Peter Higgs believes he would be regarded as “unproductive" in today’s academic system. He simply wouldn’t be able to “survive” in #science.

On his way to Stockholm to receive a Nobel Prize in 2013, he said the following in an interview to Guardian:

#AcademicTwitter #phdlife - He wouldn’t expect to make a breakthrough in today’s academia.

Why? Because expectations to "collaborate and keep churning out papers" are too high

"It's difficult to imagine how I would ever have enough peace and quiet in the present sort of climate to do what I did in 1964"

The more I read recommendation letters, the less I want to rely on them.

Many people will disagree with me. But I will still say that:

#AcademicChatter #phdlife #research 1. Recommendation letters promote elitism.
“You are not from a famous advisor’s group..? Sorry, you don’t belong here.”

2. When poorly written, a recommendation letter devaluates the candidate.
“This student has such a dull reference… It’s clearly not for us.”

Peer reviewing of manuscripts - is it THAT important as everyone thinks?

I thought of writing this post later, but Nature has catalyzed me to do it now.

Their article mentions the following important points:

#science #research #AcademicTwitter 1. The editor for Frontiers in Health Services sent out 150 (!) invitations to potential reviewers before he could receive 4 reviews. Only 1 was of sufficient quality. That is = 1/150!

Scientists spend too much time taking “professional selfies”.

A paper from PNAS describes what it takes to be a scientist today. Key points (that I always emphasize myself):

#AcademicTwitter @AcademicChatter #research 1. Scientists have a new mode of activity: “being online”
- Constant distractions and external stimulation inhibit creativity and deep thinking
- “Thinking out of the box” has become rare because the Internet is itself a box.

“Oh, really?” - a typical sarcastic reaction on social media.

However I urge to look at the original study and data more carefully. 👇

#phdchat #AcademicTwitter #research - A disruptive paper is defined here by the likelihood that this paper (and not the references inside it) will be cited by subsequent studies.

- In contrast, a consolidating paper is the one that is less likely to be cited than its predecessors. It consolidates the discovery.

Yes, as a PI, you can publish more papers by pushing your students/postdocs really hard. But NO, those extra papers will not make your life better.

#science #research #AcademicTwitter They will just make everyone unhappier:
- Your team members will feel burned out and depressed
- Journal editors will feel like there’s another manuscript that no one is willing to review

Advice for #PhD students who want to become postdocs and stay in #academia:
- How to choose a lab for a postdoc
- How to prepare for an interview
- What to be careful about

Thread: 🧵

[I was a happy postdoc at Stanford]

#AcademicTwitter #engineering #science Initial steps:

1. Decide on how far you want to move away from your PhD topic. Keep in mind:
- If your #postdoc research is distant, you will need more time to gain expertise and do competitive work

PhD students don’t want to be postdocs. Faculties are leaving academia... Intriguing discussions are published by both Nature and Science.
Key points are:

#science #research #engineering #academia #PhD #AcademicTwitter 1. U.S.-based researchers reported challenges recruiting in all #STEM fields: “This year … we received absolutely zero response from our posting,” one wrote. “The number of applications is 10 times less than 2018-2019,” another wrote.