How Much Does a PhD in Neuroscience Cost?

A doctorate in any field is a significant undertaking both intellectually and financially. In recent years, the costs of PhD students are increasingly borne by the primary investigator as part of a grant proposal, while the number of graduate students supported by individual fellowships has remained relatively constant [1]. 

In the US for example, research grants funded about 40% of all biomedical sciences PhD students in the 1980s and this figure had risen to 70% by 2007 [2]. National Institutes of Health statistics also showed that very few PhDs in the US were funded out of pocket, with at least 96% of PhDs receiving full funding [2].
One aspect of neuroscience education cost that varies quite widely by country is the amount of money required for tuition. Based on a search of program websites, in the US, tuition can range from USD 30,000-80,000 for the duration of the program, depending on how the university charges its students and the number of full time semesters required. In Germany, on the other hand, tuition from the university's side can be as low as 200-300 euros per semester, and the bulk of the cost of a PhD is for the stipend/salary that pays living expenses and supports the student during the training period.
Comparing for example Germany and the US, the cost for the principle investigator is quite different because US tuition is two orders of magnitude higher! One might expect this to have a corresponding impact on the number of PhD students in the two countries, perhaps with fewer being accepted in the US where they are relatively more expensive. If anything, the trend is reversed. According to a 2011 article in Nature magazine, the number of PhDs in the US increased by 2.5% from 1998 to 2006, while the number of doctoral graduates in Germany remained virtually the same [3]. As neuroscience funding gets more and more competitive in both Europe and the US, while the numbers of scientists entering the pipeline increases, one wonders what the future will hold for the cost of a neuroscience PhD [4].

[1] Alberts et al., PNAS, 2014
[2] http://1.usa.gov/1MrTiHP

[3] Cyranoski et al., Nature, 2011
[4] Joels et al., Neuron, 2015

by Lauren Elizabeth Mamer, PhD Student AG Rosenmund
this article originally appeared 2015 in CNS Volume 8, Issue 4, Money on My Mind.

Money, Money, Money

Is there a word for being addicted to money? Something like 'moneyholic', maybe? Being addicted to money and the urge for more prosperity than we need is a delicate topic because money operates on so many levels in our lives that are emotional, unspoken, and even subconscious.
Money addiction is not very well defined but is much more complex than shopping or gambling addictions, other common disorders related to money that are hot topics for neuroscientists.

Money Just Never Seems Enough
In the 1930s, Professor Jellinek described the steps of becoming an alcoholic. Even today, the 'Jellinek Curve' can be used as an instrument for self-diagnosis of alcohol addiction [1]. Maybe this scheme could also help identify people having unhealthy relationships with money. Let’s give it a try:
In the pre-‘moneyholic’ phase, the individual is motivated by self-preservation. The more money that is gathered, the more their income tolerance increases. This initial phase starts with memory gaps, especially on tax declarations. A critical phase is entered, as in all kinds of addictions, if loss of control is prevalent. The strong urge for more cannot be resisted and this mostly results in social isolation, which is compensated by an inflated self-confidence. In the chronic phase, the affected persons degrade their own ethical values in order to meet their strong desires for more.
Piff and colleagues revealed through several different studies that upper-class individuals behave more unethically than lower-class individuals [2]. At this point, there is only two ways forward; either the individual decides to ‘exit’ the desire for more money, or the damage becomes irreversible, when even having more money does not bring any relief.

By Frits, hikingartist.com 

Is Money Addiction Hereditary?
Assuming money has the same potential as that of a drug, being addicted to it can be defined as ‘‘the loss of control over [money] use, or the compulsive seeking of [money] despite adverse consequences” [3]. Researchers believe that genetics contribute to 40-60% of the susceptibility of drug addiction and the remainder is due to environmental factors [4].
Kuhnen and colleagues hypothesized that genetic predispositions exist for money addiction,  or, as they call it, financial risk taking [5]. They showed that variants of two genes that regulate the neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin are significant determinants of financial risk taking. Dopamine and serotonin play a role in a plethora of different brain circuits and emotional behaviors, such as anxiety, addiction, novelty seeking, and extroversion.
It is unsurprising that the sight of money activates the brain’s reward system in a very similar way as the sight of cocaine [6]. Money determines – whether we want it or not – our existence.

