Yep, I'm in one. I'm in the midst of trouble-shooting whatever the hell went wrong with my FavoriteAntibody. Final step of BullshitExperiment requires use of FavoriteAntibody. FavoriteAntibody seems to have recently given up the ghost.
In some ways, this is excruciatingly depressing. Finishing BullshitExperiment will allow me to finish the draft of the ManuBeast for submission.
In some ways, it might be a relief. Not finishing BullshitExperiment might mean not putting it in the ManuBeast. I think that this might be a better option since the BullshitExperiment is well, bullshit. Trouble is, GrAdvisor lllluuuurrrrvvvvs this experiment. I hate it. A positive result would be potentially interesting but exceedingly unlikely. A negative result will be utterly inconclusive. Like I said, bullshit. I have explained this to GrAdvisor several times now but it just goes in one ear and out the other. "Hmmm, I think I see what you're saying," he says. "I'll think some more on it." Then the next time I see him, "How are things progressing on BullshitExperiment?" Grrrr.
I'd like to drop BullshitExperiment altogether but I know I won't be able to without a fight. So I am planning one last-ditch attempt to get interpretable results from it, after which (assuming the likely event of uninterpretable results), I will propose to GrAdvisor that we submit the ManuBeast without it. This will leave fewer holes for reviewers to stick their fingers in, but it will also mean that the ManuBeast will be more likely to be rejected without review from TopNotchJournal, which has gained the unfortunate reputation of rejecting papers based on our ClassicalUnsexyTechnique. Then again, with the BullshitExperiment (which is hardly the central finding of the paper), this manuscript has the distinct possibility of turning into Swiss cheese in the hands of reviewers if they choose to focus on the BullshitExperiment rather than the ones that do lead to the central finding, so I'm not sure which scenario presents the least likely for rejection possibility.
In short, learning when to keep trying and when to throw in the towel on a tricky experiment is a skill I've not yet mastered. Learning how to convince GrAdvisor that we should/should not throw in the towel is something I'm still working on too.
I could include results from PotentiallyInterestingObservation (which I had hoped to turn into a "short report"), but it will take some time to chase down the results from PIO, delaying ManuBeast submission even further if we combine them with the ManuBeast. And I'd really like those results to stand alone.
Blech. I've blogged about this before. Several times in fact. At least it feels as if I have. Sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record. All that crap has been running circles in my head for the last several nights. I have spent the hours between 1 and 4am for the past three nights thinking about this crap and not making any progress towards conclusion. The sleep deficit has not been good for my demeanor.
I need to shake this funk before Friday so I can be excited for my next post-doc interview. For my last few interviews, it seemed that ManuBeast submission was just around the corner, so it was pretty easy to be enthusiastic about my own work and the possibility of starting on something new. Right now, I don't feel particularly interested in either. Nor are my auto-pep-talks effective. Come on AA. Time to get back on the pony and ride. Science isn't always this crappy. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. Ugh.
About Me
- Ambivalent Academic
- Ambivalence - a state of having emotions of both positive and negative valence or of having thoughts or actions in contradiction with each other, when they are related to the same object, idea or person (for example, feeling both love and hatred for someone or something [i.e., grad school, or academia]).
What people are saying about Ambivalent Academic:
Recent Comments
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
Recurrent Characters
- Better Half - My sweet and charming significant other, also a very talented scientist.
- DangerDog - My contribution to our fur family. He is adorable and hyper-excitable and would probably be easier to live with if Ritalin were approved for dogs.
- GrAdvisor - My well-meaning PI/graduate advisor. We have our differences, but I can chalk most of them up to disparate communication styles, which makes it easier to live with the fall-out of our communication-fails.
- New PI - So far an awesome mentor. Needs a moniker. Will take suggestions.
- Thing 1 & Thing 2 - BH's cats. Actually, I'm not sure if they really are cats or some alien life forms bent on world domination.
Dispatches (10 Most Recent)
...and the science gets done...and we get cake!!
This work is protected!
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. If you want to use material from this site, you must attribute it or you can email to ask permission. I will most likely say yes, but no guarantees.
Sitemeter
12 comments:
You can do it!
