Since 2022, I have worked toward improving PhD wellbeing within the Physics department. Note that this role is not that of a Confidential Advisor. Instead, I help resolve small issues that require local knowledge and short lines between PhD candidates and their supervisors. For example, I can encourage a PhD supervisor to finish giving feedback on handed-in thesis chapters or explain boundary conditions to the travel flexibility offered by your grant. I can also provide advice on how to discuss certain work-related topics with your supervisor and on how to structure your career.
People sometimes ask me why anyone would want to do such a job, given that it leads to confrontation with the lesser aspects of academia. As a researcher that has been active in (bio)physics for over a decade, I have seen too many instances where PhDs and Postdocs were negatively affected by their supervisor's behavior, be that well intended or not. On the one hand, this may be the result of simple misunderstandings on how scientific research and science financing work, as well as on what is important for making a career. That is, the reality of academic life compared to the idealized image that some junior researchers may have. Or it could be simply something that is unpleasant, but understandable, such as difficult life circumstances for either the supervisor or PhD. On the other hand, as I found out in my own career, the reasons for bad experiences in research can be substantially more sinister. For example, I have seen employees (i) who were systematically degraded, excluded, or evaluated far below their capacities, because of their gender, descent, or outlook in life; (ii) have their personal wellbeing ignored, when there were clear indicators of illness; (iii) manipulated into publishing / presenting patently false results (because "who cares if it is wrong, as long as you get more citations"); (iv) forced to steal or commit fraud, thereby harming other researcher's careers; (v) asked to choose between leaving an institute or becoming the lead's girlfriend, sadly that really has happened; (vi) and threatened with violence for failing to complete a task; among others.
The reality is that universities are more likely than not to look away and all you can do in such circumstances is to leave. I would strongly recommend any PhD candidate to respect the rules of scientific integrity, even if your supervisor compels you to do otherwise. If issues ever come to light, it is likely that you will loose your degree or job and your supervisor will not. Scientific integrity is not just about being a good researcher, it is also about protecting you from the problems of others.
To offset all the negativity that has become so prevalent in the academic sector, though thankfully it typically centers around only a few individuals, I wanted to give something back in terms of helping young researchers make more out of their research careers. The PhD counselor role allows me to do that at the lower end of the spectrum, while more independent people can help with serious issues, like the ones I have highlighted above.
In general, PhD is considered challenging, but this can also be very rewarding. You will have a unique opportunity to become an expert on one (or several) research topics and will help to move forward scientific understanding. Some people might be put off by the reports on mental-health issues being widespread among PhD candidates, as well as the lesser aspects of academia, which I have covered above. Here, I outline some general pointers to make the most out of your research project and avoid the lesser aspects of research, which can also be of use at the master's and bachelor’s level.
I base the observations below on the (co-)supervision of 10+ PhD candidates. In my experience, also as a counselor, things that go wrong in a project are primarily due to a lack of (i) communication, (ii) structured/focused work, and (iii) perseverance. Perhaps surprisingly, problems in communication typically structurally undermine the latter two, leading to a vicious cycle that is hard to break. You can do yourself a favor as follows:
Write! And write from the beginning of your project. At the end of your PhD, you will need to put together a thesis. A sure way of guaranteeing stress, mental-health problems, and even potential failure is to not write pieces of chapters while you are working on your project, as well as to avoid pushing through peer-reviewed publications when you can. Utrecht University technically only requires you to have 3 scientific chapters that are in principle publishable to obtain a PhD degree. But your overall experience and happiness in defending your work will be greatly improved by having chapters based on peer-reviewed publications. Having written material early on can also help your supervisor to give you feedback on your writing (which should happen if they are doing their job, and now they can do it outside of meetings also), help you sharpen your own thinking (because in explaining things to your peers, you will see missing elements), and help you to define your project (as you will also write about what is in the literature and identify where there are knowledge gaps). The difference between someone who structures their thesis project like this and who postpones writing is night and day, both in terms of tangible output (chapters/papers) and in terms of wellbeing. Having reference material, which shows how much work you have done and how far you have come, that is in one cohesive format, will help stave off self-doubt and feelings of failure.
Take charge, but do not be arrogant/stupid about it. Being independent is a great aspect of doing (PhD) research, but it is also something you may still have to grow into. It is your thesis project, and it is you who should be the one doing the work. But that does not mean your supervisors do not have a say in what you should or should not do, or that you can simply drop projects you think are (potentially) not going anywhere, especially on your own (because it is your PhD after all). It takes time and perseverance to make progress in a new direction. Research is one of those areas of work, where the results matter and the net time investment can be extreme to make small progress; if you are lucky, it may be small to make a large step, but this is not likely. Wrong directions exist and will need to be explored, so that you can exclude them from your thinking. Often, you can write up results on these for your thesis, which are valuable. Try not to get frustrated and see the potential in a negative result, and be honest about how things are going to your supervisor. Try not to cover up failures or brand things as 'trivial' or a 'waste of time'. Establishing a good overview on a project is hard and requires input.
Lastly, a PhD candidate who is in a comfortable position will want to talk to their supervisor, possibly even every week, because they are achieving things, have new things to show, and want to move forward by bouncing ideas off another person. Conversely, in my experience, it is PhD candidates who are struggling that tend to want to increase the time between subsequent meetings, typically leading to a vicious cycle of avoidance and negative thinking. The best way to overcome this issue is to write up your thinking (see above), keep a lab journal (which is not just wise, it is mandatory in most places), prepare for discussions with your supervisor with slides (which prevents wasting valuable time by looking up results and pictures on your computer). But most important is talking to people, reaching out to researchers who are keen to discuss research, and not being too put off by comments about the size and complexity of a problem. It is this aspect that is often most challenging to get into, but it is what makes science work best.
Try to avoid working with people who forbid you from speaking with fellow researchers about your project. This does not make sense, even if the results are profound or transformative. If you find yourself in such a situation, maybe you should reach out to a PhD counselor or confidential advisor.
Institute for Theoretical Physics
Room 7.75
Princetonplein 5
3584 CC Utrecht
The Netherlands
Telephone
+31 (0)30 253 7545
Note
We are always looking for new collaborations and would be keen to discuss possible B.Sc.'s and M.Sc.'s projects. Currently, we do not have an opening for a PhD or Postdoc position.