Beer and Bad Drugs

This week, we discuss

If the idea of saving money while in graduate school sounds laughable to you, you’re not alone. Many grad students live month to month on a stipend that places them near the poverty line.

After rent, food, and clothing, there’s nothing left to save.

But food, clothing and shelter don’t cover all the expenses you’ll face as a grad student. There’s also car maintenance and repair, gifts for loved ones, and the occasional concert or trip to the beach.

How do you squeeze these add-ons from an already meager budget?

Hitting the Target

This week, we talk with our friend Dr. Emily Roberts about some creative ways grad students and postdocs can make a regular investment for irregular expenses.

Emily shares her experience when as a student, she and her husband spent well over their budget on unpredictable expenses like car repairs and basketball tickets. Vowing never to make that mistake again, Emily looked for ways to force these every-few-months expenses into her monthly budget.

Her solution: targeted savings accounts. Simply put, these are bank accounts with a name and a purpose. Instead of saving a wad of cash under the mattress for ‘a rainy day,’ targeted savings accounts serve a single purpose. Emily created one that saved money just for car repairs.  She stared a separate account to purchase show tickets the following year.

Each month, a small amount of money would auto-draft from her checking account, and deposit in each targeted account. Over time, these grew, and when it came time to fix the car or buy theater tickets, the money was already there.  She didn’t have to sacrifice her grocery budget this week to make ends meet.

You can hear more tips and ideas for setting up accounts of your own in this week’s episode.  Or head over to GradStudentFinances.org for additional articles and a worksheet to help you identify your irregular expenses.

Hello PhD listeners can also sign up to view her webinar on income tax tips for graduate students.  Yes, it IS that time of year!

Tastes Like Chicken

This week, we’re scratching our heads over the recent report from the CBC that the chicken on Subway sandwiches contain only 50% Gallus gallus.  Because DNA!

Of course, Subway disagrees, and ordered their own antibody-based testing to show that there’s plenty of Gallus to go around.

Something that doesn’t taste like chicken: the Julius and Haze IPAs we sampled from Treehouse Brewing. These truly exceptional beers are apparently hard to come by. It’s complex enough that their website has a section devoted to finding them, and a section for ordering.

I believe the brewmaster is allowed to ask you three riddles before filling your growler, and may demand a sacrifice should you answer incorrectly.  Be warned!

 

If you read the following headline this week, you might have experienced a small thrill:

AAAS Forms Partnership to Expand Access to

High-Quality Scientific Publishing

AAAS, or the American Association for the Advancement of Science, is the organization that publishes the flagship journal Science Magazine and related titles.  You might believe from that headline that you could now access Science articles for free from anywhere in the world!

You’d be wrong.

Unlocking Access

While AAAS DID ‘expand’ access, they did it in the least thrilling way possible.  They reached an agreement with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and committed to allowing open access for Gates Foundation funded research articles.  That’s expected to be 10-15 papers per year.

But wait, there’s less!

The agreement only lasts for one year, beginning January 1, 2017, after which time the decision will be reviewed.

To secure this privilege, the Gates Foundation had to pay AAAS a lump sum of $100,000 for the year.

So much for ‘open’ access.

Scientific publishing is an unusual animal. Government agencies like the NIH and private NGOs like the Gates Foundation contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to advance research.  Scientists labor at the bench to make discoveries.  Peer reviewers offer in-depth analysis and expert consulting for free.

Meanwhile, scientists must pay the journal to publish a paper, and then pay some journals a subscription fee to read that paper!

Open access journals offer a different approach. Though they may still charge a fee for publication, the finished article can be freely accessed without a subscription or paywall by anyone in the world.

This week on the podcast, we explore the newsworthy-ness of the AAAS announcement, why the Gates Foundation may be paying to play, and what YOU can do as a scientist to advance the cause of open access.

We also sample the Wicked Weed Pernicious India Pale Ale brewed in Asheville, NC.  They claim their IPA is so good, it will make all others taste terrible by comparison.  It is tasty, but I bet we’ll find others to enjoy in the future…

Friends of the Show

We’re 67 episodes into this wild ride we call Hello PhD and we need your help more than ever!  We’re asking friends of the show to continue sharing it with your lab mates and social networks to help spread the word and make science training just a wee bit easier for everyone.

We also want your feedback.  Whether you’re a regular listener or just wandered by, take our survey to help us improve the show.

