Ocenite etot tekst:


---------------------------------------------------------------
           (Perspectives in Biol and Med, 34:2 Winter 1991, 213--218)
           Perevod: (C) Evgenij Sorokin (esorokin@glasnet.ru)
---------------------------------------------------------------

     Okazyvaetsya, nemnogie uchenye znakomy  s osnovami preuspevaniya v nauchnoj
deyatel'nosti  --  naprimer, kak poluchat'  granty,  zavoevyvat'  izvestnost',
imet'  spisok pechatnyh rabot,  prevyshayushchij  takovoj  v lyuboj  iz  citiruemyh
statej,  i  t.d.  Nastoyashchee  rukovodstvo  prizvano vospolnit' etot  dosadnyj
probel. Konechno, v sem'e ne bez uroda, i  vsegda  otyshchetsya  kto-to, zhelayushchij
dojti do vsego svoim umom, libo ignoriruyushchij nauchnyj uspeh i priznanie.  Dlya
takovyh   nizheprivedennye   rekomendacii   bespolezny.   Odnako   normal'nym
chestolyubivym  issledovatelyam  eti  pravila obespechat  prochnyj fundament  dlya
uspeshnoj deyatel'nosti.


     V svete teorii Tomasa Kunna pochti vse stressy i  perezhivaniya, svyazannye
s  nauchnymi  issledovaniyami, nesushchestvenny.  Obshcheizvestno,  chto  podavlyayushchee
bol'shinstvo uchenyh  zanyaty  "chistoj naukoj",  t.e.  tolkut vodu v  stupe.  A
poskol'ku   nastoyashchie   "proryvy"  nevozmozhny  bez   reshitel'nogo   smeshcheniya
sushchestvuyushchih  paradigm,  bol'shinstvo  iz  nas  vpolne   mozhet  rasslabit'sya,
osoznavaya, chto uzh nasha-to rabota sovershenno tochno ne okazhet na eti paradigmy
nikakogo vliyaniya. Konechno, est' i takie, kto zhazhdet potryasti osnovy, i  dazhe
pytaetsya  delat'  eto. Popytki vrazumit'  ih  -- bessmyslenny. My zhe  dolzhny
pomnit',  chto  dlya  posleduyushchih  nauchnyh  revolyucij   postoyannoe  proyasnenie
obshcheizvestnyh  istin prosto nezamenimo. Tol'ko predstav'te na minutu, -- chto
by tvorilos', esli by  kazhdyj issledovatel' delal otkrytie,  nisprovergayushchee
vse  zakony, ili zastavlyayushchee nas peresmatrivat' vse  osnovnye ponyatiya nashej
nauchnoj oblasti?...


     Zamet'te,  chto kak  tol'ko Vy  rasslabilis' v  otnoshenie vashej  nauchnoj
deyatel'nosti (p. 1), Vam stalo gorazdo legche dumat' o nauke, kak o  biznese.
A v etom biznese umenie stat' znamenitym  po  vazhnosti  ustupaet lish' umeniyu
rasslabit'sya. K sozhaleniyu,  ochen' mnogie stavyat umenie stat' znamenitym nizhe
umeniya poluchat' granty  ili ezdit' v poezdki (p. 5, sm. nizhe).  Odnako stat'
znamenitym  gorazdo  proshche,  chem  kazhetsya.  Dlya  etogo sushchestvuet  neskol'ko
sposobov. Samyj bystryj i vernyj -- rabotat' vmeste s tem, kto uzhe znamenit.
|to  -- otblesk slavy,  v  kotorom zaroditsya  vasha  sobstvennaya izvestnost'.
Drugoj sposob  --  organizovat'  simpozium  po  kakoj-nibud'  zhivotrepeshchushchej
probleme  i  priglasit'  na  nego  vseh  svetil  v  etoj  oblasti,  vklyuchaya,
razumeetsya, vashego znamenitogo sosluzhivca. Pri etom, samo  soboj, prichislit'
sebya  k ih ryadam. |tot sposob daval prevoshodnye rezul'taty besschetnoe chislo
raz, i mnogie nyne znamenitye uchenye  stali izvestnymi imenno blagodarya emu.
Tretij sposob -- ezhenedel'no  publikovat' tezisy  po  zaranee vybrannoj teme
(p. 3).  Konechno,  eto utomlyaet, odnako sledovanie  nizheizlozhennym principam
oblegchaet etu zadachu  i garantiruet Vam reputaciyu obshchepriznannogo avtoriteta
v dannoj oblasti.


