<p>I am not sure about this, but some advice would greatly be appreciated. I have a lab position during the summertime at Columbia and a lab position in my college (where I will be a freshman this upcoming fall) during the school year. The lab in my school is doing a very interesting project and it looks like I have a great shot at a few co-author publications. Though the lab at Columbia is good and all, I am basically a technical assistant to the post-doc with whom I am working with. Overall the research does not seem to be progressing very quickly. I still want to stay in Columbia overall. I mean this lab just seems like a waste of time if the only thing that I am doing is learning techniques here and there. Would it be bad to maybe find a different lab in Columbia or while I am at it, I should just try a different institution such as Rochester, Cornell Med School, Mt. Sinai, NYU, etc? I would want to stay at Columbia b/c that is where I want to go to med school. If I hopefully get an interview and the person asks why I want to go there. I could be like well I worked here for 3 yrs and I love it. No better answer than that to me. Sorry that this is so long.</p>
<p>That's not an answer I'd be particularly pleased with, actually. It would tell me that you're hesitant to leave your comfort zone.</p>
<p>I think staying in one place and doing research has greater advantages. You will get to network with many researchers during your years in one institution.
Some of the people you meet during your research years may have influence in your selection for residency later and may even give you LORs. </p>
<p>A longer duration will allow you a chance for more in-depth research and a better chance of co-authorship.</p>
<p>Whether you can get first authored paper or not depends vastly on the type of mentor you get. In my experience, I have found that the more 'secure, experienced, better funded and confident' your mentor is, the greater the likelihood that you will get first authorship for your work. </p>
<p>I think the key element in building a good collaboration with your researcher is building an excellent rapport with your mentor and with other post-docs in the lab. </p>
<p>Sometimes, people move to other labs/mentors either because they did not get continued grants or because they simply did not feel "accepted" in their labs. You will have a pretty good feel for the acceptance factor within 2-3 months of being in a lab. Thus, moving to other labs is sometimes not entirely your option. It's determined by external factors, and not all that bad. If you feel not very well accepted, you can forget about getting any recognition for publications! You might as well move to another lab.</p>
<p>The other option is that you work with different projects/different mentors within the same institution and get the best of both worlds.</p>
<p>What about working with other mentors in the same dept who are also doing research on the same disease?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I"m a first year in a lab right now, and my PI said that I'd be 2nd-authoring a paper at the END of next school year, and that realistically, I'd get a 1st authorship sometime before I'm out of college.
[/quote]
Isn't publication something that can never be predicted? How can a PI say something like that? I'm doing a summer research right now and my PI never treats publication like a surefire thing.</p>
<p>whats a PI</p>
<p>Principal investigator. Also, in retrospect, I may have misinterpreted what my PI said or he was wrong to predict publication.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, in retrospect, I may have misinterpreted what my PI said or he was wrong to predict publication.
[/quote]
It was imran who said that. (post #13)</p>
<p>Oh, haha. This thread is old.</p>