Cross Country Collaboration

Yes, those wires are electrified...

This past Saturday, I completed the 11 mile/22 obstacle course of the Chicago Tough Mudder.

We  survived!

The very next day, I left the country for Lübeck, Germany.

Situated along the Baltic Sea, Lübeck was once a powerhouse of the Hanseatic League. 

My head is still spinning from the quick turn around! It's surreal to be sitting at a new desk at the Universität zu Lübeck, and yet be working on a project that I've had on my to-do list for months. Sometime earlier this year, my advisor broached the topic of collaborating with Dr. Heldmann & Dr. Münte on a sleep fMRI project. Of course, I immediately volunteered myself and started working on the study design, along with another graduate student from my lab. However, I'm the first of the two of us to make it to Lübeck. My lab mate wont join me in Germany for another 2 weeks, by which time I hope to have finished piloting and be ready to move into data collection.

Most of my time so far has been dedicated to finding the appropriate stimuli for German participants. We piloted the behavioral aspects of the study in Chicago but it seems famous locations to us aren't nearly as well known here. That being said, most of the preparation I did at Northwestern has ended up being very helpful.

My new ride for the next month, she's old but strong!

Our next step will be to set up everything in the fMRI scanner and make sure we have our timing down. While piloting a few different sequences, I'll finally get to be the participant in the scanner! After all these years (5 years!) of being involved with imaging research, I'll finally get to take a peek at my brain! I can't tell you how exciting that is to me! And after we sort out how we will be collecting the brain images, we'll get right to the piloting phase!

But that's looking pretty far ahead. I haven't even been in Lübeck for a full week yet. So far, I've managed to figure out the grocery store and purchased an old bicycle so I can bike to work rather than taking the bus. So for my immediate future, my current plan is to finally explore the city this weekend and enjoy the fact that I'm living abroad!

How to talk science without sounding like a pompous jerk

The class I am taking this summer is rather unique, though it certainly shouldn't be. I'm trying to develop lifelong skills necessary (in my opinion) for success in academia, but they are skills woefuly ignored. Specifically, I'm trying to learn to be a better communicator with those outside my field of research.

Video interviewing at Medill

As students in classes taught by famous, yet boring professors can attest- being a great researcher does not mean you are a great communicator. It doesn't even mean you are a good one.  Northwestern University offers a wonderful program to help turn this pattern around, called 'Ready, Set, Go!' The aim of this program is to help scientists and researchers across all disciplines to disseminate their work to the broader world. It's a surprisingly daunting task.

For one thing, content really does matter. On my first day with the other students, I realized that my research is at somewhat of an advantage. I study human systems (memory and sleep) so they are easier to understand intuitively. My classmates studying nanoparticles or non-newtonian fluids have a lot more jargon to deal with the complex systems they study. Learning to cut back the three-plus syllable words is only the first step. We have also learned how to use analogies, craft stories, and pull approachable aspects of our research to the forefront. All of these pieces must fit together to create a coherent story.

Beyond storytelling, there are also other aspects to consider. For instance, this week we spent our class time in the Medill television studio to record interviews on our research. It quickly became apparent that outside of knowing the research, we had to know how to turn a question towards a topic we want to discuss and and leave hooks for other points you want to make, so the interviewer can pick them up.

And of course, we must remember the physical aspects of a tv interview. To look like a credible source, you need to dress the part. Wearing bold colors (but no patterns), sitting at the edge of the chair to avoid slumping, and wearing a suit jacket are all tricks that you only realize after watching yourself on the screen. Although I still feel there are many things I'd like to tweak on my interview, I think my last take was a solid of example of how to put some of the skills I've learned into action.

Of course, the class isn't quite over yet. I will be making a final video where I will explain my research in full, and hopefully get to play with some neat video editing tools. I will certainly be posting that video, along with a recap, when the summer ends.

But for now, I'm actually going on holiday to Europe. I'll try to post updates of my trip here, though don't expect too much science- I'll mostly be enjoying local culture and food!

Don't take notes on your laptop

Hello 2015! I can't believe the year passed so quickly and it's already a new year! I had a wonderful winter vacation in the sunny state of Texas, but now it's back to the grad school grind. This quarter is particularly looking to be extremely busy. I'll be taking classes, running my own study, and TAing for the first time. That's a lot to accomplish in just a few months. Luckily the winter weather keeps me inside, so I suppose I'll be more productive.

When it's cold out, why not drive to Wisconsin for some cheese?

As for the main meat of this post, I learned something rather unsurprising, yet interesting, in the class I'm TAing. (TA= Teacher's Assistant) I'm TAing developmental psychology which is an upper divsion psychology course. Before we got into the meat of the class, the professor presented some research she conducted on previous classes. She and several other professors conducted an observational study whereby they looked at technology usage of their students and grades earned in that class. Below are the results.

As you can see, those who didn't use a laptop scored the highest in the course on average. Second highest were those who reported staying on task while using their laptops to take notes in class, although they still earned a significantly lower grade than those with no technology. Students who reported being off-task on the laptop (ie, internet browsing, email, etc) scored just as poorly as those who claimed to be multi-tasking. This result might surprise some, but previous research has shown that humans are incredibly bad at multi-tasking. Having to flit from one thing to another makes us bad at all of them overall. According to this study, you might as well just be off-task!