     Sovershenno  yasno,  chto  sovremennyj   uchenyj  ne  v  sostoyanii   chitat'
stremitel'no   rastushchij  potok   publikacij  po  svoej  special'nosti.  Esli
odnovremenno   vspomnit'  o   minimal'noj  znachimosti   bol'shinstva  nauchnyh
issledovanij (p. 1), to stanet ochevidnym, chto popytki chitat' -- ne chto inoe,
kak  pustaya trata  vremeni. Poetomu znajte,  chto  bol'shinstvo Vashih pechatnyh
opusov nuzhno tol'ko  dlya  togo, chtoby Vashe imya zapomnili. Princip, vzyatyj na
vooruzhenie reklamnymi agenstvami, -- beskonechnoe povtorenie imen i nazvanij,
-- nezamenim  i  dlya nauchnogo uspeha. CHem chashche Vashe imya poyavlyaetsya v pechati,
tem bol'shij ves  i izvestnost' Vy priobretaete  (p. 2). Konechno, zdes' nuzhno
vybrat'  "zolotuyu  seredinu".  Vam sleduet  kak mozhno chashche  publikovat'sya  v
gazetah  i   nauchno-populyarnyh   izdaniyah,   odnako  i   nauchnymi  zhurnalami
prenebregat' ne  stoit. Postarajtes'  publikovat' po odnoj stat'e ili tezisu
kazhduyu nedelyu,  prichem v spiskah avtorov Vashe imya dolzhno byt' poslednim. CHem
bol'she u Vas soavtorov, tem luchshe! Odnako lyubomu yasno, chto iz  vseh  avtorov
lish' poslednij  v spiske soobrazhaet, chto  delaet, a krome togo, esli s  Vami
rabotaet stol'ko uchenyh, -- znachit  Vy  uzhe znamenity. Nekotorye  popytayutsya
utverzhdat',  chto  v  kazhdoj publikacii dolzhna byt'  novaya  ideya, odnako  eto
absolyutno  ne sootvetstvuet  dejstvitel'nosti. Na  samom dele,  chem  chashche Vy
budete povtoryat' odno  i tozhe, tem  bolee veroyatno,  chto  Vas zapomnyat.  Kak
tol'ko odni i  te zhe (ili slegka  razlichayushchiesya) dannye opublikuyut neskol'ko
raz, -- oni  nachinayut priobretat' vse bol'shij ves v golovah  Vashih kolleg  i
Vashej sobstvennoj golove. Krome  togo, pri  vsyakom upominanii  v presse Vasha
oblast' nauki kazhetsya vazhnoj i znachimoj, -- pust' do etogo ona byla skuchna i
neinteresna.
     Bezuslovno,  krajne   vazhen   format   publikacii.  Zdes'  preimushchestva
abstraktov ochevidny, hotya i nedooceneny. Vo-pervyh,  opublikovannyj abstrakt
daet vozmozhnost' puteshestvovat'  (p. 5). Vo-vtoryh,  abstrakty pochti nikogda
ne recenziruyut (lyuboj iz nas mozhet pripomnit' ne odnu razgromnuyu recenziyu na
svoyu luchshuyu polnovesnuyu stat'yu). V-tret'ih (i eto glavnoe!), abstrakt -- eto
oficial'nyj  dokument. Na nego mozhno ssylat'sya, esli on  soderzhit vazhnye ili
istinnye dannye (libo i to i drugoe), libo ne ssylat'sya, esli tak sluchilos',
chto dannye oshibochny.
     So  vremenem   mozhno   nauchit'sya  odnovremenno   publikovat'  neskol'ko
neznachitel'no  otlichayushchihsya abstraktov  na  odnu  i  tu  zhe  temu. Nekotorye
nauchnye obshchestva prinimayut k publikacii lish' odin abstrakt s ukazaniem Vas v
kachestve  pervogo avtora. Odnako eto ogranichenie legko obojti. Oglyanites' --
vokrug   stol'ko    potencial'nyh   soavtorov:    studentov,    sosluzhivcev,
administrantivnyh rabotnikov, i dazhe prosto ohrannikov! Mnogie iz nih prosto
umirayut  ot  zhelaniya uvidat' svoyu familiyu,  nabrannuyu tipografskim  shriftom.
Nemnogo  potrudivshis',  Vy  legko  opublikuete  srazu  neskol'ko  abstraktov
odnovremenno -- v odnom Vasha familiya budet pervoj, v ostal'nyh -- poslednej.
Hodit legenda  o tom, kak  na  odnom iz  kongressov nekij  uchenyj predstavil
stol'ko   abstraktov,  chto  ih  rassmotreniyu  prishlos'   posvyashchat'  celyh  2
special'nye sessii.