Consequences of 'Moneyholics' for Society
The most difficult thing after diagnosing someone as a 'moneyholic' is how one should deal with this problem. This is especially important if the person in question is in a position of power, such as directors and investors, whose decisions affect not only their own but also other people’s lives.
So what if researchers find a causal link between a gene and the greed for money? Does this matter when a money-related crime has been committed? Similar to the big discussion of genetic predeterminants for any sort of criminal behavior, several questions arise. One of the most fundamental is how we reconcile a legal system that is based on the concept of culpability with findings from behavioral genetics.

Personally, I wonder if the study by Kuhnen and colleagues can be seen as an artful attempt to justify things that go wrong, as in a financial crisis or when billions are made at the cost of other people’s lives. For instance, one could well say that when weapons are exported to war zones in exchange for money, it’s not the seller's fault, it’s their genes'! 

[1] Leggio et al., Neuropsychol Rev, 2009

[2] Piff et al., PNAS, 2012

[3] Nestler, Nat Rev Neurosci, 2001

[4] Uhl, Neuropharmacology, 2004

[5] Kuhnen and Chiao, PLoS One, 2009

[6] Fliessbach et al., Science, 2007

by Anahita Poshtiban, PhD Student AG Plested

this article originally appeared in 2015, CNS Volume 8, Issue 4, Money on My Mind.

Survey on Sudden Wealth

For our December 2015 edition "Money on my Mind" we performed a small survey on sudden wealth. Read the thoughtful and hilarious answers our MedNeuro students gave!

I would donate all of the money to the Charité and demand a bronze statue of my figure to be placed near the entrance of campus.

I will change the money to 1 dollar bills and enjoy my moment sleeping on it (like Breaking Bad). I am sure that my nucleus accumbens will be insanely happy!!

Then:
1- Fly to Maldives/Hawaii
2- Visit the purest lake in the world in Iceland
3- Visit the lost city in Peru
4- Everest base camping
5- Go diving in the great barrier reef

I would first invest it in gold (doesn't depreciate in value with market fluctuations) and a diversified portfolio to rapidly increase my immediate returns, then allocate dividends to my parents, my future, personal projects or startups, and international grassroots organizations and local community projects.

Invest in stocks, real estate or open my own business

I would use the money to build a house in the countryside, and create a cultural center there with workshops and exhibitions and of course travel!  

Spend every holiday with my family in a different country

Hmmmm... at first I would probably just scream. Seeing that amount of money in your hand, bank account...mind... wherever, after having to struggle every month as a student is pretty intense. So yeah, I would scream. Then, as a perfectly normal and sane person, I would call my mom. You know, the typical "hey mom, whats up? oh, I'm just here, chilling with my 800.00 euros, no biggy" haha... just kidding, I would probably scream at her too (well not at her, to her... you know what I mean!!). Then after a looooo...oooo...oooo...oong thought (and getting an earful from my dad saying that he wants a little) about what to do with it I decide I can go 4 ways:
1. I could go the selfish way and spend it all on clothes, shoes, bags, perfumes, jewels (starting to hyperventilate) and become a shopaholic, which would be horrible for everybody.
2. I could go the intellectual "also kind of selfish" way and spend it on medical school (which is my life long dream, weird, I know!).
3. I could go the cultural "also selfish way" and go travelling to meet new people, learn new stuff, enrich my brain.
4. Or I could go the kind "super cool" stranger way and give it to charities, buy food for homeless people, help a friend in serious economical need: just helping others. But this last one would only make me want to congratulate myself by taking selfies with my new iPhone to show the world what a good person I am (right? isn't that what famous people do?)
And which one to choose?? Hmmmmmm. well... if the world was a place were 800.000 euros would fall out of the sky then probably it wouldn't be such a big deal and I could go the crazy shopaholic narcissist way. But since it's not I have made my choice. I think I would go with a mixture of the three last ones. I would try to help a friend in need (which I do have), I would pay for medical school AND FINISH IT IN TIME. And then I would go toooo...hmmmmm..... Africa maybe? Cuba? South America? And not only increase my medical knowledge but also help a little around there with it. Places where maybe 800.000 euros might not do much (because let's face it, world hunger can not be cured with 800.000 euros) but a little help, in any way, can go a looong way.
Oh! did I forget? I would go to all those places in my newly purchased Gucci/Dolche&Gabanna shoes!!

What would you do if you became wealthy over night? Let us know your answers in the comments!

Compensation in Life Sciences

“Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants.” (Epictetus)

"Piled Higher and Deeper" by Jorge Cham, www.phdcomics.com

 

Renumeration in the Life Sciences

Can I fuse my passion for research with a worthwhile and financially secure living? This is one of the most gripping questions that researchers at all levels face when becoming part of an ever-growing global academic elite of dynamic, aspiring scientists.

More and more countries of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) are building up their higher education sectors. Science doctorates, post-docs, and principle investigators are key factors for the generation of wide-scale economic growth [1]. However, the question arises as to how we compensate life scientists for their academic excellence.

ACADEMIA PAYS UP TO 30% LESS THAN INDUSTRY

Taking a closer look at the importance of salaries in neuroscience becomes even more crucial in the light of global ‘over-production’ of science graduates [1]. Nowadays, scientists are increasingly being exploited as a cheap working force derived from a never-ending fountain of highly-skilled doctoral students and post-docs, allowing countries to develop their higher education system and general economy by paradoxically investing as little as possible into compensation of academics.

Salaries in Europe and the USA

The Scientist's 2014 web-based survey of compensation of life scientists gathered information from over 5334 individuals ranging from graduate students to professors in various life science sectors [2]. The survey revealed differences in income between different sectors, genders and institutions. European life scientists annually earn US$68,361 on average compared to US$99,011 in the US.

This regional discrepancy (in both academia and industry) is compounded by sector-specific differences in academia. Figures for academic neuroscientists in the US indicate an average salary of US$102,770, which is close to the average payment scale. Molecular biologists earn an average of US$77,970 and scientists working in drug discovery and development are more highly compensated – up to US$143,544.

Those working in academia make 30% less income in both Europe and the US compared to industry employees. Interestingly, researchers in the US working in specific areas in both academia and industry, such as genomics and biostatistics, had a 13% higher pay compared to the preceding year and compared to their colleagues in other disciplines. This indicates that employment in specific sectors with larger demand tends to be a ‘gold mine’ – that is, until the supply of new graduates reaches saturation. The vicious cycle continues because the demand for new graduates is being dictated by the amount of money (from research grants) available for paying them. This allows group leaders to recruit as much cheap labor as they want without considering the fact that not enough senior positions are available in the job market to keep these people employed in academia in the long run [3].

MEN ARE STILL PAID FAR MORE THAN WOMEN

Other fundamental factors affecting life scientists' salaries are age and experience, consisting of a leap in salary by up to 20% for every additional 5 years of experience. Remarkably, gender is still another dismaying aspect of salary inequality in the life sciences in the highly-developed countries of the 21st century. The survey revealed that European male scientists in high positions earn up to US$13,000 more than their female counterparts – a situation which is even worse in the US, where the discrepancy can reach up to US$28,000 [2].

Intellectual Freedom vs. Lifestyle

Looking at future compensation in the life sciences, we will probably continue to face a rather grim picture of ‘brain drain’ from academia to other institutions or to countries with a smaller salary gap [4]. Insufficient compensation and/or insecure job positions currently discourage scientists from staying in academia (only 6% of PhD students do stay) [5].

Promotion of progressive PhD programs that equip researchers with transferable skills that can be applied not only in academia but also in the wider job market is nowadays a pivotal part of German scientific training [6]. This increases the chances of circumventing the bottleneck problem of occupational demand due to educational ‘over-supply’ of researchers that ultimately leads to dwindling salaries in the academic life sciences.

Academic scientists at all levels have to face the reality that salaries in the future will most probably continue being unstable and less lucrative than in other sectors. It remains the individual decision of every scientist as to how to weigh academic intellectual freedom with monetary compensation.  

[1] Cyranoski et al., Nature, 2011
[2] http://bit.ly/1rZ8nGD
[3] http://bit.ly/1OZQ2IT 
[4] Jacobs, EMBO Rep, 2013
[5] http://bit.ly/20Ehktz
[6] Shen, Nature, 2013

by Meron Maricos, PhD Student AG Kettenmann
this article originally appeared 2015 in CNS Volume 8, Issue 4, Money on My Mind.

Berlin's Neuromarketing Startups

Berlin is known as a startup factory, with many young businesses cutting their teeth here. With neuromarketing perhaps one of the youngest fields on the block, it is not surprising that it is well represented in this city.

Apple Emotions
When most people hear the term “neuro”, a pretty image of a brain with colourful patches pops into mind. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), otherwise known as “brain scanning”, has become the poster child for all things neuro, representing neuroscience's sexy side in the public eye. That is marketing appeal just waiting to be tapped, and that is exactly what the startup INCORE has done.

 Apple users elicit an emotional reaction to the brand unlike samsung users

They have capitalized on the appeal of fMRI by offering it as a neuromarketing service, proposing that market research on consumers inside the scanner will lead to a deeper understanding of how brands are perceived. With Dr. Simone Kühn of the Max Planck Institute at the scientific helm, they claim to “measure the unconscious emotional reactions of targ[et] groups” via fMRI [1]. They have done studies on brand perception of international giants such as Coca-Cola and Apple, with results suggesting that Apple users have an emotional reaction to the brand which is absent from Samsung users. Obviously, this is no cheap service, but perhaps the appeal of brain scanning will be strong enough to draw business in.

Measuring "Unconscious Emotions"?

FMRI might be prohibitively expensive for most companies, but there are cheaper alternatives out there. Berlin seems to have an abundance of attention-modeling startups, offering scientifically grounded analysis of media design, such as websites, to improve layout and maximize profits. Attention determines where we look and for how long, and companies are obviously keen to get this right when they are trying to communicate with a customer via a webpage or advertisement. 
One way to measure attention is with eye tracking. By directly measuring where users look, you know what has grabbed their attention and what has not. The startup Emolyzr does just this, in combination with other measurements such as electromyography and skin conductance. Specifically, Emolyzr claims to measure the “unconscious emotions” of users, although what exactly they mean by this is not clear [2].

SMI Eye Tracking, via flickr

 Attention: With or Without Humans?

Although cheaper than fMRI, eye tracking is also not without its costs. Another startup, Attensee, replaces eye tracking with mouse exploration [3]. Users are presented with a blurred version of the website, and as they move their mouse cursor around the screen a small portion of content is revealed. This is cheaper and faster than eye tracking, while still returning real participant data.
However, in the dog-eat-dog world of marketing, it is all about money and speed, and the startup EyeQuant attempts to push both of these to the bottom line by removing the participant altogether [4]. Instead of relying on human subjects to indicate what is attention grabbing, they implement a fully computational saliency and attention model, reducing both time required for a result (allegedly within seconds) and potentially cost as well. Of course, the highly complex model behind EyeQuant is itself validated against human eye tracking data.
But even so, modeling human behavior is a tricky business, and perhaps the main criticism of the method is that it is not always accurate (a claim that Attensee makes explicitly) [3]. However, with such speed and potential cost efficiency, and with saliency godfathers Prof. Laurent Itti and Prof. Christof Koch on the team, it is not surprising that Google has been a client already.

Check Your Brain App
Although not strictly neuromarketing, I could not help including the nascent startup BrainModes here. BrainModes aims to make neurofeedback available to the general public via an app. On their website, they state:
“We are developing the BrainModes app to visualize the brain activity of the user measured with BCI (brain-computer interface) devices, even if they have no prior experience. The visualization of brain activity is based on state-of-the-art computational neuroscience and brain imaging: a novel technology to provide detailed visualizations of brain activity based on sparse information collected with brain computer interface technology.” [5]
The idea is incredibly cool, and although they do not go into details about just what types of BCIs they will be working with, the notion that anybody could get a glimpse into the workings of their own brain via an app is tantalizing. It is unclear from their website whether the app will be commercial or not, but the team also appears to have been involved in some pretty wacky art installations involving neurofeedback. You can see a video of one of their previous projects here.


[1] http://www.incore-berlin.com/
[2] http://emolyzr.de/  
[3] https://www.attensee.com/
[4] http://www.eyequant.com/
[5] http://www.brainmodes.com/

by James Kerr, MSc Student, International Experimental and Clinical Linguistics
this article originally appeared December 2015 in "Money on My Mind"

Neuromarketing

SALE! Everywhere you look these days. Are these campaigns and advertisements simple sales strategies or is this already brain manipulation?

Source: Laura Moreno Velasquez

When you go shopping, do you end up buying much more than you had planned? Our mind is active and receptive all the time to different auditory, visual, and even olfactory stimuli. Companies and sellers know exactly how to get our attention. Have you noticed for instance how you have to cross the entire store just to go to another floor or to reach basic items?

Marketing has always sought to understand not only the needs of consumers but also their preferences and emotions in order to improve advertising and sales. Given the difficulties that marketers have faced trying to measure our minds and especially our emotions, the new discipline 'neuromarketing' has emerged.

Inside the Consumer's Brain

Neuromarketing is “a multidisciplinary field of research whose aim is to investigate the consumer's reaction to advertisements from a neuroscientific perspective” [1]. In other words, neuromarketing applies specialized and well-known techniques in neurosciences such as electroencephalography, galvanic skin response, electromyography, functional magnetic resonance imaging, and eye tracking in order to measure and analyze emotion, attention, and the memory of consumers and try to unravel how our brains decide what to buy [1].

Only 15% of our decisions are made consciously

At least 70% of new products launched worldwide, tested by traditional techniques like interviews or surveys, fail within the first six months [2]. This happens because only 15% of our decisions are made consciously, whereas the rest is decided by our subconscious [3]. Neuromarketing seeks to be more accurate than traditional methods by measuring the unconscious and spontaneous reactions of the consumers when they are confronted with diverse stimuli.

Neuromarketing vs Neuroeconomics

Neuromarketing is often compared to and confused with neuroeconomics. While neuroeconomics focuses on individual and group choice, judgment, and decision-making, neuromarketing investigates how a distribution of choices can be influenced or shifted from one pattern to another [4].

This is where I start to wonder about the real purpose of neuromarketing. It is not any more about understanding our minds in order to satisfy our necessities, but about finding a way to manipulate our choices simply to boost consumerism. Neuromarketing is not necessarily intended to benefit the consumer by offering better products. Its main purpose is to enrich companies or sellers at the expense of the consumer.

Neuromarketing’s Challenges

Being a very recent discipline, while promising, it faces some challenges to overcome. First, implemented techniques require high cost equipment, which makes it unapproachable for small companies. Besides, these techniques can be also very invasive for the participants of the study.

Second, there are no defined standards yet for either measurements or analysis. Thus, any result can change based on the methods applied, measured parameters, and most importantly, the analysis of the data, depending on the scientist behind the research. 

Personally, I think ethics is the major problem to be solved in neuromarketing. On the one hand, data is taken directly from our brain and I am not sure how comfortable people feel being literally “read”, particularly because this information could be used widely for many other purposes, besides sales, as you can imagine. On the other hand, neuromarketing techniques are closely associated with the manipulation of our brain and, as already mentioned, we - as consumers - don’t even benefit from it. Therefore, if this field wants to survive, grow and attract people, it should start redefining itself and offering a real contribution to society.

[1] Vecchiato et al., Comput Math Methods Med, 2014

[2] http://bit.ly/1hoRuXY 

[3] http://bit.ly/QG5Nug 

[4] Breiter et al., Front Hum Neurosci, 2015

by Laura Moreno Velasquez, PhD Student AG Schmitz

this article originally appeared in December 2015 Volume 08 issue 4 in "Money on My Mind"

Does Money Make You Happy?

We have been talking about New Year's resolutions lately, among them were "Exercise more often", "Eat Healthier and Diet" and "Quit Smoking". Today we focus on another common resolution "Spend Less, Save More". But is this really a good idea? Will it make me happy to not spend the money but to save it?

via flickr

We live in a world where happiness is advertised to us as reachable by material things. Be it a big house, a new car or a vacation in the Caribbean, we are promised that we are only one step away from greater happiness by simply buying things. There is no doubt that money controls our life to a great extent. But does money truly make us happy?

