Feature

ILLUSTRATION BY SÉBASTIEN THIBAULT

THE MENTAL-HEALTH
struggles, many argue that it only exacerbated
problems that were already present. The
recent studies, which have collectively sur-

CRISIS IN SCIENCE
veyed tens of thousands of researchers world-
wide, suggest that scientists’ mental-health
struggles are a direct result of a toxic research
culture.
That is particularly true for members of
under-represented groups, including women,
non-binary individuals, people of colour, those
from sexual and gender minorities (LGBTQ+)
With researchers reporting high rates of anxiety and students on low incomes. But they also
and depression, calls are growing to change toxic affect senior researchers and scientists in dif-

elements of the culture in science. By Shannon Hall ferent countries.

T
here is a mental-health crisis in
science — at all career stages and
across the world. Graduate students
are being harassed and discrimi-
nated against, paid meagre wages,
bullied, overworked and some-
times sexually assaulted. It doesn’t
get much better for early-career
researchers struggling to land long-term
employment. And established senior research-
ers face immense pressure to win grants,
publish in high-profile journals and maintain
their reputations in highly competitive fields.
Scientists have raised concerns for years
about the impacts of all these pressures on
mental health. But a series of studies in the
past few years are now providing hard data.
And the findings show that the situation is dire.
Researchers are much more likely than the
general population to experience depression
and anxiety. And although the COVID-19 pan-
demic caused an increase in mental-health
“Well-being and how to set healthy bounda-
ries in your life and in your work is a fundamen-
tal skill,” says Sharon Milgram, director of the
Office of Intramural Training and Education
at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH).
“I feel like there was a blind spot in myself and
many of us, in that it took this data to wake us
up.”
With hard numbers in hand, some argue
that science is at the beginning of a move-
ment  —  one that will encourage systemic
changes to improve the mental health of
researchers over generations to come. Oth-
ers argue that change is happening too slowly