        4. Publikujte lish' to, chto nel'zya oprovergnut'
     (hotya by pri Vashej zhizni)
     Mnogie nachinayushchie uchenye chreschur vser'ez schitayut, chto publikovat' nuzhno
lish' tshchatel'no produmannye i vyverennye raboty. Kak raz naoborot -- publikuya
rezul'taty bez  malejshej zaboty  ob ih prakticheskoj  znachimosti i znachimosti
voobshche,  Vy sekonomite massu vremeni  i sil! Na samom  dele, nikto ne chitaet
statej  celikom (p. 3),  --  poetomu  ne trat'te Vashe dragocennoe  vremya  na
analiz  poluchennyh  rezul'tatov. Bolee togo! Esli v stat'e ili abstrakte  Vy
sveli  obsuzhdenie  k  perechisleniyu  nablyudaemyh  yavlenij,  ukazali  razlichiya
metodik  ot  metodik  drugih  avtorov  (dlya  togo, chtoby  pri  neobhodimosti
ob®yasnit'  etim raznicu rezel'tatov), --  Vas  nevozmozhno ulichit'  v oshibke,
osobenno esli Vy vozderzhalis' ot obsuzhdeniya znacheniya rezul'tatov!
     Luchshij  sposob izbezhat' nenuzhnyh napryazhenij  --  publikovat'  raboty po
novym   i  usovershenstvovannym   metodam   issledovaniya.   Kak   pravilo,  k
vysokouchenym   diskussiyam  oni  ne   privodyat,   odnako  pozvolyayut  zavyazat'
ozhivlennyj disput  na temu: "A tot li byl rN?". Eshche luchshe -- izobresti novyj
reagent, kotoryj mogut ispol'zovat' v  svoih  issledovaniyah Vashi kollegi,  i
razdat'  ego so  skromnoj  pros'boj  vklyuchat'  Vas  v  soavtory vseh statej,
posvyashchennyh issledovaniyam s  etim reagentom.  Vy  budete  porazheny,  s kakoj
skorost'yu   nachnet   uvelichivat'sya   spisok   Vashih    pechatnyh   rabot   i,
sootvetstvenno,  rasti Vasha  izvestnost'! Esli  zhe Vy  hotite ili  vynuzhdeny
obsuzhdat'  pechatnye   rezul'taty,   --   ogranich'tes'  predpolozheniyami   ili
dogadkami,  kotorye  nel'zya  ni  proverit',  ni  oprovergnut', --  vo vsyakom
sluchae, pri Vashej zhizni.