Money Matters – to a Certain Degree

The relationship between money and happiness has fascinated researchers for many years. Fifteen years ago, it was shown that there is a high correlation between the general wealth of nations and the mean reports of subjective well-being (SWB), the standard measure for happiness. However, within each nation, there were only small correlations between the two (see also "The Happiest (Or Wealthiest?) Countries On Earth" on page 14). Moreover, an increase in individual income did not have a clear effect on SWB and recent economic growth was followed by only a small rise in SWB [1]. The study concluded that more money increases SWB when it means avoiding poverty (as the difference in SWB between developing countries and developed countries suggests) but income does not change the SWB levels over the long term.

Other recent studies have examined happiness levels with regard to SWB showing that a high income improves our evaluation of life in the rational sense, but not SWB in the emotional sense. In other words, money makes you think you feel better but it actually does not [2]. Finally, a fascinating study examined the happiness levels of lottery winners and accident victims along time. Surprisingly, after a certain period of time had passed (a year), both groups returned to their original baseline happiness levels [3].

Overall, it seems that money plays a relatively minor role in happiness – it is important to a certain degree, to provide for the basic necessities in life, but once these necessities are met, money will have almost no effect on our happiness levels.

Culture and the Money-Happiness Relationship

To understand the relationship between income and happiness, the consumption norms of a society seem to be essential. In a culture where ostensibly money plays such a large role in defining our social class, it may have a prominent effect on our happiness, and not necessarily in the right direction. People who value money highly and are materialistic tend to be less happy [4-6]. This is due to motives of social comparison, seeking power, showing off and an urge to overcome self-doubt.

These bad side effects of materialism were not only found in people with a materialistic personality, but also in people who were simply exposed enough to a consumption-promoting environment [7]. So whether money itself makes us happy or not, it is clear beyond doubt that pursuing it definitely makes us feel less happy. 

If Not Money -  Then What Does Make Us Happy?

Autonomy seems to be part of the answer. A meta-analysis with data from 63 countries showed that individualism was consistently a better predictor than wealth for happiness [8]. Many other studies emphasize the positive effect of gratitude on an individual's happiness [9]. Grateful thinking and gratitude expression improve mood, promote savoring the good things, boosts our self-esteem, and helps strengthen social bonds and relationships.

Leading a healthy lifestyle with regard to food, physical activity, and sleep also has an effect on our happiness. Bad foods (covered in our last issue on Nutrition and Neuroscience) has a bad effect on our mood [10], while engaging in physical activity enhances self-esteem, improves our mood, and reduces anxiety [11]. Sleep also has an important role for our happiness [12] - dreaming in particular - is an important mechanism to deal with painful memories [13]. In addition, sleep deprivation decreases our job satisfaction [14].  

Tips for Seeking Happiness

Overall, it seems that money is a bad focus point to achieve happiness. If you want to enhance your happiness, you should concentrate on the following:

• Do not set money as your top priority
• Express gratitude and remember to be grateful especially for the things you may take for granted
• Lead a healthy lifestyle – move more, eat healthy, and SLEEP!

[1] Diener et al., Social Indicators Research, 2001

[2] Kahneman and Deaton, PNAS, 2010

[3] Brickman et al., J Pers Soc Psychol, 1978

[4] Srivastava et al., J Pers Soc Psychol, 2001

[5] Kasser et al., Motiv Emot, 2014

[6] Nickerson et al., Psychol Sci, 2003

[7] Bauer et al., Psychol Sci, 2012

[8] Fischer and Boer., J Pers Soc Psychol, 2011

[9] Watkins et al., Soc Behav Pers, 2003

[10] Golomb et al., PLOS One, 2012

[11] Fox, Public Health Nutr, 1999

[12] Griffith and Rosbash, Nat Neurosci, 2008

[13] Science Daily, UC Berkeley

[14] Science Daily, ESRC

by Michelle Livne, PhD Student AG Sobesky

This article originally appeared December 2015 in Volume 08, Issue 4 "Money on My Mind"