NATURE: CAREER COLUMN (Paraphrased)
Graduate students are often expected to perform like machines, yet it is repeatedly shown that such behavior only results in frustration and a lack of fulfillment. This reality is emphasized by writer Gauthier Weissbart, who argues that completing a PhD requires recognition of one’s humanity as much as one’s research skills.
When a PhD in biophysics was begun in Germany four years ago, difficulties were anticipated because long working hours and a strained work–life balance had been observed among other researchers. After completion of the program, it became clear that the most challenging moments were rarely caused by the scientific work itself. Instead, they were created by psychological pressures—uncertainty, self-criticism, and mental stress.
Although earning a PhD involves learning the practices of research, much of the common advice focuses primarily on productivity: planning, organizing, and reading. Such skills are important, but they overlook the fact that PhD students are human beings with emotional and psychological needs. Addressing these needs is crucial for both well-being and research quality.
For many students, including the author, psychological struggles—amplified by relocation to a new country during the COVID-19 pandemic—make the early stages of a program especially difficult. Yet these experiences often encourage a stronger focus on personal well-being, eventually restoring motivation and fulfillment. The following six principles are proposed to guide PhD students in surviving their programs not only as researchers but also as people. Nature Careers
1. Uncertainty Should Be Embraced
Research is characterized by unanswered questions and unexpected outcomes, particularly at the beginning. This uncertainty can make progress feel unstable, but it must be accepted as an integral part of scientific work. If all answers were already known, research would not be necessary; science exists precisely because they are not.
During the program, the leaf epidermis was studied to understand how spatial patterns form among cell types. Frustration was often felt when the biological system could not be fully explained. Because complete understanding proved impossible, the need for total clarity was eventually abandoned. Instead of seeking final explanations (“giant cells are organized this way”), open-ended questions were asked (“How are giant cells organized?”).
By releasing the desire to know everything, frustration was reduced. Uncertainty was adopted as a source of curiosity — a form of “healthy uncertainty” that fuels, rather than blocks, scientific progress.
2. Thinking Must Be Balanced With Doing
Once uncertainty is accepted, it must be navigated. This requires a balance between reflection and action. Deep thinking is necessary for generating ideas, but excessive reflection can lead to stagnation.
At one stage, so much time was spent imagining possible models and hypotheses that no practical work was done. Even detailed descriptions of genetic pathways failed to produce insights. The adviser’s comment—“You like to think”—was interpreted as a reminder to take action. When analyses were finally conducted on existing data, new findings emerged regarding stomatal spatial organization.
Excessive reflection can trap a researcher, while action often reveals the next steps. Flexible plans can guide direction without constraining it. In short: when uncertainty persists, think; if uncertainty still persists, act. Ideas arise from both processes.
3. Perfection Should Be Abandoned
Self-criticism is another obstacle commonly faced during a PhD. Many researchers strive for perfection, but perfectionism often produces stress, wasted effort, and dissatisfaction. Imperfection is part of being human and offers opportunities for growth.
During the program, perfectionism frequently resulted in unnecessary work driven by fear of failure. The advice that “done is better than perfect” shifted this mindset. Completion began to be viewed as a moving target—chosen rather than forced. No perfect version of a thesis exists. Sometimes, “good enough” is what allows progress. Perfection, therefore, must be replaced with practicality.
4. Arguing Must Be Balanced With Listening
Scientific work involves constant interaction with supervisors, colleagues and collaborators, all of whom have emotions, biases and perspectives. Constructive discussion is essential, yet not always easy.
Persuading others became difficult at times, especially when strong personal confidence in a hypothesis was not shared by colleagues. Evidence and clear analysis had to be provided before support could be gained — as scientific practice demands.
Listening presented its own challenges. An adviser once suggested a different modelling framework, and it was initially dismissed. Later reflection revealed that the suggestion had value. Being open to other viewpoints is crucial, as science is built through collective effort. Diversity of perspective—whether cultural, intellectual, or experiential—is known to increase innovation and improve outcomes.
By developing the ability to argue respectfully and listen attentively, researchers enrich both their communication and their work.
5. Breaks Must Be Taken Seriously
Although taking breaks is widely recommended, it is often poorly implemented. A true break requires giving the mind rest by shifting attention away from work. Overthinking can damage mental health, and burnout arises from overwork and feelings of insignificance.
Work on weekends was frequently attempted, even for short periods, preventing true disconnection and contributing to exhaustion. In contrast, time spent away from research — with family or on holiday—consistently renewed motivation and productivity. Breaks not only refresh the mind but also provide perspective, reminding students that life extends beyond the PhD. Mental and physical health must be prioritized because all work depends on it.
6. Meaning Should Be Built Beyond Work
Maintaining well-being during a PhD requires creating meaning outside the program. When identity and fulfillment depend solely on academic success, setbacks can feel overwhelming. Engaging in other aspects of life—relationships, hobbies, sports—distributes emotional weight across multiple sources of satisfaction. A bad workday then becomes simply a bad workday.
Strong personal connections also matter. Emotional support from loved ones, even those unfamiliar with academic life, proved invaluable during difficult periods. In these moments, emotional support is more important than technical advice. Personal relationships and meaningful activities should not be postponed for after the PhD; future career stages are likely to be just as demanding.
PhD completion is not achieved through research alone. It is achieved through the careful balance of intellectual work, emotional resilience, psychological well-being, and human connection.