     Odno iz preimushchestv nauchnoj deyatel'nosti -- vozmozhnost' puteshestvovat'.
Razumeetsya,  chem bolee Vy  znamenity,  tem chashche  Vy puteshestvuete. S  drugoj
storony,  chem   chashche  Vy  poyavlyaetes'  na  lyudyah,  tem  skoree   priobretete
izvestnost'.  Pomnite,  chto  lyubaya  konferenciya  --  eto  kak  minimum  odna
prezentaciya i odin opublikovannyj  abstrakt (p. 3).  Dlya predstavleniya svoej
raboty ispol'zujte samye prostye i krasivye slajdy. Vybros'te so slajdov vsyu
statisticheskuyu informaciyu,  osobenno  esli  na  slajdah  izobrazheny grafiki:
vsyakaya cifir' otvlekaet ot osnovnoj mysli.  V otlichie  ot pechatnyh rabot, vo
vremya  ustnogo  obsuzhdeniya   bez  vsyakogo  stesneniya  obsuzhdajte  poluchennye
rezul'taty, prichem ne ogranichivajtes' real'nymi faktami! Pomnite, chto effekt
prezentacii budet kuda bol'shim, esli Vy sdelaete kak mozhno bol'she global'nyh
zayavlenij i obobshchenij, vovse ne obyazatel'no podkreplennyh  faktami. Esli  zhe
kto-libo popytaetsya osporit'  Vashi utverzhdeniya,  Vy legko  osadite  nagleca,
ukazav, chto emu nuzhno bylo rabotat' pri pravil'nom rN.
     Dlya nauchnogo uspeha uchastie v prezentacii  vazhno, no ne samodostatochno.
Kogda Vas priglashayut na konferenciyu ili simpozium, vsegda vyyasnyajte, kto eto
sdelal, -- dlya togo, chtoby priglasit' etogo cheloveka na konferenciyu, kotoruyu
organizuete Vy.  V konechnom schete Vy obnaruzhite, chto stoit popriglashat' drug
druga  neskol'ko  raz  v  godu,  --  i  mozhno  organizovyvat'  novoe nauchnoe
obshchestvo, sostoyashchee iz samyh znamenityh uchenyh, raz®ezzhayushchih po konferenciyam
neskol'ko raz v godu.


     V eto trudno  poverit', no  sushchestvuyut uchenye (ih osobenno mnogo  sredi
"zelenyh" novichkov),  kotorye prosyat granty  pod eshche ne vypolnennye proekty.
Bol'shinstvo chinovnikov,  prosmatrivayushchih  zayavki  na  granty,  otseivayut teh
buntarej, kotorye nepreryvno predlagayut chto-to novoe.  V  to zhe vremya  ni  u
kogo net somnenij, chto vernee vsego stavit' na loshad', kotoraya uzhe vyigrala.
A potomu  sleduet vnimatel'no otnestis'  k  podache  zayavki na  grant --  ona
dolzhna   operedit'    poyavlenie   Vashej   polnovesnoj   zhurnal'noj    stat'i
(mnogochislennye  abstrakty  tam i  syam  --  ne v  schet). Novobranec ot nauki
vozrazit, chto nevozmozhno delat'  rabotu, ne  poluchiv pod nee snachala den'gi.
Zdes'  vozmozhny neskol'ko  vyhodov. Pervyj -- predlagajte pod grant  rabotu,
kak  mozhno  bol'she  pohozhuyu  na  vypolnennuyu  Vami  ranee  v soavtorstve  so
znamenitost'yu. Esli Vy ne rabotali  so znamenitost'yu,  --  ne  otchaivajtes',
vspomnite, chto lyuboe issledovanie -- eto lish' nebol'shaya variaciya na temu uzhe
sdelannogo drugimi. Takoj podhod k delu lish' uverit prosmatrivayushchego zayavku,
chto Vashi rezul'taty vpolne ulozhatsya v granicy sushchestvuyushchih paradigm. Horoshij
primer temy dlya issledovaniya: "Nahozhdenie optimal'nogo rN dlya proverki novyh
i otrabotki staryh metodov issledovaniya".


