IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0250662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Postdocs’ advice on pursuing a research career in academia: A qualitative analysis of free-text survey responses

Author

Listed:
  • Suwaiba Afonja
  • Damonie G Salmon
  • Shadelia I Quailey
  • W Marcus Lambert

Abstract

Background: The decision of whether to pursue a tenure-track faculty position has become increasingly difficult for undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral trainees considering a career in research. Trainees express concerns over job availability, financial insecurity, and other perceived challenges associated with pursuing an academic position. Methods: To help further elucidate the benefits, challenges, and strategies for pursuing an academic career, a diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the United States were asked to provide advice on pursuing a research career in academia in response to an open-ended survey question. 994 responses were qualitatively analyzed using both content and thematic analyses. 177 unique codes, 20 categories, and 10 subthemes emerged from the data and were generalized into two thematic areas: Life in Academia and Strategies for Success. Results: On life in academia, postdoc respondents overwhelmingly agree that academia is most rewarding when you are truly passionate about scientific research and discovery. ‘Passion’ emerged as the most frequently cited code, referenced 189 times. Financial insecurity, work-life balance, securing grant funding, academic politics, and a competitive job market emerged as challenges of academic research. The survey respondents note that while passion and hard work are necessary, they are not always sufficient to overcome these challenges. The postdocs encourage trainees to be realistic about career expectations and to prepare broadly for career paths that align with their interests, skills, and values. Strategies recommended for perseverance include periodic self-reflection, mental health support, and carefully selecting mentors. Conclusions: For early-career scientists along the training continuum, this advice deserves critical reflection before committing to an academic research career. For advisors and institutions, this work provides a unique perspective from postdoctoral scholars on elements of the academic training path that can be improved to increase retention, career satisfaction, and preparation for the scientific workforce.

Suggested Citation

  • Suwaiba Afonja & Damonie G Salmon & Shadelia I Quailey & W Marcus Lambert, 2021. "Postdocs’ advice on pursuing a research career in academia: A qualitative analysis of free-text survey responses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0250662
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250662
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250662&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0250662?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brendan Maher & Miquel Sureda Anfres, 2016. "Young scientists under pressure: what the data show," Nature, Nature, vol. 538(7626), pages 444-444, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katchanov, Yurij L. & Markova, Yulia V. & Shmatko, Natalia A., 2023. "Empirical demonstration of the Matthew effect in scientific research careers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shang, Jing & Zeng, Mingbin & Zhang, Gupeng, 2022. "Investigating the mentorship effect on the academic success of young scientists: An empirical study of the 985 project universities of China," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    2. Halizah Mat Rifin & Mahmoud Danaee, 2022. "Association between Burnout, Job Dissatisfaction and Intention to Leave among Medical Researchers in a Research Organisation in Malaysia during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Jin, Ruining & Hoang, Giang & Nguyen, Thi-Phuong & Nguyen, Phuong-Tri & Le, Tam-Tri & La, Viet-Phuong & Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2022. "An analytical framework-based pedagogical method for scholarly community coaching: A proof of concept," OSF Preprints qabhj, Center for Open Science.
    4. Chiara Bruckmann & Endre Sebestyén, 2017. "Ten simple rules to initiate and run a postdoctoral association," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-7, August.
    5. Zane, Ariel C. & Onken, James & Parker, Marie B. & Ghosh, Dolan, 2023. "An evaluation of programs to support new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Striking a balance with funding for established investigators," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    6. S. G. Grace & F. S. S. Wiepking & A. A. J. van Zundert, 2021. "Hot topics in anaesthesia: a bibliometric analysis of five high-impact journals from 2010–2019," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8749-8759, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0250662. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.