A Retrospective Analysis of Career Outcomes in Neuroscience.

Abstract

What factors are associated with career outcomes among biomedical PhDs? Research to date has focused on drivers of interest in (and intention to pursue) various careers, especially during graduate school, but fewer studies have investigated participants' ultimate career outcomes. Even less is known about what factors matter for groups historically underrepresented in the US science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce, such as women, some racial and ethnic groups, and persons with disabilities ( National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES), 2021a). This study reports a new analysis of data from 781 PhD neuroscientists that were obtained from a retrospective survey ( Ullrich et al., 2021) to investigate the factors that influence the career sector in which neuroscience PhDs are employed and whether there were group differences according to social identity. We find evidence of academia as a "default path" for incoming PhD students, but interest in different careers increases over time. Those who remained in academia had greater acceptance of the structural aspects of academic careers, such as promotion and tenure processes, and greater faculty support during postdoctoral training. Conversely, prioritizing monetary compensation and/or varied work were associated with not being in academia, while a strong interest in research was positively associated with being in nonacademic research. Somewhat surprisingly, there were few interactions with gender, and no interactions with underrepresentation status, although perhaps this was due to lower statistical power for these analyses. Our findings also underscore the role of advisors, networking, and personal relationships in securing employment in STEM.