     Pomnite o  svoej osnovnoj  celi -- preuspet' v nauke! Hotya v  nebol'shih
dozah prepodavatel'stvo izredka polezno  (studenty  zapominayut Vashe  imya,  i
vposledstvie  nekotorye iz nih  zahotyat rabotat'  na Vas;  krome togo, sredi
studentov mozhno verbovat'  soavtorov dlya mnogochislennyh abstraktov), v celom
zhe  -- eto  sovershenno  pustaya  trata vremeni. Inogda Vashe nachal'stvo (esli,
konechno,  Vy  sami  ne  nachal'nik)  zastavlyaet  zanimat'sya prepodavatel'skim
delom, no tut mnogoe zavisit ot Vas.  Esli ot vedeniya zanyatij otvertet'sya ne
udalos', prepodnosite material tak, chtoby on nikoim obrazom ne byl svyazan  s
interesuyushchimi studentov voprosami. Sredi prepodavatelej  mediciny sejchas eto
stalo obshchim pravilom. Krome  togo, vo vseh podrobnostyah opisyvajte studentam
hod eksperimentov  v  Vashej  laboratorii, akcentiruya  vnimanie na neocenimoj
znachimosti   optimal'nogo   rN.  Obychno  studenty  byvayut   stol'   zavaleny
informaciej, chto na skol'-nibud' intellektual'nye  voprosy stanovyatsya prosto
nesposobnymi. Preimushchestva  takogo sposoba nalico: vskore Vy obnaruzhite, chto
prepodavat' Vas priglashayut  vse men'she i  men'she, a potomu Vy vpolne smozhete
sosredotochit'sya na sostavlenii abstraktov i poseshenii konferencij.


     Slava -- eto prekrasno, no  kuda luchshe, kogda  ona  pokoitsya na prochnom
material'nom  fundamente. Hotya  kar'era uchenogo  nikogda ne chislilas' v ryadu
vysokodohodnyh,  vremena  menyayutsya. Odno iz samyh cennyh kachestv uchenogo  --
vovremya  razglyadet' kommercheskij potencial provodimoj raboty  i vydvinut' ee
na  rynok.  Nekotorye  issledovateli dobivayutsya preuspevaniya,  organizuya pod
komercheskoe  primenenie  rezul'tatov  issledovanij  sobstvennye  kompanii  s
nachal'nym kapitalom v vide gosudarstvennyh grantov i zakazov. Izyashchestvo etoj
shemy v ee maloriskovannosti: esli kommercheskie opyty ne  udalis', Vy prosto
prosite u gosudarstva drugoj grant. Esli zhe Vam udalos' materializovat' svoyu
uchenost' i organizovat' pribyl'nyj biznes, -- sam Bog velit Vam ispol'zovat'
vse  svoi  vozmozhnosti  (akademicheskoe  zvanie,  redaktorstvo v  zhurnalah  i
chlenstvo  v  uchenyh sovetah)  chtoby otslezhivat' poyavlenie poslednih novinok,
poleznyh dlya Vashej kompanii, i nemedlenno voploshchat' ih v zhizn'.


     Sledovanie dannym pravilam uspeha ne garantiruet, odnako mnogochislennye
primery svidetel'stvuyut, chto ono sushchestvenno povyshaet  shansy  na  zavoevanie
izvestnosti,  uspeha  i  material'nyh  blag  (pri  rN=5,6  p  <  0,03, metod
neparnogo hi-kvadrata po Vilkoksonu). I nakonec, eti pravila uderzhat  Vas  v
granicah  "normal'noj"  nauki,  blagodarya  chemu ostavshiesya gody zhizni Vas ne
budut schitat' neudachnikom i eretikom.