Yeah, I know. I get the same way at times. I do not have any advice for you. I know you'll find your way out. You've been in crappy places with science before and you've made it out. So, you will this time. Try to get some sleep at night (easier said than done, but much easier with some benadryl-- better living through chemistry) and it might make it seem better.
(My word verification is oxygone and for some reason that amuses me a lot.)
(Why, yes, I'm procrastinating working on a project.)
Not much advice, because you know what you need to do. It'll get better and you'll be fine. Make a call on that last experiment and live with it one way or another. If you chose to ditch it, send it to the journal you think will accept it rather than screwing around with the one that won't. If you leave the experiment in, batten down the hatches on your manuscript and send it into battle is well prepared as you can. Good luck.
Amanda - you're the second person today that's suggested Benadryl. If I have the same trouble tonight I will give it a try. I am also amused by "oxygone". I don't know why either.
PLS - Thanks man. You're right - at some point we just need to make the decision and deal with the consequences. GrAdvisor is being really wishy-washy about it, which makes it difficult - he's not going to be happy with either decision. Frankly, neither am I but I can get over it. I just don't want to hear all the what-ifs from him once it's done. Sitting around not making a decision is also a decision and it moves nothing forward, so both the other alternatives are an improvement.
Dear Ambivalent Academic, this is a perfect description of a funk and how easy it is to fall into one in a science lab. I am currently involved with a documentary film entitled Naturally Obsessed: The Making of a Scientist about a group of graduate students in a Columbia University Biochemistry lab that might interest you and resonate with what you describe here. Many PhD students have said that the film perfectly captures laboratory blues, the frustrations and continuous failure they experience in their research, as well as the perseverance it all takes. Certain groups of high school students for whom the film was screened went as far as to say that it turned them off to the idea of pursuing science all together because lab work seemed so hard, which had us consider going as far as giving the film an R rating! For more information about the film and scientists’ reactions to it, go to www.naturallyobsessed.com
Speaking of getting "on the pony", if science doesn't work out, you can always do other things with your life. But if you feel science is in your soul, I encourage you to press on. Also keep in mind that you don't need to wed yourself to an academic PI career track, something that I think we could be doing a better job at communicating to all you scientists in training.
Steve - I chuckled at your comment about whether "science is in my soul". I'm sorry - I couldn't help it. But it sounds so much like inquiring as to whether I have "accepted Jesus into my heart". Tee hee. :)
I really do appreciate the intention behind your comment. Your concern for the happiness and well-being of scientists in training is admirable and it makes me warm and fuzzy.
That being said, I suspect that you are a relatively new reader here (yes?). Let me take this opportunity to assure you that I am not actually right-this-second making a decision as to the future of my career in science (academic or otherwise). Sometimes we all have shitty days (or weeks? months?) and writing negative blog posts about my cranky attitude is a method for putting those thoughts somewhere else rather than letting them continue to rattle around in my head and wreak general havoc and disarray. I know better than to make big decisions when I'm feeling poorly (or euphoric for that matter).
Also, you know, it's OK (even productive) to get bitchy about this stuff. I do get a little tired sometimes of the attitude that I should just be all peppy and smiley all the time (even when things suck). So, to spare my labmates from science-fail wrath (which we all experience), I put it here where it is less likely to catch them in the crossfire. I bitch (a lot!) on this blog. This is not to be read that I hate my career in science as much at it might sometimes appear here. It's just that if I bitch here, then it's out and less likely to fester and eventually bite me in the ass when I'm actually doing the science. I also think it's valuable for a lot of other people to read that other scientists go through this kind of self-doubt and mild unhappiness (I know it was for me) - if other people have times that feel like this too, then it's not *you* that's the problem. So I am honest about the negative crap here for solidarity and for my sanity, and because if I am so honest in real life, I often get told to "buck up, kid!" which is not really helpful in processing the negative aspects of the career path I've chosen (and ultimately love).
Allow me to point you to these posts so as to provide you with a more complete perspective on whether or not I have science in my soul. Thanks again for your concern - I hope you'll keep reading here. Thanks for the links.
