Science PhD career preferences: levels, changes, and advisor encouragement

Abstract

Even though academic research is often viewed as the preferred career path for PhD trained scientists, most U.S. graduates enter careers in industry, government, or "alternative careers." There has been a growing concern that these career patterns reflect fundamental imbalances between the supply of scientists seeking academic positions and the availability of such positions. However, while government statistics provide insights into realized career transitions, there is little systematic data on scientists' career preferences and thus on the degree to which there is a mismatch between observed career paths and scientists' preferences. Moreover, we lack systematic evidence whether career preferences adjust over the course of the PhD training and to what extent advisors exacerbate imbalances by encouraging their students to pursue academic positions. Based on a national survey of PhD students at tier-one U.S. institutions, we provide insights into the career preferences of junior scientists across the life sciences, physics, and chemistry. We also show that the attractiveness of academic careers decreases significantly over the course of the PhD program, despite the fact that advisors strongly encourage academic careers over non-academic careers. Our data provide an empirical basis for common concerns regarding labor market imbalances. Our results also suggest the need for mechanisms that provide PhD applicants with information that allows them to carefully weigh the costs and benefits of pursuing a PhD, as well as for mechanisms that complement the job market advice advisors give to their current students.

Figure 1. Students judging a career “extremely attractive” by field and stage in program.

Respondents rated the attractiveness of each career on a 5-point scale (and were instructed to ignore job availability). The scale anchors ranged from 1 (extremely unattractive) to 3 (neither attractive nor unattractive) to 5 (extremely attractive). Figure 1 shows the share of respondents who gave a rating of 5 (“extremely attractive”) to a particular career. Data are shown separately for respondents in the early stages of the PhD program (prior to completion of qualifying exams or similar milestones) and in the late stages of the PhD program (looking for a job at the time of the survey or planning to do so within the next year).

Figure 2. Most attractive career path (full sample; ties possible).

Respondents rated the attractiveness of each career path on a 5-point scale. Figure 2 shows the share of respondents who gave their highest rating to a particular career. For example, 53% of life sciences PhD students gave their highest attractiveness rating to the faculty research career. Since careers were rated independently, careers can be tied (i.e., receive the same attractiveness score).

Figure 3. Change in the relative attractiveness of careers over time (respondents in the late stage of the PhD).

Respondents were asked how certain they were at the time of beginning the PhD program to pursue each career. Similarly, respondents were asked how attractive they found each career at the time of the survey. For each of the two points in time, we coded which career received the highest rating (ties possible). Positive numbers in Figure 3 show the share of respondents who gave the highest rating to a particular career at the time of the survey but not when starting the PhD (i.e., the relative attractiveness of that particular career increased). Negative numbers show the share of respondents who gave the highest rating when starting the PhD but not at the time of the survey (i.e., the relative attractiveness decreased). For example, the relative attractiveness of a faculty research career increased over the course of the program for 8.7% of life sciences PhD students but decreased for 18.3% of life sciences PhD students. The net effect is a decrease in the share of students who rate the faculty career as most attractive by 9.6 percentage points.

Figure 4. Share of students reporting that particular careers are encouraged/discouraged in their lab or department.

Respondents rated on a 5-point scale the degree to which PhDs in their lab/department are encouraged or discouraged to pursue each career. Figure 4 shows the share of respondents choosing each response category. Raw data for this figure are shown in Table S5.

Figure 5. Share of students finding particular work activities interesting/uninteresting.

Respondents indicated how interesting they would find each of six kinds of work when thinking about the future. Figure 5 shows the share of respondents choosing each response category. Raw data for this figure are shown in Table S6.