                  (Perspectives in Biol and Med, 34:2 Winter 1991, 213-218)

     It  seems that many of our scientists have not received  basic training
on how to succeed in science - for example, obtaining grants, receiving peer
recognition,  having  a bibliography  that  is  longer than  any  particular
publication  listed in  it, etc. In order to  correct  this  deficiency, the
following guidelines are  presented.  Of course, there  will  always be  the
occasional black sheep who decides to embark on an entirely original  course
of work or chooses to forgo the rewards of being recognized  as a successful
scientist, in which case.  these guidelines  do not. apply. But attention to
the  principles set forth below should provide a  solid  framework for  most
aspiring scientists to build on.



     Much of the stress and anxiety that have  traditionally been associated
with  the conduct of  science  are now relieved  by  the  tremendous insight
provided  by  Thomas  Kuhn.  Since  the  vast  majority  of  scientists  are
currently, doing "normal" science, akin  to  treading theoretical water, and
true a advances must await the next shift in paradigms, most of us can relax
as  we realize that our work  is unlikely to have any lasting influence.  Of
-course,  there  may  be  some  who  seek  to  cont ribute  to,  or actually
precipitate,  a  shift  in  paradigms, and  it is  unlikely that they can be
stopped, but the rest of us should  recognize  that the clarification  of an
existing paradigm is necessary for subsequent scientific  revolutions.  Just
imagine  how difficult  science  would  be if  every investigator  made some
fundamental contribution that  involved a shift in  paradigm or forced us to
analyze our basic assumptions about the area in which we work.



     Once you have the appropriate relaxed attitude about the  importance of
your  own work (see 1) it becomes  much easier to  focus on the  business of
being  a scientist. In this regard, being famous ranks second  only to being
relaxed.  Unfortunately, many  scientists have overlooked the  importance of
being famous  in  order to succeedy  especially  in the areas  of  obtaining
grants, and getting. to travel (see 5, below). And becoming famous is really
much less difficult than most realize. There are several options. One of the
quickest and surest is to work with someone who is already famous. This will
guarantee  a  certain  amount  of  secondary  fame that  can  be  used as  a
foundation  for establishing your own fame.  Another method is to organize a
symposium  on a "hot" topic and invite the most famous people  in the field,
including.the  famous person with whom you work,  to  participate. Then list
yourself on the same program. This  technique  has had marvelous results for
countless numbers of now famous scientists. Another  effective option  is to
publish a paper or bstract every  week  in your selected area (see. 3). This
method takes more effort, but with  attention to the following guideline the
work  can be minimized  and  the results guaranteed.to make you a recognized
expert in any particular field.



