The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Science PhD Career Preferences: Levels, Changes, and Advisor Encouragement
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
KRISTOF‐BROWN, A. L., ZIMMERMAN, R. D., & JOHNSON, E. C. (2005) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x · Cited by 4,082
Science and Engineering Indicators
Washington, E., & Warren, M. E. (2004) · Cited by 2,822
The Meaning of Translational Research and Why It Matters
Woolf, S. H. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2007.26 · Cited by 1,910
Does Entrepreneurship Pay? An Empirical Analysis of the Returns to Self‐Employment
Hamilton, B. H. (2000) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/262131 · Cited by 1,845
Retrospective reports of strategic‐level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy
Huber, G. P., & Power, D. J. (1985) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250060206 · Cited by 1,708
Science and Engineering Indicators
Bond, J. S., Humphrey, D. C., Paton, K. L., Hightower, A. M., Suter, L. E., Johnson, J. M., Pollak, M., Jankowski, J. E., Lehming, R., Rausch, L. M., et al. (1993) · Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · Cited by 1,631
Stephan, P. (2012) · Harvard University Press eBooks · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674062757 · Cited by 934
30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship
Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.04.005 · Cited by 913
Research productivity over the life cycle: evidence for academic scientists
Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991) · American Economic Review · Cited by 763
Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001) · The Journal of Technology Transfer · doi:10.1023/a:1007884111883 · Cited by 709
Cited by
Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163 · Cited by 797
Edwards, M. A., & Roy, S. (2017) · Environmental Engineering Science · doi:10.1089/ees.2016.0223 · Cited by 688
Gibbs, K. D., & Griffin, K. A. (2013) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.13-02-0021 · Cited by 261
Pantelis, P. C., Byrge, L., Tyszka, J. M., Adolphs, R., & Kennedy, D. P. (2015) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsv021 · Cited by 97
PhD Student Experiences with the Impostor Phenomenon in STEM
Chakraverty, D. (2020) · International Journal of Doctoral Studies · doi:10.28945/4513 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Sauermann, H., & Roach, M.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-05-02
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- e36307
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2089012022
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 31.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Science PhD Career Preferences: Levels, Changes, and Advisor Encouragement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0036307
- The paper
- Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2012). Science PhD Career Preferences: Levels, Changes, and Advisor Encouragement. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036307
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.