And if you’re feeling generous, why not donate a few bucks and become a Patron of Hello PhD?  We’ve got a Patreon account now to help cover the costs of hosting and distribution.

We’ve got some fun rewards set up for anyone who contributes, and thanks for your support!

 

Though techniques and terminology vary from one scientific discipline to another, all scientists are bound together by a set of core principles.

We call this the “scientific method,” and the approach is sacrosanct.

Observe the world around you, state a hypothesis to explain what you’ve seen, devise an experiment to prove yourself wrong, and report your findings so that the next inquisitive mind can build upon your work.

So what happens when an elected official seeks to erode the foundations of scientific inquiry?

Scientists take to the streets.

March Against Madness

After just over two weeks in office, US President Donald Trump has stirred up more controversy than most presidents achieve in two terms. And whether you love or loathe his policies on abortion, immigration, and the economy, it’s his approach to science that warrants a watchful eye.

So far, the news media has described a president and cabinet who are antagonistic to the scientific community. In their first week, a gag order silenced ‘unapproved’ communication from institutions like the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture.

At the same time, the EPA was instructed to remove references to ‘climate change’ from its website, though that edict was later walked back. The agency remains under a strict media blackout and some contracts have been frozen.

But perhaps more troubling than seizing control of the money and message of scientific agencies is the administration’s cavalier attitude toward the goal of science: to understand the truth.  

Spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway famously invoked the concept of ‘alternative facts’ to defend the President’s insistence that the crowd at his inauguration was many times larger than the cameras showed.

Trump himself continually flouts scientific consensus and verifiable data. He believes vaccines cause autism, has said climate change is a hoax, and recently declared that any poll showing disagreement with his policy is automatically ‘fake news.’

Any negative polls are fake news, just like the CNN, ABC, NBC polls in the election. Sorry, people want border security and extreme vetting.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 6, 2017

Scientists working directly in government agencies are already feeling the chilling effects of this administration, but those in academia and the private sector are also nervous.

An administration willing to deny scientific consensus, hamstring research agencies, and publicly humiliate detractors is unlikely to increase research funding or clear the way for major breakthroughs.

So what’s a scientist to do?

Protest, of course. 

Dr. Smith Goes to Washington

A Facebook group called “March for Science” emerged in recent weeks and called on scientists to stand up for the immense value of scientific inquiry in our society.  The group ballooned quickly,

Though most of us have never served on a graduate program admissions committee, we can still appreciate the difficulty of their task: Given a stack qualified applicants, choose the few that you believe will succeed.

Where do you start?  Perhaps you check on each applicant’s GPA, or focus just on the GPA in their science classes.

Or maybe you trust the Graduate Record Examination (GRE).  After all, it’s designed to measure a student’s readiness for graduate school, right?

Because reviewers differ on which metrics they trust most, it’s worth considering a scientific approach to admissions. Are there any predictor variables that actually correlate with student outcomes?

Let Me Gaze into My Crystal Ball

That’s exactly the question taken up by Joshua Hall et al. in their recent paper titled “Predictors of Student Productivity in Biomedical Graduate School Applications.” If you’re paying close attention, you’ll notice that Joshua Hall is also the co-host of the Hello PhD podcast!

Josh works with a large biomedical training program at UNC Chapel Hill, and he and his colleagues have a vested interest in choosing the very best students from a large pool of applicants. They wanted to collect data on student outcomes, and then correlate them to the screening data included in a typical application.

Would GRE scores or extensive research experience help predict laboratory success?

Of course, “success” is subjective and difficult to define or measure. Instead, they used student publications as a proxy for productivity and a tangible outcome.

Using data from 270 graduate students admitted to the biomedical program at UNC Chapel Hill between 2008 and 2010, Josh and his colleagues correlated the following five factors to students publishing rates:

* Undergraduate GPA

* GRE Scores

* Length of prior research experience (in months)

* Letters of recommendation (standardized answers)

* On-site faculty interviews (standardized answers)

The results? Only recommender reviews had any significant correlation with student productivity. Even faculty reviews and longer research experience did not predict which students would publish.

Listen in to this week’s episode to hear more on each factor included in the study, and why it’s such a serious indictment of the GRE and other traditional screening metrics.