     It is common knowledge that modern scientists do  not have time to read
the rapidly growing literature in their,field and, with the realization that
most research will have no lasting effect (see 1), it is clear that to do so
would be a waste of time. Therefore, take advantage of the fact that most of
your  peers are going to be influenced  by.your work primarily  through name
recognition.  The  same  principle  that  advertising  agencies use, namely,
repeated exposure, is vital, to success in  science as  well. The more times
your name  is seen in print, the.more  influence you will have and the  more
famous  you will be  (see 2). Of  course the choice of medium  is  critical;
ideally, you should  publish as often as possible in newspapers  and popular
magazines, but scientific journals can have their place as well. You  should
try to average one paper or abstract every week, and your name should appear
last. The  more coauthors you have,  the better, because everyone knows that
the last author is the realy one, who who counts, and it shows that you must
already be famous  to  have so many other scientists working with you.  Some
will argue that each publication should contain new information, but, again,
this view  does not  take  into account the  lessons  learned  from  Madison
Avenue. In fact, the more often you say the same thing, the more likely your
chances of being remembered, Once the  same set of data have  been published
several times,  with no  more than slight variations,  they begin to take on
greater  credibility, both in  the minds of your colleagues and  in your own
mind.  In addition, the  particular area that you  work in,  even  if it had
formerly  been considered  obscure  and uninteresting, takes  on  increasing
importance each time it appears in print.
     Of  course, the format can play a vital role in your  ultimate success.
The many advantages derived from publishing your work, in abstract form, for
example, are often overlooked . First, it provides the opportunity to travel
(see 5). Second, it is rarely  reviewed  (and we all have horror stories  to
tell  about  critical reviews  we  have  received on  even our best papers).
Third,  and most important, it provides a published document that can either
be cited in establishing precedence for  an.observation, if it turns  out to
be correct or important (or both!), or can just as easily be left uncited if
ultimately found to be in error.
     In some cases, particularly once you have gained some experience, it is
possible to  publish  several abstracts  at one  time, each dealing  with  a
slight variation on the same theme. Some scientific  societies permit you to
submit on abstract with yourself listed as first author. ut this restriction
is  easily  overcome. Most scientists,  for example,  are already  aware  of
potential  coauthors  from  the  ranks  of  students  and associates,  often
overlooked are administrators  and members of the  custodial staff,  some of
whom  would  be happy  to  see  their  names in print. With a little  bit of
planning you can  have several abstracts published simultaneously,  one with
your name first and the rest with your name listed last. Legend. has it that
one  scientist was able to fill two entire sessions at a single meeting with
abstracts solely from his laboratory.



     Many young scientits sadly misinterpret this principle to mean that one
should publish  careful, well-thought-out papers. On the contrary, much time
and effort can be saved by publishing results without any attention to their
significance or relevance at all. Odds  are,  no  one  is  going to read the
paper  anyway  (see  3),  so  don't waste  your valuable  time analyzing the
results. More important, as long as you restrict your discussion to what you
saw,  with enough methodological differences from  previous work so that any
discrepancies can be explained if the need  arises, you  will never be found
in  error,  particularly  if  you  refrain  from  discussing  the  potential
significance  of the results. The simplest way to avoid any embarrassment is
to  publish  new and improved  techniques. The publication  of  new  methods
rarely  leads you into  strong theoretical disputes with your colleagues but
still permits  lively  discussions  about  whether the  pH was optimal. Even
better, develop a desirable reagent that  your colleagues can  use  and then
distribute it  to them  with the modest request that you be  included  as an
author on any  paper that  mentions  the reagent. You will be  amazed at how
quickly your bibliography lengthens and your fame correspondingly increases.
If for  some reason you feel compelled  to speculate on your data, in print,
be.sure  to limit your speculation to  ideas that  cannot be  tested in your
lifetime, if at all.



     One of the many benefits of doing science is the opportunity to travel.
Of course, the more famous you are, the more opportunities you will  have to
travel. Conversely, the more times, you are seen in public,  the more famous
you  will  become. In addition, most conferences provide  the opportunity to
publish at least one abstract (see 3). When presenting your work, be sure to
use attractive, slides that are not cluttered with detail. One helpful hint:
leave off any statistical information, especially  for graphical data, since
it  often  detracts  from  the  main  point of the  slide.  Contrary  to the
situation  for your  published work,  feel free  to  speculate  during  your
presentation. In fact, don't be constrained by the data. Remember  that your
effect   will   be   much  greater  if  you  make  sweeping  statements  and
generalizations unrestrained by the facts or by what  ou  have published  in
the abstract. If anyone seriously questions a  statement  you have  made  or
presents contradictory results, you can avoid any embarrassment for yourself
by pointing out that he or she did not use the optimal pH.
     Presentations  are  necessary,  but  not  sufficient,  for  success  in
science. When you have been invited to participate at a meeting, be sure  to
keep track of who invited you so that vou will  be able to  inv ite the same
individuals to present at the next con ference you  organize. Eventually you
will find that  there  are enough of  you to  invite each  other to  several
conferences during the year, and, if you are really successful, you may even
decide to establish your'own society consisting  of only the most successful
scientists  (mainly those who are invited to several conferences during  the
year).



