This year we ran the first MRC Toxicology Unit Science Writing Competition for all staff and students. The aim of this is to provide an opportunity for researchers to develop their skills in writing and communicating science.

Entrants had to submit a written article of no more than 1000 words in non-specialist language. They had to provide their own take on the question:

"Are non-scientific qualities necessary to perform high quality research?"

All the essays were all well thought out and approached the question in a different way, which make for great reading! Here is our second entry in the competition.

You don’t have to be mad to work here, but would it help?

Anonymous

Many people will imagine the stereotype of a mad scientist laughing maniacally as he sends a bolt of electricity through his reanimated Frankenstein’s monster.  But such research projects are generally frowned upon by modern science and, instead, scientific research is a more ordered and regulated practice.  Yet while Universities UK published a framework for mental health as a ‘strategic priority’ in 2020, obsessive-compulsive activities are being reported among scientists [1].  So, is it possible that obsessive and compulsive behaviours promote high quality research, or do they ultimately hinder scientific advances?

Scientific research relies on the reproducibility of experiments and the most efficient way to achieve this is to minimise variability in the way experiments are conducted – ensuring time points are adhered to strictly, treating samples in the same way each time and recording meticulous notes about how experiments are performed.  It is easy to see how an obsessive personality can be well-suited to these skills, but also how such activities can become an obsession.  Indeed, it is not obvious whether the rigours of scientific research selects for those individuals with a propensity to obsessive behaviours, or whether it conditions them towards it.  Additionally, an ability for single-minded focus can lend itself to solving intractable problems and making efficient scientific progress during research investigations; but if left unchecked, this can snowball into obsession.  So, although these obsessive traits may be of some benefit in the laboratory setting, it can be difficult not to let them become overwhelming or let them overflow into our personal lives.  While routine can be comforting and support our sense of wellbeing, it is one thing to have a consistent breakfast routine to start our day, but another to let our day be ruined if plans go awry, or to allow ourselves to become socially isolated due to obsessive habits.

Another aspect of obsessive behaviour that can manifest among scientists is excessive self-criticism.  Scientists constantly self-assess their work to test its integrity.  This can involve questions on experimental practice, like whether an experiment has been performed with sufficient care or accuracy to trust the result?  Or whether enough controls have been included so that the conclusion is robust?  But it can also reflect a more broad or fundamental aspect such as whether the underlying hypothesis is incorrect?  Or has a false assumption been made?  Such self-criticism is important to avoid misrepresenting results or drawing inaccurate conclusions.  But this can easily escalate to cause self-doubt, low confidence and anxiety which can be detrimental to our mental health and hinder progress.  Moreover, it is not always easy to restrict a higher level of self-criticism that might be appropriate in a workplace and prevent it invading into our personal lives where a greater degree of protection can be necessary to maintain healthy mental attitudes.  For example, it can be a short mental leap from thinking in the lab, “Why is this enzyme not working in this reaction?  What assumption have I made incorrectly about the reaction conditions?”  To asking, after a traumatic life event like a relationship break up, “Why did my girlfriend leave me?  What did I do wrong?”  Although a period of self-evaluation may be helpful in both cases, the emotional responses involved are very different and the mental tools we use in the lab to intellectually dissect a problem can be too destructive in our personal lives.

But as part of producing high quality research, scientists must also submit their work to the criticism of others to ensure it is robust and sound.  This can be in a private scenario such as revision comments on a submitted research article or grant application.  But it can also be in a very public environment such as a research seminar or conference.  Under such circumstances, even reasonable criticism can be difficult to process if it follows years of dedicated effort or results in public embarrassment.  In these cases, while it is important that proper scientific criticism is applied, it is also integral that it is communicated appropriately and sensitively to be effective.  However, an obsessive scientist may overstep this to display hyper-critical behaviour – making unreasonable demands of a researcher, fixating on irrelevant details and not accepting that mistakes can be made.  Such behaviour can be directly detrimental to high quality research and prevent scientists from communicating their findings.  But it can also have a negative impact on those around them, affecting their mental well-being and inhibiting their productivity in the workplace, as well as impairing collaborations between scientists which are beneficial to promote an effective exchange of ideas and knowledge.  As such, it is important that we, as scientists, self-evaluate our own behaviour to ensure that we are applying an appropriate level of criticism for the situation and that we are communicating it in an effective, actionable and acceptable way.

Ultimately, while there are aspects of obsessive behaviours that can synchronise effectively with performing high quality research, it is also important to recognise when these behaviours become damaging, uncontrollable and toxic.  We take care to ensure that appropriate safety precautions are in place when handling toxic chemicals or biological agents in the laboratory to limit our exposure, so a similar level of care should also be taken to protect us from toxic behaviours in the research setting.  As scientists, we strive to maximise our research output and advance our understanding of biological processes and disease; but this should not come at the expense of our mental health or the well-being of those around us, be that in the workplace or in our personal lives.  And in promoting a positive mental attitude we garner confidence among our research team, nurture personal development, foster open communication and a productive exchange of ideas, and stimulate new and creative ways of thinking which cultivates high quality scientific research. 

References

[1] Lippi G, Plebani M, Franchini M. The syndrome of the "obsessive-compulsory scientist": a new mental disorder? Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013 Aug;51(8):1575-7. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2013-0265. PMID: 23648636.