Personally, I've always noticed that I have trouble focusing on class when I have my comnputer out. I am better at remembering information when I write it, rather than type. It seems old-fashioned, but I much prefer carrying a bunch of spirals around instead of a laptop. I'm just glad real research supports my own habits. I have to wonder, when I'm a professor will I allow my students to use laptops? I think not, though maybe we will be such a technology-driven society that I wont have much of a choice. That's a long way away so I better just focus on surviving this quarter!

Pushing and cutting science, all at the same time

I've noticed an underlying dichotomy through my research experience this summer. It's a paradoxical state that is brought up every week during our faculty lecture dinners. Every Monday, we have one of the Einstein faculty give us a short presentation on their work and sometimes their lives in science. The talks have ranged from fascinating to yawn-inducing, but one small issue remains a constant thorn in the back of my mind- there just isn't much money devoted to research anymore.

Maybe I should go into finance instead? One
problem.... I don't really like math for the sake
of math.....

If you have any experience in research, you may have heard the dreaded word 'sequestration' thrown around. The basic facts are that the US government is mandating that NIH (National Institutes of Health) cut all programs by 5%. That may not seem like a lot, but check the impacts that this will make on all research, particularly medical. All around the nation, newly minted PhDs are struggling to find positions of any sort in academia. Well-established labs are cutting back on personnel or sometimes even disbanding altogether. In an age when we have the technology to approach some of the most difficult scientific problems, we simply wont put the money into completing the necessary research. I kid you not, one of our weekly presenters nearly broke down and cried when he started to discuss the tremendous impact the sequestration and other economic changes are having on basic laboratory science.

This is all very depressing and dissuading for people like me and the others at this program, but you may be wondering how this amounts to a paradox. The paradox is that grade schools and undergraduate programs are constantly pushing for students to go into the sciences. There are countless programs driven at getting women, underrepresented minorities, and everyone else into some sort of science career. Scholarships, awards, and specialty programs are all being driven to get the next generation of scientists out there. A next generation that has almost no financial support when they complete their years of rigorous schooling/training.

Fellow SURP students out for dinner in Little Italy in the Bronx.

Why are we pushing science so hard, if there will be no career at the end of all this hard work? Scientists in training spend years learning techniques, reading difficult technical papers, and foregoing many social experiences in order to stay in and study for those requisite top grades. But at the end of this long arduous path is... nothing. Or not much, at least. Because of cut funding, programs have become highly selective and end up not taking many bright, hardworking students simply because they cannot afford it. So much hard work for a rapidly shrinking payoff. IT DRIVES ME NUTS!

I'll just wash away my depression at the current
state of affairs away with delicious independently
brewed beer! ...Just kidding, that's what alcoholics
do. I drink to celebrate!

Ok, all funding cuts to education tend to get me pretty annoyed but this one in particular is affecting my future. A future that is approaching very quickly as I will be graduating next spring. If there's no funding in science, how can we expect my graduating class to actually want to stay in their research fields? I'm still at a loss for how the next few years of my life will progress. I LOVE neuroscience research, but I'm not the top student at my university and I don't know how competitive I'll be for graduate programs.

I'd like to wrap this post up with a hopeful note saying "I'm sure to persevere" but the truth is, I don't know what awaits me.

Science is Hard!

Remember back in the good old days when teachers said "Here's how this works! Just learn the process." and that was it?  I wont disagree that there's a certain element of boredom involved with that style of learning.  But this semester is teaching me that performing real science is so far beyond rote memorization.

It's not easy to get access to up there, huh?

Currently I'm working in a lab on my college campus.  I'm just an undergraduate research assistant but our project is relatively small so I get to handle all aspects of the actual research.  When I first volunteered for the position, I thought all the procedures and general direction of the project were pretty obvious.  We're doing a longitudinal study so it breaks up into neat little chunks.

But halfway through the semester I'm seeing all these sources of error!  I have a bit of OCD and sometimes I wonder whether that's a blessing or a curse for doing academic research.  Let's start with the fact that I do human research.  So we had to start by getting a big enough sample size.  We didn't have grandiose expectations yet you'd be surprised on how difficult it is to even get 10 people to it your research criteria.  There are all sorts of things that can eliminate a person from a psychology study.

And even when they do make it past initial screening, you have to remember that these are people you're dealing with.  People, unlike lab rats, have schedules and plans and can't be kept in a cage in the lab.  So you have to keep an eye on your participants and make sure they keep up with the requirements of the project.  This is particularly important for longitudinal studies.

Ah, and we must also remember the fallibility of technology.  For all the good its done us, our tech is never perfect.  You can have faulty wires or computer programs that wont run or even run out of materials.  Just today, my lab ran out of circular adhesives to use with the EEG and had to run a makeshift version of our preferred methods.  And I've had times when batteries nearly died and the electrical leads on the EEG decided to stop working.  There's just so many little places for a slip up to affect your data.

Obligatory cute baby picture!  Though really I meant to
say I'm still young in my training.

Yet, in a weird way I love that variability.  It makes science hard, but it also keeps it interesting.  You're always striving for the perfect run and the most accurate results.  And a truly good scientist learns to compensate for all the possible external factors.  Trying to design the cleanest. most efficient, most reliability study appeals as an interesting study for me.  But for now, I hope to continue to learn in my current position.