With time and additional research, we may be able to screen and interview graduate students in a fairer, more consistent way. For now, you’ll still need to shell out $200+ for that GRE score.

Feeling Hot, Hot, Hot

For this week’s Science in the News, Josh brings us down with a report that the global temperature is up.

A few years ago, climate scientists observed a ‘stall’ in the predicted warming caused by increasing CO2 levels.  It turns out that may have just been due to a measurement error from data collected by ships crossing the oceans.

More recent analysis using data from a fleet of “Argo Floats” show that warming has been consistent, with the Earth breaking heat records for three years in a row. Here’s how the floats work:

This seemingly benign story of improved instrumentation now enters the realm of political theater, as politicians and pundits raise the specter fabricated data, media bias, and political pandering. Isn’t science fun?

With all that heat, we try to stay cool with the Jai Alai IPA from Cigar City Brewing.  It’s crisp and refreshing,

You might think internships are the domain of business students and undergrads.  You’re training every day in a lab – why would you need more experiential learning?

The short answer is that your laboratory training is a great internship if you want to go on to a faculty position at a major research university.

But what if you want to use your scientific training to craft policy and legislation in your state government?

Or what if you want to work with a Contract Research Organization and help shepherd new drugs through clinical trials?

The Best of the BEST

The NIH recognized this gap between the current training regimen an the job prospects of biomedical grads.  They cite a 2012 study by the Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group that found only 20-25% of graduating biomedical trainees went on to faculty positions. That means 75-80% did something else with their careers.

To bridge this gap, they introduced the Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (BEST) program. BEST provides funding and support to 17 research institutions to experimentally improve career development.

This week, we talk with Patrick Brandt, PhD, about the program he administers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.  The UNC program includes funding that allows students to leave their dissertation labs for a short time to work directly with industry or government agencies.

Dr. Brandt tells us about a few of the internships recently completed by trainees, and shares some tips for getting a spot in the program.  He also discusses some of the ways students convince their PIs that time away from lab is worthwhile.

Dr. Brandt has noticed that students participating in the intern program are highly successful at getting a job after graduation.  And it’s not just jobs with the intern host company.

Sure, an internship provides experience, CV fodder, and network of contacts, but Dr. Brandt thinks the real value lies elsewhere.  He believes interns find greater success due to a surge in confidence the feel after working ‘in the field.’  They gain focus and can speak the language of their target industry, and that goes a long way when you’re trying to land a job.

It’s beginning to look a lot like New Year

Sure, the holiday season is far behind us, but no one told Winter Storm Helena that swept through the southern US this past week.  We were snowed in for a few days, and celebrated with New Belgium’s Accumulation.  It’s a white IPA that would be a great introduction for your friends who aren’t sure about hoppy beers.

Plus, after a few sips, you’ll feel warmer!

And here’s a link to the crazy robotic moth to fuel your next nightmare:

Insect-controlled Robot: A Mobile Robot Platform to Evaluate the Odor-tracking Capability of an Insect

Statistically speaking, Teresa Ramirez didn’t stand a chance.

She was raised in Compton, California, a city south of Los Angeles and the eponymous setting of the N.W.A. album “Straight Outta Compton.”

Teresa loved books. She asked questions during class. She put in extra time to help out after school.  In a high school where gang violence was an expectation and higher education was not, Teresa stood out like a sore thumb.

Straight Inta College

This week on the show, we find out what transformed a teenager living in a dangerous part of town into an accomplished scientist who makes the path easier for the next generation of trainees.

Teresa reflects on the blend of luck, kindness, and personal motivation that propelled her through college, graduate school, and beyond her PhD.  She shares the struggles that sapped her confidence and the leaps of faith that ended up paying off in unexpected ways.

Whether you’re a high school student, undergrad, PhD candidate, or postdoc, she has advice that will help YOU make the next step in your career.  Work hard, stay open to every opportunity, and take a few chances.  You won’t regret it.

Deck the ‘Nog

And since it’s the Holiday Season, Josh and Dan mix up a special ethanol to celebrate.  It’s Eggnog!

If you mistakenly believe you hate eggnog based on the yellow, syrupy gloop poured from a cardboard carton this time of year, then you’re in for a surprise.  REAL eggnog is a creamy, rich indulgence that is almost too decadent for words.  Luckily, we have words for everything, so we walk you through the recipe step-by-step.

Next year, we’ll try it aged…  Stay with us!