Industry Trends

There has been an exponential growth in the number of PhD graduates in China since 1978. In 1978, only 18 students were enrolled for doctoral courses, but since then, the number has grown at an average rate of 24% per year, with the last decade witnessing an exceptional spurt of growth. In 2002, only 14,368 doctorates were awarded in China, but the number increased to 27,677 in 2005 and to 48,987 in 2010. For more details, read this article on the PhD boom in China.Related reading:  China’s performance in global R&D Where does China stand in global academic publishing?  Is China becoming the global leader in scientific research and publishing?

It’s sad that journals are not readily accepting your paper for publication. As is well known, publication and reporting bias has been a persistent problem in science publication. Often, only the very eye-opening negative results—ones that strongly challenge existing beliefs—are published, while the rest are brushed aside. This trend can be seen across disciplines, and there are several reasons behind this.Unlike you, many researchers are not enthusiastic about publishing negative findings because they think such results may reflect poorly on their skill, which in turn would affect their career and the reduce their chances of receiving grants. So they may publish negative results along with some positive results rather than publishing the negative ones exclusively. Moreover, most researchers may prefer to pursue another way of proving their hypothesis right rather than spend time in developing a manuscript that explains why their original hypothesis turned out to be incorrect.Another factor influencing this, as you have realized, is that journals are not as open to publishing negative results. This stems from the inclination to publish results that make headway rather than those that explain how and why something doesn’t work. Journals may also reject such papers because they are not likely to attract...

Securing a tenure-track position is a time-consuming process. Statistics show that in recent times there has been an oversupply of research doctorates in comparison to the number of job openings in academia. Many researchers have the experience that doing everything to make yourself marketable—publishing in high impact-factor journals, presenting papers at conferences and meeting the right people, getting external grants and awards, and having teaching experience at different institutions—may not ease the way to an academic position.  Under the current competitive environment, what becomes most important is to identify what you are truly passionate about and capable of. Gauge your interests, understand your strengths and weaknesses, and then decide whether a long-term career in academia would be suitable for you. How do you really feel about teaching, publishing, collaborating, and fund-raising? The "publish or perish" and "procure funding or perish" pressures are higher in academia than in industry. As tenure-track faculty you will be required to publish high-quality research in respectable journals very frequently. However, publishing may not be that essential in industry, though it would certainly improve your credentials. Identify your strengths and interests. Do you see yourself as a person with people skills and the ability to strategize...

Your question comes at an interesting time, as gender bias among scientists is a topic that is currently being widely discussed globally. Interest in this topic was sparked by a recent study by researchers at Yale University, which was published in PNAS some time ago.In this study, physics, chemistry, and biology faculty members from various research universities in the US were required to evaluate applications of undergraduate students applying for lab manager positions. Of the total set of applications, 50% randomly sampled ones were assigned female names and the rest, male names. The faculty members rated each application on the candidate’s  competence, whether he/she should be hired, what starting salary he/she should be offered, and how much mentoring support the faculty members would be willing to give the candidate. The results showed that even if all the application material remained the same, male candidates received higher scores on competence, were more likely to be hired, and were offered higher starting salaries and more mentoring support than their female counterparts. What’s more interesting is that  both male and female faculty members favored male candidates in their evaluations, even though they subjectively reported that they enjoyed reading about women who excel in various fields...