666 | Nature | Vol 617 | 25 May 2023

©
2
0
2
3
S
p
r
i
n
g
e
r
N
a
t
u
r
e
L
i
m
i
t
e
d
.
A
l
l
r
i
g
h
t
s
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
for young scientists who are already fleeing
science — an effect that could have grim conse-
quences for the future of research and society
itself.
A global problem
In 2015, Teresa Evans, who directed graduate
biomedical career development at the Uni-
versity of Texas Health Science Center at San
Antonio, learnt that her students were strug-
gling. But when they came to her for advice,
she felt ill-equipped to help.
So Evans started her own research, only to
uncover a dearth of literature on the topic. Not
only were there few resources on how to help
students, but it was unclear how extensive
mental-health problems were — compelling
Evans to circulate her own survey to quantify
the matter. She received 2,279 responses,
mostly from PhD candidates, at 234 institu-
tions across 26 countries.
The results, published in March 2018, repre-
sented the largest survey of its kind at the time.
It revealed a global problem: 41% of respond-
ents reported moderate to severe anxiety
and 39% had moderate to severe depression1.
Those levels are six times greater than in the
general population (see ‘Struggles in science’).
The data also suggested possible sources of
these mental-health problems — anxiety and
depression were often correlated with poor
work–life balance and poor mentor relation-
ships.
The rates varied significantly by gender:
female, transgender and gender-noncon-
forming respondents were more likely to
struggle with mental health than were their
male counterparts. The prevalence of anxi-
ety and depression was 55% and 57% for trans-
gender and gender-nonconforming graduate
students, 43% and 41% for women and 34%
and 35% for men. That didn’t surprise Evans,
because women are more prone to anxiety and
depression than are men2.
But there was another, bigger factor at work:
sexual harassment in science that dispropor-
tionately affects women. In 2014, Kathryn
Clancy, an anthropologist at the University
of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign, documented
high rates of sexual harassment in field sci-
ence3 . Then, in 2017, she and her colleagues
surveyed 474  astronomers and planetary
scientists, and found that 30% of women felt
unsafe because of their gender (compared
with 2% of men)4.
These studies encouraged the US National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Med-
icine to appoint a special committee to exam-
ine the issue in academic settings. In June 2018,
it released a report that revealed pervasive and
damaging sexual harassment in science5.
It’s not just a problem in the United States.
In 2020, Wellcome, a major biomedical
research funder in London, surveyed more
than 4,200 scientists from 87 countries across
genders, career stages and disciplines, and
found that 43% of participants had experi-
enced bullying or harassment and 61% had
witnessed it6. Many felt that it was “culturally
systemic”, and 33% thought that leaders turned
a blind eye to the behaviour.
In a 2021 Nature survey of more than
3,200 working scientists, nearly one-third
said they had observed discrimination
against or harassment of colleagues in their
current job. The following year, another
Nature survey of more than 3,200 PhD and
master’s students found that 35% of scientists
who identify as members of minority racial
or ethnic groups said they had experienced
harassment or discrimination during their
graduate studies.
They get you to
torture yourself
by making this work
part of your identity.”
It’s no wonder there is a serious mental-
health problem in science, say researchers.
One study even found that the rates of burn-
out, depression and anxiety were comparable
with those reported in ‘high-risk’ occupations
such as health care7.
The Wellcome study6 found that 70% of
respondents felt stressed on the average
workday, and 34% had sought professional
help for mental-health issues. Beyond har-
assment, many participants blamed funders
and institutes that emphasize quantity over
quality in terms of publishing and obtaining
grants — all of which contribute to a poor
work–life balance.
Another explanation suggested in the study6
is that many scientists see their work as a
vocation, not just a job. Although that means
researchers are passionate, it also presents
a unique challenge, argues Eric Pellegrini,
an astronomer who left the field last year to
become an independent data scientist. “They
get you to torture yourself by making this work
part of your identity — it’s not a job, it’s not even
a career, it’s a life choice,” he says. “And you buy
into that for years until you figure out what it
is. Take away a lot of the parts, make it more
generic, and it’s just an abusive relationship.”
Pandemic pressures
That was the picture before 2020. Then
the COVID-19 pandemic hit, and with it, an
onslaught of further challenges.
In a 2020 survey of 5,247 graduate students
in science, technology, engineering and math-
ematics from 9 institutions across the United
States, 38% reported symptoms consistent
with anxiety and 35% had depression8. These
proportions represented large jumps from
what the same team found in 2019. The num-
ber of students with depression doubled, and
the prevalence of anxiety rose by 50% (ref. 8).
“Our findings indicated that it was really
a disaster,” says Igor Chirikov, a senior
researcher at the Center for Studies in Higher
Education at the University of California,
Berkeley, who led the study.
Chirikov’s team found that challenges in
mental health were often associated with
financial stress, which are acute for early-stage
researchers. In the United States, for example,
PhD students in the biological sciences earn
salaries that are well below the cost of living.
Postdoctoral researchers earn an average of
$47,500 a year — a little more than half of the
average annual salary for university graduates.
Moreover, postdocs face constant upheaval,
because they typically have to move to a new
role every few years. Some researchers spend a
decade or longer jumping from one short-term
contract to the next.
Then, despite the years that scientists
devote to training, many struggle to find a
long-term job at a university, and this can drive
young researchers out of science entirely. The
2020 Wellcome survey6 found that nearly
half of the respondents who had left research
reported that difficulty in finding a job was
one reason. The two other common reasons
included a negative impact on mental health
and a desire for a better work–life balance.
Even if scientists land permanent positions,
the competition never ends. In 2020, a sur-
vey designed by Cactus Communications, a
science communication and technology
company headquartered in Mumbai, India,
analysed the opinions of 13,000 researchers
in more than 160 countries. It found, for exam-
ple, that 65% of respondents were under tre-
mendous pressure to publish papers, secure
grants and complete projects to maintain their
reputation in the research community9. “That
response is coming largely from more senior
researchers, because they need to continue
to be seen as bright as they once were,” says
Abhishek Goel, co-founder and chief executive
of Cactus Communications.
Beyond the pressure to perform, the study
identified several other factors contributing to
poor mental health among researchers, includ-
ing long working hours and a culture in which
stress and anxiety are normalized. Another
factor mentioned by a large proportion of
scientists was bullying and discrimination in
their work environment. This was especially
common for women, researchers identifying
as gay and people of mixed race. Some 60% of
the last group, for example, reported that they
had experienced discrimination, harassment
or bullying at work.
Although the study took place in 2020, most

