On Reading More Scientific Books and Articles
Hey Neurons,
Often, I discuss with colleagues how they stay on top of the literature coming out of the field. One of the most common complaints among scientists is the size of their reading list. This list never seems to decrease and only seems to grow as we move forward in our scientific careers. When people ask me how I stay on top of this list and ensure I read everything that is out there, my first thought is not to provide them with the secret to reading 10× faster or having a dedicated 10-hour time block each day that one can spend solely on reading. My first question is: “Why do you feel you need to read more?”
On the question: why do you feel you need to read more?
In some respects, this is the most important question to ask yourself, as I think the answer will change how you approach your reading list and reading tactics. For myself, I have found that three primary reasons underlie my desire to read more: to fill a knowledge gap, to stay up to date, and to find creative inspiration.
Below, I will dissect some of these reasons a little further, but I want to invite you to consider for yourself what the primary reason is that you want to read more, as this will change the best approach to tackling this problem.
Reason 1: To fill a knowledge gap
When I started as a PhD student, I felt this general sense that I needed to read as much literature as I could get my hands on. The reason I felt I needed to read so much is that I had no grasp of the field yet. Most topics were new to me. I did not know who the main authors, professors, and scientists in my field were, and I did not know what topics were worth exploring. In other words, I wanted to read to fill a knowledge gap that I perceived in myself.
Although I think this is a noble and ambitious goal, the manner in which I went about filling this knowledge gap was, in hindsight, most likely not the optimal strategy. I would add anything and everything that seemed remotely novel to my reading list and proceeded to dedicate many hours every day to going through this list. This not only meant that much of the reading I did was only vaguely related to my thesis, but it also meant that the pace at which my list was growing outpaced any possible reading I could do. In the end, this led to a constant feeling of overwhelm, and I think this did not contribute to my overall goal of wanting to learn more about my field.
Looking back now, what I would recommend anyone new to their field do is not randomly add papers to their reading list in the hope of getting rid of the anxiety of not knowing enough. What I would recommend instead is asking your seniors in the field (these might be more senior PhD students, postdocs, or professors) to send you their top 10–20 papers that they think every student in their area should have read. The key is to take your time with these important papers and work through them.
Rather than reading a high number of papers, what is more important is the depth of understanding you gain from one important paper. So after you have read one of these papers, take time to reflect, doubt, and reason through what you have just read. For example, you can make a list of questions or doubts that you can discuss with your fellow lab members or professor.
This reading strategy ensures that, over the time span of your studies, you will fill your knowledge gaps with the most important knowledge and that you do not spend too much time on adjacent or irrelevant literature. Furthermore, if you visit another lab or see a poster or presentation from a different field, it is also very interesting to ask the people presenting the same question: what are the top papers in their niche? In this manner, you can slowly expand your knowledge network to adjacent topics and fields as well.
Reason 2: To stay up to date
Currently, in my postdoctoral research phase, the reason I often find myself wanting to read more is not to fill a perceived knowledge gap, as at this stage I am quite confident in my grasp of the literature, but more often to stay “up to date” with the work of other scientists. In other words, what are the top scientific authors in my field working on, and what topics should I be aware of?
In general, there is not one way to stay “on top of the research.” I have found that combining a couple of different techniques works best. One great approach that I have found over the years is having a weekly or biweekly journal or reading session. This can be with fellow students, within your lab group, or in any setup that works best for you. What we would do is have one or two students pick a paper they liked, present it briefly to the group, and try to explain what they learned or found interesting in the paper. The discussion that followed would often allow me to learn something new. In addition, different people select quite different papers as “interesting,” making this a nice way to broaden your knowledge sphere.
Another common approach is to set up automatic updates. For example, in Google Scholar, you can set citation alerts for your profile and follow authors to receive notifications about new articles they publish. This can be done through Google Scholar, PubMed, or journal alert systems. If you want to take it one step further, you can also create your own dedicated RSS feed reader.
An RSS reader is similar to a personal newsletter, where you subscribe to the most important journals, research blogs, and preprint services. Currently, I am also in the process of creating my own RSS feed reader using NetNewsWire, where I have subscribed to various topics, websites, and sources of interest. It is a tricky balance between subscribing to too much (overwhelm) and subscribing to too little (the risk of missing certain articles), but I hope to keep you updated as I continue to refine this balance in the coming weeks.
Reason 3: To find creative inspiration
The final reason that I often find myself wanting to read more is to find creative inspiration for my work as a researcher and also for creating YouTube videos and these biweekly blogs. I often find myself wanting to read more scientific books and blogs simply for the enjoyment I get from reading this type of literature. The reason is not necessarily that I want a direct output or benefit from reading this type of work, but mostly to learn something new or remember why I wanted to become a scientific researcher in the first place. When I notice that I want to do more of this type of exploratory reading, this often means that I am not giving myself enough time to learn about topics for pure enjoyment.
A good example of this was at the end of my PhD. I solely read books and articles because I wanted to finish my PhD; everything that was not directly related to this goal would be scrapped from the reading list. Although effective, what I noticed over a couple of weeks was that I lost the joy in the research I was doing. It all felt very repetitive and uninspiring.
During high-pressure periods, it is, to some extent, necessary to cut back on more divergent reading. However, I would encourage master's and PhD students to always have one or two books on hand that they are reading for the pure joy and curiosity the topic brings. In the end, I think these books and novels will creatively help your work rather than hinder it. Without this type of reading and exploration, science quickly transforms into a dull endeavour.
📻 Something to listen
📻 Podcast - A conversation with OHBM 2026 Keynote Speaker Eduardo Garza-Villarreal - The Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) conference has just started, and every year they interview the main speakers for their podcast. I have found this podcast insightful, not only for staying up to date with the latest research in neuroimaging, but also for gaining early-career advice and insights into my seniors' academic pathways. In this episode, Dr. Garza-Villarreal talks about their academic work in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), animal research, and general models for understanding addiction. One interesting discussion they have is how we can bridge the scientific work done in animal models and translate it to humans. Within neuroscience, this has always been a difficult bridge to cross, as some of the foundational results found in animals often cannot be directly replicated in human participants, and vice versa.
🧠 NeuroSnips Community
P.S. One thing I want to do more of this year is have conversations with people in the NeuroSnips community about learning, growth, and the kind of person they’re trying to become. If you're currently a PhD student and would like to connect, I've opened a few 1:1 deep-dive sessions over the coming weeks.
I'm especially curious to hear about:
- what you're currently trying to learn or master
- where you feel stuck or inconsistent
- what would help you think more clearly, learn more deeply, or grow more intentionally
These are relaxed 20/30-minute conversations, and mostly a chance for me to better understand what curious people are struggling with and what support would be most valuable to create through NeuroSnips.
If that sounds interesting, you can book a session here:
