-
-
Scientopia Blogs
DrugMonkey is an NIH-funded researcher who blogs about careerism in science. And occasionally about the science of drug use.
-
Your donation helps to support the operation of Scientopia - thanks for your consideration.
Recent Comments
- qaz on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- A Salty Scientist on On PO/PI interactions to steer the grant to the PI's laboratory
- baltogirl on On PO/PI interactions to steer the grant to the PI's laboratory
- Morgan Price on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Ola on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Ben Stein on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- mathlete on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Jonathan Badger on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Caroline on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- drugmonkey on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Joe on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Isis on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- Anon on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- AcademicLurker on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- BethAnn McLaughlin on Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
-
Recent Posts
- Faculty Retention: The Rule of 10
- On PO/PI interactions to steer the grant to the PI's laboratory
- Twitter Cloud
- The culture of "the lab that socializes together" enables the predators
- Plea bargains are unsatisfying to their vict.... wait, again?
- Plea bargains are unsatisfying to the victims of their type of crime
- NIH Ginther Fail: Do the ersatz reviews recapitulate the original reviews?
Archives
So..congrats..but..I gotta ask...
Did you generate the data, or your underling? How much more overjoyed do you think the underling must be, if you're this excited? Do you ever resent your dependency on others for your data fix? Why don't PIs do benchwork anymore?
Sometimes I feel like it is easier for PIs to get excited about data. I'm frequently criticized for not being enthusiastic enough when I present my results. I think that's because I know all the caveats, while all the PIs see is the abstract of their next RPG.
Other people.
That's up to them.
No.
Some do.
!
I feel the same way and have received the same criticism.
"while all the PIs see is the abstract of their next RPG."
First, of course a PI should get excited at the potential for funding (trainees and staff should begin to appreciate that too). Second, the PI might also see the caveats, but that can bum you down. The key is seeing beyond the caveats. Also, consider the alternative: a PI that only sees the caveats and doesn't get excited. I bet that would be a lot worse.
I have always felt sad for the people that never get truly enthusiastic about their data. It must be so difficult to stay in this rat race without the excitement.
"Also, consider the alternative: a PI that only sees the caveats and doesn't get excited. I bet that would be a lot worse."
-True, part of being a PI is seeing the big picture and getting excited about it, and being a motivator. That's why I want to be there and not where I am. In the trenches, it's easy to get bummed out about the one control of a triplicate that didn't work, so you have to go back and redo essentially all the work to get the figure quality draft.
Also, at least part of it (with preliminary results) is tempering my enthusiasm until all the replicates are in (in my field the standard is three standalone experiments processed separately). And there's probably at least a tiny superstitious part of my brain that doesn't want to "jinx" it.
"It must be so difficult to stay in this rat race without the excitement."
Eh, I like the big pictures and concepts. I get excited planning the experiments, and writing up the manuscripts, or even grant applications. Also interpreting the occasional truly novel and interesting results. Like any other work though, there is a fair amount of drudgery. I imagine the drudgery of benchwork gets replaced by something equally tedious as a PI.