PhD students preferred supervisors who were supportive and scheduled regular meetings. Credit: xavierarnau/Getty
Bad experiences with supervisors are common among early-career researchers and one of the leading reasons they leave academia, a survey of more than 2,600 researchers has found1.
The study, which was posted on the preprint server bioRxiv on 22 May and has not been peer reviewed, reveals the sizeable effect academic supervisors can have on scientists early in their career.
Researchers at the University of the Basque Country in Leioa, Spain and their collaborators asked PhD, postdoctoral and former researchers more than 40 questions about their experiences — both positive and negative — with supervisors. Respondents came from 65 countries, but around 80% were based in Europe.
The survey participants were asked whether they had experienced any adverse situations with their scientific supervisors, and were given a list of possible examples to choose from. Almost 40% of respondents said that their supervisor was disorganized and poor at communication. At least 30% reported one of the following issues: abrupt attitude changes; lack of support; lack of empathy; and supervisors contacting them outside working hours.
When asked about the extent to which their supervisor’s attitude positively or negatively affected their mental health, roughly 31% said the impact was moderate, and 45% reported it was significant.
Empathetic boss
Co-author Xabier Simón Martínez-Goñi, a plant physiologist at the University of Essex, Colchester, says that as he and his co-authors conducted the survey because they wanted to understand what it takes to be good academic supervisors.
When respondents were asked to select the top characteristics of a supportive supervisor, more than 50% indicated a preference for a supportive supervisor rather than boss-like one; 47% wanted regular meetings and open communication. Respect for personal time and setting realistic goals were other sought-after characteristics.
The results suggest that early-career researchers who have a positive mentorship experience have empathetic supervisors, says Simón Martínez-Goñi. “An empathetic supervisor treats early-career researchers as colleagues, rather than mere production units for results and reports,” he says.
Two-hundred and six (8%) of the respondents said they were former researchers. When asked for the main reasons behind their decision to leave academic research, nearly half cited negative experiences with their supervisors as a factor. Other reasons for leaving included limited stable job opportunities, financial instability and poor work–life balance. Seventy-four respondents said that they left academia mainly because they wanted to pursue other professional goals.
Together, the authors say, these results indicate that poor working conditions, rather than a desire to change career, are likely to underlie a researcher’s decision to leave academia.
The researchers suggest the findings reflect broader problems in academia; specifically, that researchers often progress into supervisory roles on the basis of their success in securing funding and research output, and rarely undergo any formal training in leadership or mentorship.