     This would hardly seem to require stating, but there are still a number
of   scientists,   especially  unseasoned  rookies,   who  actually  propose
experiments  that  have  not yet  been conducted.  Most  reviewers of  grant
applications have finally weeded out the ones who continually  propose novel
work,  but there are still some who do riot quite understand that the surest
bet is on a horse that has already won. Naturally, you need  to be  a little
careful in  timing the  publication of  the proposed work so that it doesn't
actually  appear in print before your  grant is reviewed (except, of course,
in multiple abstract form).  The rookie  scientist may encounter the dilemma
of  not having  been  able  to  do  the  experiments before  obtaining grant
support.  The most  common  solution is to propose work similar  to what you
have already done working with someone who is famous. If that option is  not
available, then you may be forced to propose work that is original.  If  so,
be sure that the research is only a  slight variation of  work that  someone
else has  already done.  This  assures the  reviewers that  your  particular
experiments  fall within  the existing paradigm.  A good  example  would  be
finding the optimal pH at which to run a new and improved technique.



     Remember that  your  goal is to succeed in science. Although  a certain
amount of teaching can be beneficial, in that  it gives you some exposure to
students who may decide to work for  you (and provide potential  authors for
your many abstracts), it is terribly time-consuming to make more than  cameo
appearances.  There will be some pressure by other faculty and your chairman
to  contribute  to the  teaching  program,  especially,  before you  receive
tenure, but this pressure can be relieved to some extent by the way in which
you  teach. For  example, always  present your  material  in a fashion  that
obscures any  relevance to matters  that concern  the students.  In  medical
teaching this has  become common practice. Another effective  approach is to
provide details  of the  methods that you use in the laboratory,  especially
emphasizing  the  importance  of  optimal  pH.   Usually  students   are  so
overwhelmed.  by  the volume of information  that they will  have difficulty
asking intelligent questions. The  advantage of  this is obvious. Eventually
you will find less teaching is required of you, and you. will have more time
to spend writing abstracts and going to conferences.



     Fame is nice but is so much  more enjoyable when accompanied by wealth.
The traditional role of scientist  has not always been as lucrative as other
careers. This is changing. One of the very exciting options in science is to
identify potential  commercial  applications  of the work you do and  market
them. Numerous scientists are discovering the monetarv advantages of forming
their own com I panies with initial  research and development funds provided
by  the federal government through grants  and contracts. The beauty of this
system is that there is very little risk. If the commercial application does
not generate  a profit,  you can  always apply for another  federal research
grant to keep going.  On  the other hand,  if  you are able to capitalize on
your scientific  successes and establish a  profitable company, you  can use
your  academic affiliations, and your  positions on  editorial review boards
and study sections, to keep abreast of the hottest developments in the field
to feed  into your company. The competitive advantage this gives  you should
be obvious.



     Adherence to  these  principles will  not  guarantee  success,  but the
testimony of  many famous  scientists supports  the  hypothesis  that  these
guidelines can significantly (p < 0.03,  Wilcoxon unpaired X-test run at  pH
5.6)  increase your chances of achieving  recognition, acquiring wealth, and
ultimately  being known as a successful scientist.  At the very least,  they
should prevent you from falling too far  outside the  boundaries of "normal"
science  where you  could  easily be  branded for life  as a troublemaker or
heretic.


     'Few scientists are  aware of  the illustrious history of the abstract.
The word is a contraction of  the Original "Abe's tract," which was a little
known pamphlet  circulated  by  Lincoln  when first running  for  political.
office. Although the contents of the  tract are not known, its influence can
hardly be underestimated since  Lincoln's remainingpolitical career was said
to derive  entirely from this little tract. Some  say that  several ideas in
the tract were actually plagiarized from an  unpublished work of John Wilkes
Booth, but this allegation has never been substantiated.


Last-modified: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 04:43:01 GMT
Ocenite etot tekst: