I have been involved in basic science research now for almost a decade (that makes me feel older than it should). The first was the addiction lab at BYU, which utilized rodent models to investigate involvement of reward centers in the brain in addiction. The second was the cardiothoracic research lab at the University of Virginia, which used the porcine model to investigate new methods for lung transplantation. The third (and current lab) is the BYU eye-tracking lab, headed by Dr. Steven Luke. This lab was quite different from the others. Instead of utilizing animals, our research requires humans to willingly participate in our research. Successful experimentation no longer requires good surgical techniques, nor can comfort be administered in the form of an opiod or paralytic. It requires soft skills in order to interact with a participant in order to build repoire and help them feel comfortable. This adds a social aspect to my science that was absent from my previous research.

In my short time as a graduate student, I have observed these skills to be somewhat lacking among researchers, particularly those just getting started. This is not surprising as much of this can only be mastered through practiced experience. A good mentor who can train, observe and critique is especially helpful. I just got thrown right into middle of things while a graduate student. Luckily for me, my service as a proselyting missionary (imagine going door to door trying to talk to people about religion all day) and my rudimentary training in medical interviews prior to graduate school has made working with people a less than foreign concept. This has made the transition from animals to humans less awkward, though I still make a great deal of mistakes.

What I present here are some thoughts (in no particular order) on how to become a better human researcher, especially for those who have not recieved any training in human research methods (e.g. any non-clinical neuroscience or physiology program).

Tips

  • Find an expert: Having an expert to observe and train under is incredibly useful. If you are in a lab with leaders who are hands-off or uninvolved then do not be afraid to ask to watch them do it first. Ask them to allow you to practice on them once or twice just so you can get a feel for things. Ask for feedback often.
  • Know your protocol/tests: I won't say memorize your protocol (it might be long enough to be impractical) but certainly know it well enough to make executing it second nature. You should refer to your notes to double check yourself, not to tell you what to do next. This allows you to proceed through a participant interview or testing fluidly and comfortably. If you are comfortable the participant will be comfortable (or at least less uncomfortable)!
  • Be prepared: Take time prior to the participant interview to prepare the room and set out all the materials you will need, whether that's a lab manual, test forms, stimuli, or digital protocol. This will help you by giving you visual cues to remind you what to do and what order (making for a fluid interaction), as well as present yourself as a professional to your participant. This builds repoire.
  • Be professional: Manners maketh man. Present yourself as a professional. Do not show up in sweat pants and a t-shirt. Wear clothes that set a professional tone. Consider the participant's cultural predisposition as well. Try to make them comfortable. Your explicit t-shirt may be funny, but it may give your participant a reason not to trust you or think the research is a big joke like you.
  • Be water: One of Bruce Lee's maxims, it certainly applies to human research. While you should stick to the script of your protocol, the only thing that is certain in research is that no single trial or experiment perfectly conforms to the protocol. Sometimes it is because of the participant, e.g. they show up late to an appointment, or there is some unforseen medical complication. At times it is expedient for you to leave the scripted protocal behind and ask questions not in the script as a means of clarifying some point. Do not let this fluster you. When something unscripted happens just roll with it and document it. No matter who wrote the protocol, there is no way it will address every single contingency. No man or woman is all knowing enough to create such a document. Protocols delineate default action, but they should not limit you as a researcher, so long as you document what happens and what you did.