Rxivist combines preprints from bioRxiv with data from Twitter to help you find the papers being discussed in your field. Currently indexing 65,724 bioRxiv papers from 291,101 authors.
Insights from a survey-based analysis of the academic job market
Jason D Fernandes,
Christopher T Smith,
Natalie M Niemi,
Nafisa M Jadavji,
Ariangela J Kozik,
Alex S Holehouse,
Alexandre Wilson Bisson Filho,
Posted 09 Oct 2019
bioRxiv DOI: 10.1101/796466
Posted 09 Oct 2019
Many postdoctoral fellows in the STEM fields enter the academic job market with little knowledge of the process and expectations, and without any means to assess their qualifications relative to the general applicant pool. Demystifying this process is critical, as there is little information publicly available. In this work, we provide insight into the process of academic job searches by gathering data to establish background metrics for typical faculty job applicants, and further correlate these metrics with job search outcomes. We analyzed 317 responses to an anonymous survey for faculty job applicants from the May 2018 - May 2019 market cycle. Responses were about evenly split by gender, largely North American-centric and life science focused, and highly successful with 58% of applicants receiving at least one offer. Traditional metrics (funding, publications, etc.) of a positive research track record above a certain threshold of qualifications were unable to completely differentiate applicants that did and did not receive a job offer. Our findings suggest that there is no single clear path to a faculty job offer and that perhaps criteria not captured by our survey may also influence landing a faculty position above a certain threshold of qualification. Furthermore, our survey did capture applicants perception of the faculty job application process as unnecessarily stressful, time-consuming, and largely lacking in feedback, irrespective of a successful outcome. We hope that this study will provide an avenue for better data-driven decision making by the applicants and search committees, better evidence-based mentorship practices by principal investigators, and improved hiring practices by institutions.
- Downloaded 10,928 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 95 out of 65,724
- In scientific communication and education: 4 out of 468
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 17 out of 65,724
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 2 out of 65,724
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- Top preprints of 2018
- Paper search
- Author leaderboards
- Overall metrics
- The API
- Email newsletter
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!