<p>A potential PhD adviser contacted me and suggested that if I work for him, I would probably be doing all-rounded work (Still in one domain) rather than a very specialized area. This seems appealing, but isn't a PhD about doing work in a very specific area?</p>
<p>In my field, the research area i want to go into can be further subdivided into other areas (let's call these subareas). So basically he doesn't want me to focus on just one of these subareas, but a couple. When he was telling me this, I thought it was a good idea. Afterwards, i started thinking more about it and was wondering if this was more of an insult.
Is there any belittlement in doing all-rounded "PhD" work rather than a very specific area? </p>
<p>I could see this as a "you're not smart enough to delve deeper into a very specific area, so instead I will let you scratch the surface of a few areas."</p>
<p>It depends on the topic. A lot of fields are becoming more interdisciplinary, and it would be really useful to have the technical skills for both while being trained more specifically in one. One caveat of this would be if the topics really don’t mesh well, and the PI is just trying to get you to do free work that should be given to staff. You should really only do work during your Ph.D that can eventually be somehow included in your dissertation.</p>
<p>I see. That’s a good point, the free work thing…
Perhaps the best course of action is to ask him what actually goes towards my dissertation.</p>
<p>Yes, it depends on the specifics. The topics have to mesh. For example, my PhD is a hybrid of social and health psychology, two subfields in the same discipline. But these two subfields blend very well AND I have picked a focus area that overlaps both and allows me to write a dissertation in that area.</p>
<p>Every PhD student needs to focus narrowly enough in an area that you have a viable research agenda to take into your full-time research career post-PhD, and so that you can write a dissertation. You don’t want to spend so much time working in 3 or 4+ subfields doing grunt work that you never graduate.</p>
<p>All my Ph.D. students need to know more than just physics. If you like the research that this professor does and you have a good impression about how he advises graduate students, I wouldn’t worry about it too much. As for doing more projects than what is specifically in your thesis, I often ask my students to get involved in other projects. It is a broadening experience, they get publications, and learn skills that might just help them get a job. However, completing the dissertation is always the highest priority. </p>
<p>Another little secret that no one tells you is that if you take a post-doctoral position, you will likely (and hopefully) do something different than your Ph.D. work. This is important in order to become a mature scientist who develops original lines of research.</p>
<p>That’s a good point about additional papers. Some side work is certainly acceptable, especially if it will improve your CV, but I have definitely witnessed PIs who give their grad students tech-type work because they’re running out of money and just need hands at the bench. THAT is a situation you really need to avoid.</p>