bioRxiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.64898/2025.12.03.691733

Trump Administration Impacts on Early Career Scientists and How To Fight Back

Hammond, C.·Flores, J. P.·Rouzer, S.·Fernandez, K.·Ralston, A.·Bankston, A.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Scientific research drives national progress and innovation, and must be protected at all costs. Actions from the Trump administration in early 2025 sent shockwaves across academic research. Federal science budgets were slashed, hundreds of research grants were abruptly frozen or terminated, and politically appointed agency heads overrode peer-reviewed grant decisions. We conducted rapid-response surveys to capture quotes, stories, and data to understand how these seismic shifts were being felt by early career researchers. The majority of survey respondents were PhD students, and early career trainees in varying years of training at a variety of institutions, mainly in the life sciences. Their future in research, funded by major science agencies including NIH, was threatened by funding cuts with varying impacts to their professional endeavors. Survey respondents highlighted concerns with long-term research job prospects and broader systemic issues in academia, leading them to consider leaving the field altogether and/or pursue science in another country. Their opinions highlighted concerns at the undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral levels. While universities provided some resources, trainees called upon Congress to protect, stabilize, and restore science funding. They also undertook a number of advocacy actions across the nation. The fight is far from over. Continued support for early career researchers and their careers in research is imperative to continue both in the current environment and into the future, in order to develop a strong workforce and ensure U.S. global competitiveness in science and technology fields.

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hammond, C., Flores, J. P., Rouzer, S., Fernandez, K., Ralston, A., Bankston, A.. 2025-12-04. Trump Administration Impacts on Early Career Scientists and How To Fight Back. https://doi.org/10.64898/2025.12.03.691733

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Internal Grant Review: A Pre-Submission Program for Early-Career Clinical and Translational Researchers

The iTHRIV Scholars Mentored Career Development Program initiated an Internal Grant Review (IGR) program in 2020 for current and recently graduated Scholars seeking funding through K and R awards from the NIH. The IGR program is designed to replicate the NIH review process and provide Scholars the opportunity to receive valuable feedback on their applications prior to NIH submission. A key characteristic of the program is the integration of REDCap, enabling automation and year-round offering while improving tracking and reporting efforts and capabilities. Results of the program have been overall positive, both in proposal development and participant feedback. IGR is a sustainable, valuable resource for early-career faculty competing for limited resources in the pursuit to become independently funded clinical translational scientists.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2026

Multi-Lab Testing of Early Preclinical Discoveries Identifies Promising Treatments

A fundamental challenge in drug development is the frequent failure of early laboratory research to translate into clinical benefit. One promising solution is to confirm findings from exploratory single-laboratory studies across multiple laboratories before clinical testing. We investigated this approach following the conduct of preclinical multi-laboratory studies across different fields of medicine. For this, we evaluated effect sizes, experimental rigor, and a set of criteria to identify determinants of confirmation success. When tested under increased rigor, only a fraction of multi-laboratory studies confirmed the initial results. The underlying effect size reduction was associated with outcome-relevant experimental differences between exploratory and confirmatory stages. In summary, multi-laboratory studies proved highly informative and served as an effective filter for promising treatments.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2026

Technology-enhanced learning in undergraduate neuroscience education: tractography-based virtual dissection in psychology

Background: Neuroanatomy poses a significant challenge for Psychology students due to its spatial and conceptual complexity. Educational approaches that enhance the relevance and visualization of neuroanatomical content may improve students learning experiences. This study implemented a tractography-based activity focused on the virtual dissection of the arcuate fasciculus, a major white matter pathway, in undergraduate Psychology students and examined the relationships between perceived learning and students perceptions of utility, difficulty and handling, and organizational aspects of the activity. Methods: First-year undergraduate Psychology students participated in a two-session tractography-based activity combining instruction on white matter anatomy and diffusion tractography with a hands-on virtual dissection of the arcuate fasciculus using research-grade software routinely employed in neuroscience research. Following the activity, students completed an anonymous questionnaire assessing perceived learning, utility, difficulty and handling, and organizational aspects of the activity. Pearson correlations, multiple regression analyses, and relative importance analyses were performed. Results: Sixty-eight students completed the questionnaire. Students reported generally positive perceptions of the activity across the evaluated dimensions, with perceived learning receiving the highest mean score (M = 3.44, SD = .85). Perceived utility showed the strongest association with perceived learning (r = .64, p < .001). The regression model explained 41% of the variance in perceived learning (R2 = .41, adjusted R2 = .38, p < .001). Perceived utility was the only significant predictor in the model ({beta} = .59, p = .001), accounting for 67.9% of the explained variance. Conclusions: The findings support the feasibility of integrating authentic neuroimaging tools into undergraduate neuroanatomy teaching. Students who perceived the activity as more useful also reported higher perceived learning outcomes, with perceived utility emerging as the strongest predictor of perceived learning. In contrast, perceived difficulty and handling, and organizational aspects did not make significant independent contributions. These results suggest that students perceptions of educational relevance may play an important role in technology-enhanced STEM learning experiences.

scientific communication and education↗