Warning signs in the interview that your potential research advisor is … not nice

So, you’re a potential student, research assistant, postdoc etc. interviewing for a place in Professor Coolpapers lab. In this interview you’re hoping to impress the Professor, but you’re also trying to suss out if they may have some tendencies that will later cause you distress that negatively impacts your life. But how on earth do you actually go about finding this out?

I’ve worked long enough in research spaces and spoken to enough people to say with relative certainty: determining if a particular professor would be toxic for you is a hard, and very individual process.

That’s not to say that you can’t detect a toxic boss in the interview, just that the interview should not be the only way you try to suss out any toxiness. And, there’s definitely some approaches to the interview that will really help you but the best way to tackle the interview will be tailored to you, and your values.

Despite this complexity, there are definitely some warning signs that a particular Professor/lab may be a tad toxic I’ve repeatedly noticed. So in the interest of catharism, and helping out future advisors, I’m going to describe some of these signs below. For some more information, check out the information here.

1. “If you work with me/on this project, you’ll get a paper - guaranteed!”

Papers are the currency of promotion and recognition in science, and so the promise of one (or many) is hard to turn down. I’ve known many a professor to say during an interview that the project you’re interested in pursuing with them will turn into a paper, and pretty soon (~1 year). They may also specify the journal/s they’d expect this future paper to be published in - the more glam, bam, thank you ma’am the better.

While many of my friends have been promised a paper in an interview, I know only a couple who actually achieved this. Every one of these friends got a fun side dish of trauma - whether they got their paper or not. Nobody got the promised paper by the original promised deadline.

In research, you’re typically trying to do something hard, and new. Things will probably go wrong and change along the way to a published manuscript. Promising a specific paper, on a specific timeline, while a project is just an idea is often … fantasy. Sometimes this fantasy is just delayed. Other times making this deadline just means being pressured to publish an article you do not believe in.

Now of course this is all anecdotal evidence, and I’m sure there’s professors who buck this trend. And this advice will not apply if the professor is referring to a project nearer to completion or a smaller commitment. But it’s worth wondering if you hear something that sounds too good to be true in the interview, it probably is.

2. “Before I’ll take you on as a student/postdoc/research assistant, I need you to prove yourself with this task …”

Most professors are pressed for time. Money can also be tight. Promotions, and/or getting tenure can be really tough. It’s not hard to understand why Professors might try to focus their time supervising people who have the skills, aptitude, and attitude to do their work.

No, the red flag with this approach is not their selectiveness. It’s the belief often hidden behind it: you are a lowly, unknown student/posdoc/research assistant, I’m the superior Professor Coolpapers, you need to prove you’re worthy of becoming my underling.

Academics aren’t known for being the most socially adept people in the world, so it can be hard to tell sometimes whether they’re trying to assess whether you’re a good fit for the lab or trying to get you to prove yourself. But if you ever feel like you’re being asked to prove your lowly self worthy, trust but verify that weird feeling. (By that I mean, make a note of it, and consider how you might determine what’s triggering that feeling).

3. “I care about work-life balance … I/my students just don’t seem to have it!”

It’s one thing to know the famous Maya Angelou quote, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them”, it’s quite another to take it to heart. Because, let’s be honest, you really want Professor Coolpapers to be the gregarious, empathetic person they claim to be.

It’s important to mindful therefore, that Professor Coolpapers may profess till they’re black and blue: they care about equity, mental health, flexible working hours, work-life balance, sleep, supporting students pursue non-academic pathways, fair pay and unions, and everything else good in life … but their actions might not say the same thing.

Do they ask more of their students than could possibly be achieved in normal working hours? When students disclose disabilities do they bring up stories of other disabled scientists who were sooooo smart, but never able to hack it because of their disability? Do they reserve the highest praise for students who can always be seen in the lab, and on slack?

It can be really hard to see if a PI’s actions match their words from the interview alone. Your best approach to trying to assess this is to ask for example: how do you support work-life balance? If you can, ask prior and current underlings of the Professor for examples of how the Professor achieved this good thing (e.g. supported them to have work life balance).

In conclusion

While I may come across as jaded in parts of this post, I do want to reassure you that there are kind supervisors in academia. These people are worth their weight in gold. The Professors at the other side of the spectrum … well, no glam-journal, first author, discipline creating paper is not worth the pain they inflict. Or maybe it is, you’re free to choose your own path. I wrote this article just to help make sure you actually chose this bed of nails.

On the other hand, If you’re here because you find yourself on a bed of nails without making any conscious choice to do so, I’m sorry. Maybe there were red flags you could’ve spotted in the interview, maybe there were not. Maybe you spotted the red flags, but chose not to believe them. Maybe you believed the red flags, but thought you could overcome them. Regardless of how the interview went, I want you to know it’s not your fault. It’s the culture and institutions of academia that have failed you, and for that that I can only apologize. Take care, seek advice, protect yourself (and if you can find others to protect you), and get out when/if you can. That paper just ain’t worth it.