The Next Generation Book

Imagine applying that technology to neuroanatomy textbooks
(or neuroimaging software manuals!)

Academic Picking

Students are picked by universities.
Faculty members are picked by departments.
Postdoctoral fellows are picked by principal investigators.
Principal investigators are picked by grant committees.
Papers are picked by journals.

All that picking presupposes scarcity.

What happens when:
Universities aren't the only way get a education.
The grant system isn't the only way to conduct groundbreaking research.
Killing trees isn't the only to communicate science.

This post was inspired by Seth Godin's post.

3 Questions (and no answers)

It is amazing (almost overwhelming) the amount of information that comes across my eyeballs over the course of a day conducting research. There is almost always one more article to read or one more set of analysis to do.

I ask the following questions every time something demands my finite research resources:

What is the theoretical underpinnings?

What is the empirical track record?

What is the practical implementation?

It is still important to ask these questions, even if there aren't always clear answers.

These questions are fundamental to the doing of quality research (in contrast to talking about the doing of quality research). However, they are not limited to just that endeavor. I'm starting to ask them of anything that demands my finite time and attention.

Book Review: Do The Work by Steven Pressfield

Steven Pressfield's newest book escaped today (I think that books, like scientific manuscripts, aren't published, they escape). Do The Work is an in-the-trenches manual for guiding anyone from start to finish on any project that is important in his or her life. The book is targeted at anyone that does work. If you take David Allen's definition of work, anything you want to get done that's not done yet, then the book is applicable to everyone. In addition to being a pragmatic guidebook, Do The Work is a easy book to read. The text leaps off the page. It is less than 100 pages, as long as it needs to be but no longer. For someone that reads a lot, both aspects are appreciated.

The section most appropriate for scientific researchers is "A research diet" (page 19). Steven writes, "You're allowed to read three books on your subject. No more." My translation for researchers - " You're allowed to read three articles on your subject. No more."

It initially sounds counterintuitive. For someone who loves research, reading less seems fundamentally wrong. The questions that every researcher must ask is "Am I someone who reads about research or someone that actually does research?"

I'm guilty of procrastination via attempting to know everything. You will never find (let alone read) every journal article, book, or blog post that is relevant to your current project. Find the critical few, then go Do The Work. You can deal with "must read" stuff later.

At some point the Resistance will ask, "Are you missing something?" You must answer, "I could be BUT I can catch it later. If not, my collaborators will catch it. If not them, the reviewers will catch it. If no one does, it is not that important." Like in Fight Club, "No fear. No distractions. The ability to let that which does not matter truly slide."

I'm not suggesting that you do a low quality literature review, but I've witnessed every researcher I know procrastinate by overfixating on the literature review. Do no more than the minimum. Your work is more than reading other people's work.

Simply:
Go do something. Anything important to you.
If the Resistance attacks you (it will),then go read "Do The Work."