🎓 The importance of transparency and mentorship in a PhD program cannot be overstated; they often make the difference between a thriving research career and burnout. These red flags are real and well-defined signals of potential issues, from micromanagement and a lack of support to unsafe lab conditions. A PhD is an immense commitment, and, as you’ve emphasized, it’s crucial to invest time in finding an advisor and lab where students are genuinely valued and mentored. Waiting for the right fit, even if it means turning down an offer, is often a much better long-term decision than rushing into a potentially toxic environment. This guide should be required reading for anyone considering a PhD! Thank you Andrew Akbashev for sharing this; it's an essential reminder for students to prioritize their well-being and career sustainability. #BeyondScience
My biggest advice to students: AVOID TOXIC LABS. They can EASILY break your research career. ❗ Your advisor is your biggest asset during PhD. NOT the degree itself. NOT 'being called Dr." NOT the courses. But your ADVISOR. Below is a list of what I consider important when choosing an advisor. ❗ The lab may be toxic if: 1. You were denied a personal meeting with other PhD students during or after the interview. 2. You receive negative feedback from the lab alumni (DO privately contact them before accepting an offer). 3. Students/postdocs are hesitant to speak in private when you ask them about things they wish could be different in the lab. 4. Students are rarely first authors on research papers. It means the priorities do not center on students. 5. The advisor cannot explain how he/she provides successful mentorship (with examples!). 6. The advisor is NOT interested in your vision for your own PhD. This is a big downside. 7. Postdocs and senior PhDs are bossy and authoritative. This is another red flag. It implies the group is hierarchal and hard to work with. 8. Students in the group are not that enthusiastic about their work. Lack of interest means lack of mentorship and leadership from their advisor. 9. The advisor doesn’t trust students and doesn’t believe in them. This means MICROMANAGEMENT is a very likely scenario. 10. The advisor avoids discussing topics related to “personal/professional development” such as attending conferences, doing side projects, getting access to facilities, etc, which are crucial for a successful PhD. 11. The advisor dominates the conversation during interview and doesn’t listen to you. (This means you should expect similar conversations during your entire PhD) 12. The advisor makes sarcastic or inappropriate comments about students, other labs or colleagues, or even you. This is absolutely unacceptable and clearly a red flag. 13. The advisor is the first author on research papers where students did the work. To me, it would be a big red flag. (Remember that if a professor writes the manuscript, it does NOT automatically entitle him/her to be the first author) 14. The lab space looks dangerous / unsafe. 15. The advisor EXPECTS to receive responses during off-hours. 📍 My opinion is: Getting a PhD in toxic labs is often not worth it. Bad PhD experience haunts people for many years. Your career may be jeopardized. Your passion will fade away. Your trauma can persist for decade(s). So, waiting for another PhD offer is often better than accepting it in a toxic lab. Working in a company is better than in a toxic lab. You can leave a company anytime. But leaving PhD, especially abroad, is VERY hard. Please DO share it with other students. Make sure they don’t get into trouble. p.s. Red flags do not mean the lab is necessarily toxic. But the more red flags you see, the more careful you should be. Stay safe. #PhD #students #science #research #education