Among the many researchers I know, many people have adopted either a purely cynical attitude toward the scientific establishment or struggle with an intensive love-hate relationship with science (in academia and industry). Several painful dilemmas cannot be solved, and you must learn to handle them.
One of the unspoken rules in research is that a successful career in science is only possible with one or more papers with an impact factor above 10 or higher. This belief creates a lot of peer pressure among young scientists and might even be one of the causes of increasing numbers of scientific fraud cases. However, is it true?
Writing a research paper or a review can be a pleasure or a pain. If you manage your energy and time well, you can dramatically speed up your writing. What are the best tips and easy steps to write a research paper faster and more efficiently?
To become an author on a scientific publication, you need to contribute substantially – but what does that mean? Are there clear criteria, or can this be debated? What about collaborators who only provide data or samples or medical writers who improve the English of the paper? What about ChatGPT and other text generators?
It is often tempting for young scientists to aim for co-authorships on papers published in journals with a high impact factor. However, is it a clever career move?
Attending a scientific meeting can be very inspiring. It may broaden your network and help you to make yourself and your research visible to a broad audience. Nevertheless, it is also often time-consuming and expensive. How do you choose the right meetings to attend?
The world desperately needs experts. We live in a complex world, and knowledge is dramatically expanding. Nobody can comprehend anymore all the data which are produced on a daily basis.
For any scientist pursuing a career in academia, bibliographic metrics such as impact factors or citations are essential for measuring the impact and relevance of their research. But which bibliographic metrics are relevant, and which are misleading?
When young scientists start thinking about leading a research group, they feel overwhelmed by the number of transferable skills they have to learn for a career in science. It is crucial to understand which research leadership skills are essential and where to begin.
What are the essential strengths and weaknesses of leaders in science? Strong scientific leadership is vital in driving scientific progress and innovation. The scientific community needs leaders who inspire others, make ethical decisions, and effectively communicate their findings to experts and the public.