Nature | Vol 617 | 25 May 2023 | 667

©
2
0
2
3
S
p
r
i
n
g
e
r
N
a
t
u
r
e
L
i
m
i
t
e
d
.
A
l
l
r
i
g
h
t
s
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
Feature
STRUGGLES IN SCIENCE and postdocs have led to various events and
Surveys show researchers are experiencing high rates of mental ill health, such as workshops, even yoga meet-ups. Drives to form
anxiety, depression and a sense of being overwhelmed by their work. PhD student and postdoc unions on US cam-
Graduate students report anxiety and depression In a worldwide survey of more than 13,000 puses have also sought guarantees of better
at rates six times that of the general population, researchers between October 2019 and July working conditions. “It is the beginning of a
according to a survey of some 2,300 people 2020, 38% said they felt overwhelmed by their
from 26 countries. Rates were highest among situation at work very often or fairly often movement that hopefully over generations
transgender and female students. during the previous month. of academics will result in long-term change,”
Never Evans says. “And I feel like we have all the pieces
Anxiety Depression 7%
Male Very often
to see that happen. It just takes time.”
34% 15% Almost But others argue that science needs larger,
never systemic changes — such as zero tolerance for

SOURCES: LEFT, REF. 1; RIGHT: REF. 9

35
Female
43
41
Transgender
55
57
0 100%
of these issues were present well before the
COVID-19 pandemic.
One study, for example, surveyed more
than 3,000 physicists and biologists in the
United Kingdom, United States, Italy and
India, and conducted in-depth interviews
with more than 200 scientists. It found that
the pandemic only exacerbated issues that
were already present10.
“In our interviews, scientists said that the
pandemic was really just the tipping point,”
says study co-author Brandon Vaidyanathan, a
sociologist at the Catholic University of Amer-
ica in Washington DC. “Things like burnout and
emotional exhaustion had been happening
beforehand and the pandemic laid them bare.
It amplified these effects.”
Chance to change
As evidence of all these problems has grown,
scientists are turning towards solutions. But
exactly what needs to change is far from clear.
“When we looked at the results from the study,
we were actually quite upset and felt a little
angry — helpless even,” Goel says. “We just felt
that it would be extremely difficult to effect
change.”
Still, many scientists agree that the first
step is for mental health to become a main-
stream topic of conversation — a change that
might already be afoot. Since Evans and her
colleagues published their study in 2018,
they and other scientists have been invited to
numerous institutions and conferences to talk
about the issue. And the most recent decadal
survey of US astronomy and astrophysics, in
2021, conducted by the National Academies to
set funding priorities every decade, discussed
the need to address harassment and discrimi-
nation in the community.
That’s huge progress, argued Jennifer
Wiseman, an astronomer at NASA’s Goddard
Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, at
a meeting of the American Astronomical Soci-
ety (AAS) in Seattle, Washington, in January.
Other programmes are looking to tackle the
17%
Fairly often Sometimes
23% 38%
representation and equity issues that so often
coincide with harassment, abuse and mental
illness. For instance, NASA recently reviewed
its Hubble Fellowship Program, which pro-
vides esteemed postdoctoral positions, in
order to diversify its reach. Major grant pro-
grammes, such as those of the US Department
of Energy, now require a plan that outlines
how the proposing team will work against
barriers to create and sustain an inclusive
work environment. “These examples highlight
actions being taken in our astronomical field
in response to shifting values that now pri-
