Bullying in scientific research
Maxine Clarke
Monday, 06 October 2008 07:34 UTC
Given the discussions we had before the Science Blogging 2008 conference about manners in the blogosphere, and disappointed that in a crammed programme we did not have time to discuss this issue, I thought Nature Network bloggers might be interested in blogging about or otherwise discussing this month’s EMBO Reports editorial, which I have posted about today at Nautilus. Here is my post:
Frank Gannon, in his October editorial for EMBO Reports (9, 937; 2008) identifies bullying as a pervasive problem in academic research, which scientists seem to accept “without further comment or disapproval as though it were a normal part of life.” From bullying of junior scientists (PhD students) or of peers, to defending accusations of dishonesty, Gannon provides a host of situations in which he believes this behaviour is rampant. He writes: “the reaction of some scientists when their grant application or submission is rejected can be downright disgraceful. If they know that they are dealing with more junior people, they will emphasize that they are the expert and that the decision should not rest with ‘some ignorant editor’ who is not a ‘real scientist’ anyway. They will ridicule the referees who critically analysed their work; they will persist, bully and coerce until they get beyond the initial rejection.”…
…“I might be exaggerating the extent and seriousness of bullying in academic science, but its existence is undeniable. Science certainly needs a degree of competition and is genuinely driven by the incentive to be the first to discover; we are a competitive species after all. Nonetheless, we should consider the damage we inflict on one another and on research itself if we tolerate bullying. Academic science needs all types of characters; not only the dominant and aggressive ones, but also the pensive and quiet workers. More importantly, scientific research flourishes best in an environment characterized by mutual respect, tolerance and support, and where bullying has no place.”
-
Replies
Jump to resultsResults
-
Maybe open souce publishing would be a way to get rid of this. But the more you “democratize” science to remove the bullying, the more you bury the peer-review system that keeps quality high.
I want also to address this comment by Michael. I don’t agree with the implications, based on my experience. I have seen plenty of bullying going on by proponents of open-source science, often targeted at people or organisations that are perceived not to share their views. I also find the peer-review process to be a highly civilized one which, properly moderated by editors, keeps judgements on a rational, issue-based level. I think it is when you remove this process, you begin to see casual, nasty comments about the work that is described. (Eg the many emails and letters I have received over the years about articles Nature has published, by people who, er, “lack perspective”).
So I don’t think that Michael your suggestion would do anything about bullying per se. I cannot think of a system-based “solution” but can only conclude that it comes down to how individuals behave. Many organisations are full of people who reflect the character and style of the Chief Exec, as the subordinates adopt his (usually) or her culture. Leading by example is a powerful motivation to many people.
-
I agree with what Maxine has just said. Peer review takes a lot of the sting out of things, especially when authors and peer reviewers know that the editor is there to act as a kind of ‘chairman’ overseeing the progress of a paper and ensuring that people behave well on all sides.
-
Maxine and Henry: I defer to you guys because of your expertise in the publishing world. I do agree that it is up to individuals to “set an example” and that goes back to my original point. It is woven into the scientific culture to be this way.
I particularly notice it in certain labs, and unfortunately they tend to be the most succsessful.
This idea of scientific culture and how it is passed down from gerneation to generation is a post in itself and you guys know that the crux of my entire blog is devoted to addressing it-because it is so complex and encompassing, but I digress…
The question is: if some of the biggest and best labs teach bullying (even if it is subversive)-did they become that way (successful) because of bullying, or vice versa?
What do I mean? Read this post.
-
This is a very interesting and important discussion – has given me much to ponder, though I don’t have the time now to put it all down (stress of the job, you know).
Michael, that post about the MM Poo lab was pretty shocking – though you can see that his rather draconian approach pays off in terms of high-impact publications (put ‘Poo_MM[lastau]’ into Pubmed). Whether the price paid by the lab members is deemed worth it in the long run is a big question. If you’re making people’s lives miserable, then my answer would be no.
That said, as Gannon’s editorial points out, at all levels of science, we are under continuous pressure to perform. Dealing with that pressure in a supportive way has to be the way forward but I’m still figuring out how best to do that (and haven’t always been successfull…)
-
Stephen, you bring up an important point-and you are right about Poo, his pretty famous in my field.
Maybe one apporach would have the university system address this sort of thing in a formal way (i.e. a short seminar given to faculty and students on how to deal with pressure to perform without resorting to draconian measures or bullying on publications or in the lab).
Granted, I understand you have to lay down the law, much like a parent when your lab is seriously underperforming. Teaching management coping strategies to those in power might slow the progression of the passing down from generation to generation of the bullying practices…and may keep more good people (who may not be blessed with a thick skin but otherwise are promising scientists) in research.
-
I am still considering myself a junior player in this, so my view might be completely wrong here, but: one aspect that distinguishes the performing pressures in scientific world from those in, for instance, financial companies, is that those doing the management in science very rarely or ever have studied management. Not only that, but it seems to me that since we are all so damn intelligent, we perhaps don’t feel the need to learn what others have found out about leading people. In fact, since our workers are also very intelligent (otherwise we would not have hired them), they should understand to perform their best regardless of what management does. It’s for their own best, after all, isn’t it?
I’m not really saying a position at the helm of the lab should require a MBA and leading a lab takes too much time to have the luxury of reading self-help books written for company CEO:s, but some amount of reflection on this issue (that even the most enthusiastic scientists and lab heads are people who are not always right) might help.
-
In my experience most lab heads are bad managers.
Good people management is a skill—some people have it, others learn it; most people don’t even realize it.
I’m not talking about MBAs, by the way. I’m talking people skills.
-
I can’t heap enough praise on HHMI’s initiative, entitled Making the Right Moves: A Practical Guide to Scientific Management for Postdocs and New Faculty . It’s a free downloadable book based on test sessions they performed with former fellows just starting their labs. (I was in the first test group in 2002.) It is really valuable and worth taking time to read or review.
In essence, there are ways of getting what you want with a less heavy-handed way of directing a group than Dr. Poo showed in the link provided earlier. I used to be at UCB and that was indeed the culture there, so it was an honest and even appropriate letter in itself. I just wonder how many people took him up on the offer to find a more appropriate lab for their own ambitions (and how that bore out in the end), and how many others were browbeaten into submission and going against their own inclinations?
-
Thanks for the link Heather – I discovered that HHMI will also send you a free copy of the book if you ask them (you just need to register on their site).
Results
-