PS - it's funny that you linked to the scientist-nee-jockey article. I used to be an equestrienne extraordinaire. Gave it up for grad school. That's no easy life either (especially for someone with a mountain of student loans). My best friend from college is a professional jockey. She basically lives out of her car. Not my choice but she loves it. Used to be because that's how she could afford to do it. Now it's because she's in demand at several meets and tracks and it's impractical to put down roots. She faces a lot of uncertainty in her career too. Not very long ago a horse flipped over on her and broke her hip. She's been in rehab for months and is just now getting back on the (literal and figurative) ponies. It sounds really glamorous in the NYT article, but at the end of the day, we all choose to make some sacrifices for our careers, and we deal with the bad days as they come.
Yep. Writing can be a great psychotherapist, you just happen to be doing it on stage. So my comments are also (primarily?) targeting your readers that may be similarly wallowing in science-angst and may need some cheering from those who have gone before (though I'm not quite done 'going' yet, perhaps).
You're right about the cultural push-back on complainers. Sometimes we just need a venue to get the whines out of our systems without necessarily looking for advice about it. Totally agree. I guess the backlash against 'negative crap' is that it gets annoying to hear. A little story to illustrate:
Once at SFO, after about 20+ hrs of traveling, I was waiting in the customs line with lots of other tired people, and I noticed that the same scene would repeat as each person approached the guy checking passports. He'd ask how they are doing -- they would reply "fine", obviously lying. So I decided to add a touch of honesty when it was my turn, saying, "Oh, kind of tired, traveling all day." The official handed me my passport back saying, "Cowboy up, son. Don't complain." So there you go (and another equestrian reference to boot ;).
You're right about the cultural push-back on complainers. Sometimes we just need a venue to get the whines out of our systems without necessarily looking for advice about it. Totally agree. I guess the backlash against 'negative crap' is that it gets annoying to hear.
Yes, writing is cathartic. And I agree that the push-back is meant to shut people up, though I think it is sometimes less innocuous than you imply. I agree that being around a Debbie Downer all the time is well, a bit of a downer (which is why I try to restrict my whining and complaining to this blog and keep it out of meatspace if I'm feeling particularly negative). OTOH, sometimes telling people to "cowboy up" when they are legitimately upset (or even just experiencing one of the lows in the rollercoaster) about something is a tactic used to dismiss and marginalize their very real and important complaints. It is also exceedingly patronizing (also unhelpful and marginalizing), which is why I found Michael's self-adulating comment on a previous post to be so obnoxious.
In response to the latter (patronizing) sorts I say: Here on the blog, it's my party and I'll whine, bitch, or wallow if I want to. To do otherwise would be unhelpful to myself (which is my primary reason for writing) and disingenuous (which is unhelpful to readers who are having similar experiences). As the infamous PhysioProf has declared, "academic science is not a motherfucking Carebears tea party"(TM). He's right, and I won't represent here as if it is. That doesn't mean I don't still want to play. I've never really been into tea parties anyway. My beverages of choice are whisky, beer, and coffee.
As for being on stage, if people find the negative posts annoying, they don't have to read them. They don't have to read the positive ones either (and there are several dated about two weeks ago on this blog and many more in the archives).
Some people do a pretty good job of offering support (not that I'm writing this blog to solicit it, though I certainly do appreciate it when it comes my way) without being patronizing. Prof-like Substance's comment up-thread is a good example.
Side note to our "why do I blog" tangent: KQED radio here in SF had an interview today (July 30) with Scott Rosenberg talking about his new book about blogging. He didn't mention the cathartic-venting-for-sanity/solidarity blogging motive in the part of the interview I caught, but one caller was eager to mention the cat blogosphere. So I leave it to you to contemplate this as you grapple with your experiments: Is it healthy to blog as a feline persona? Where do all these people find the time to channel their pets?
Are you sure its people channeling their pets, and not the cats themselves?
I wouldn't put it past them. We have a pair of frighteningly intelligent and devious cats in our household and we've taken to checking our bank and credit card statements for weird purchases...like 50# bags of catnip or large invoices from the Acme company. None yet, but it's only a matter of time really.
You might consider letting your cats contribute some posts of their own. It could add a new angle to your catharsis. And why stop there? They could do podcats and even videos, following in the paw prints of such greats has Henri.
Post a Comment