oritize inclusivity and the well-being of our
communities as central to scientific success,”
Wiseman said at the meeting.
The whole system
needs a massive
overhaul.”
Milgram has long viewed mental health
as an essential component of a successful
researcher’s skill set. Since 2020, the NIH Office
of Intramural Training and Education has
offered a course called Becoming a Resilient
Scientist, with topics that range from impostor
syndrome to developing better relationships
with mentors. Its 25,000 participants — includ-
ing undergraduates, graduates, postdocs and
medical students recruited from the NIH
and various extramural institutions — have
reported decreases in anxiety, depression and
presenteeism (that is, not fully functioning in
the workplace because of stress). In the past
two years, Milgram’s team has offered a parallel
programme called Raising a Resilient Scientist,
which is designed to help faculty members and
administrators develop better mentoring skills
and work on their personal mental health.
Grassroots initiatives by graduate students
abuse. Although institutions and conferences
are strengthening value statements, codes
of conduct and enforcement, there is still a
lot of work to be done, Wiseman said at the
AAS meeting. Researchers need to be able
to raise concerns without fear of reprisals
or prejudice. In Goel’s survey9, for example,
49% of respondents said that they would not
seek support because they would worry about
retaliation.
Many argue that there needs to be drastic
changes to funding structures. “These mod-
els are just really dated,” says Sheila Kanani,
the education outreach and diversity officer
at the Royal Astronomical Society in London,
which surveyed 650 astronomers and phys-
icists in 2020 and found a systemic bullying
problem. “The whole system needs a massive
overhaul.” As part of that, she and others say
that funding should not be entirely based on
publications, but rather on a healthy work
environment — one that considers the mental
health of researchers and the rigour of their
work, including ideas that might never land
in an academic journal.
Without dramatic change, it’s possible
that young researchers will continue to flee
the field. “This really is a problem that could
potentially affect the future of science if we
can’t retain young talent,” Vaidyanathan says.
“We owe it to future generations of scientists
to create more hospitable workplaces that just
allow you to just do the science.”
Shannon Hall is a freelance reporter in
Colorado.
1. Evans, T. M., Bira, L., Gastelum, J. B., Weiss, L. T. &
Vanderford, N. L. Nature Biotechnol. 36, 282–284 (2018).
2. Eaton, N. R. et al. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 121, 282–288 (2012).
3. Clancy, K. B. H., Nelson, R. G., Rutherford, J. N. & Hinde, K.
PLoS ONE 9, e102172 (2014).
4. Clancy, K. B. H., Lee, K. M. N., Rodgers, E. M. & Richey, C.
J. Geophys. Res. Planets 122, 1610–1623 (2017).
5. Johnson, P. A., Widnall, S. E. & Benya, F. F. (eds).
Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and
Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine (National Academies Press, 2018).
6. Wellcome. What Researchers Think About the Culture
They Work In (Wellcome, 2020).
7. Watts, J. & Robertson, N. Educ. Res. 53, 33–50 (2011).
8. Chirikov, I., Soria, K. M, Horgos, B. & Jones-White, D.
Undergraduate and Graduate Students’ Mental Health
During the COVID-19 Pandemic (Univ. California, Berkeley
& Univ. Minnesota, 2020).
9. Cactus Foundation. Joy and Stress Triggers: A Global
Survey on Mental Health Among Researchers (Cactus
Communications, 2020).
10. Jacobi, C. J., Varga, P. J. & Vaidyanathan, B. Front. Psychol.
13, 923940 (2022).

668 | Nature | Vol 617 | 25 May 2023

©
2
0
2
3
S
p
r
i
n
g
e
r
N
a
t
u
r
e
L
i
m
i
t
e
d
.
A
l
l
r
i
g
h
t
s
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.