3 answers
Meghana
Student
Katy, Texas
19
Questions
Updated
3656 views
How do PhD admission officers think about an undergraduate who worked in two research labs simultaneously?
I am currently a rising sophomore who started in a genetics lab in March. I found a really interesting opportunity to work in a biomedical engineering lab, and their position description requires me to learn many software skills which will be helpful for my bioinformatics track.
Assuming I can handle the workload, would adding a second lab strengthen my PhD application? Or might it raise concerns about my ability to commit deeply to one research lab?
Login to comment
3 answers
Wala'a B
Healthcare and Student Succeses Advocate
10
Answers
Detroit, Michigan
Updated
Wala'a’s Answer
Peace Meghana,
I hope you’re doing well!
I’m currently applying to MD-PhD programs and have worked in multiple labs over the years, so I really resonate with your question. The short answer is:
It depends on
Quantity,
Quality,
and Consistency.
Here’s how I would break it down:
Quantity:
Yes, working in two labs can be a strong asset, especially if you can manage the workload. It shows you’re capable of balancing multiple responsibilities and that you’re serious about exploring research from different angles. But it only adds value if it doesn’t come at the expense of depth.
Quality:
If you’re planning to apply to a PhD program in genetics, I recommend prioritizing the lab most aligned with that field. Admissions committees care more about what you did than how many hours you logged.
Ask yourself:
What did I contribute to this lab that made a difference?
What skills did I gain?
Did I show initiative — like helping write an SOP, mastering a technique, or contributing to a project or publication?
Even if you spend over 1,000 hours in a lab, if you can’t articulate how you grew or helped the lab grow, the experience won’t carry as much weight. It’s not about the number. It’s about the narrative you can tell.
Consistency:
One thing admissions committees do watch for is how long you stay in your research roles. Jumping between labs every couple of months can raise red flags. If you do take on both labs, try to stay in them for a meaningful amount of time.
Read your labs’ recent papers, offer to assist on new ones, and if you can — stay long enough to see a project through. That kind of investment shows maturity and genuine interest.
The bottom line is:
If you truly believe both labs will help you grow — in different but complementary ways — go for it. Just make sure you’re not spreading yourself too thin, and that you're able to speak meaningfully about what you’ve done in each space.
You’ve got this! I’m happy to help if you want to talk through anything else — or if you’d like feedback on future decisions or applications.
Below are some steps I wish I had done (or done earlier!) during my own research journey:
Thoroughly research what degree and specality you want, and dissect the requirements of that degree to see how best you can accomplish them
Keep a log of the hours you end up accumulating in an Excel log or otherwise; it'll make applying to graduate schools easier.
Keep a log of how you contribute to the lab in an Excel log or otherwise; it'll make applying to graduate schools easier.
Pro tip from my PI: when you apply to a program or school, do a bit of research on the topic or specality you are trying to get into so you know how to talk about it past surface level. For example, multiple sclerosis is a nerve disease, yes, but what else? Tell its story.
Be true to yourself, and give yourself grace. Do not compare yourself to others, because trust me when I say that you truly do not know what is happening behind the scenes.
I hope you’re doing well!
I’m currently applying to MD-PhD programs and have worked in multiple labs over the years, so I really resonate with your question. The short answer is:
It depends on
Quantity,
Quality,
and Consistency.
Here’s how I would break it down:
Quantity:
Yes, working in two labs can be a strong asset, especially if you can manage the workload. It shows you’re capable of balancing multiple responsibilities and that you’re serious about exploring research from different angles. But it only adds value if it doesn’t come at the expense of depth.
Quality:
If you’re planning to apply to a PhD program in genetics, I recommend prioritizing the lab most aligned with that field. Admissions committees care more about what you did than how many hours you logged.
Ask yourself:
What did I contribute to this lab that made a difference?
What skills did I gain?
Did I show initiative — like helping write an SOP, mastering a technique, or contributing to a project or publication?
Even if you spend over 1,000 hours in a lab, if you can’t articulate how you grew or helped the lab grow, the experience won’t carry as much weight. It’s not about the number. It’s about the narrative you can tell.
Consistency:
One thing admissions committees do watch for is how long you stay in your research roles. Jumping between labs every couple of months can raise red flags. If you do take on both labs, try to stay in them for a meaningful amount of time.
Read your labs’ recent papers, offer to assist on new ones, and if you can — stay long enough to see a project through. That kind of investment shows maturity and genuine interest.
The bottom line is:
If you truly believe both labs will help you grow — in different but complementary ways — go for it. Just make sure you’re not spreading yourself too thin, and that you're able to speak meaningfully about what you’ve done in each space.
You’ve got this! I’m happy to help if you want to talk through anything else — or if you’d like feedback on future decisions or applications.
Below are some steps I wish I had done (or done earlier!) during my own research journey:
Wala'a recommends the following next steps:
I genuinely appreciate the time you took into answering this question. I understand how to decide now!
And yes I would love to stay in contact for further application questions! I truly wish you the best for your MD-PhD journey!
Meghana
Of course, it is the least I can do! Search my name up on LinkedIn (Walaa Bazoun) and we can connect from there, anytime. You got this, Meghana!
Wala'a B
Jane Doe
20
Answers
New York, New York
Updated
Jane’s Answer
Hi, Meghana! From my understanding, PhD admissions committees generally view research experience very positively, especially when it shows initiative and diverse skills. Working in two research labs simultaneously can definitely strengthen your application if you manage both roles well and gain meaningful experience from each. It shows you’re proactive, adaptable, and building a broad skill set—which can be especially valuable for interdisciplinary fields like bioinformatics.
At the same time, admissions officers appreciate seeing that you can commit deeply to your research and contribute significantly, rather than just spreading yourself too thin. So it’s important to demonstrate real involvement and growth in both labs, not just superficial participation. If both opportunities are meaningful, you can highlight them in your application and explain how their complementary nature adds value, while also emphasizing your commitment and ability to balance responsibilities.
Since perspectives can vary by program and faculty, talking with your current mentors, academic advisors, or faculty members involved in PhD admissions can provide tailored guidance based on your goals and workload. Reviewing the expectations of programs you’re interested in can also help you balance breadth and depth in your research experience. Best of luck!
At the same time, admissions officers appreciate seeing that you can commit deeply to your research and contribute significantly, rather than just spreading yourself too thin. So it’s important to demonstrate real involvement and growth in both labs, not just superficial participation. If both opportunities are meaningful, you can highlight them in your application and explain how their complementary nature adds value, while also emphasizing your commitment and ability to balance responsibilities.
Since perspectives can vary by program and faculty, talking with your current mentors, academic advisors, or faculty members involved in PhD admissions can provide tailored guidance based on your goals and workload. Reviewing the expectations of programs you’re interested in can also help you balance breadth and depth in your research experience. Best of luck!
Puneet Garg
Technology Consultant
16
Answers
Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
Updated
Puneet’s Answer
You're already on the right track by planning for your future, which is something admissions committees love to see. Here's how you can enhance your application:
Adding a second lab can really boost your PhD application. It can help you gain new technical skills and experience in different fields, especially if it ties into bioinformatics. Admissions committees look for candidates who show curiosity, initiative, and a range of skills. If you can explain how each lab has contributed to your learning—like how genetics gave you a strong foundation and biomedical engineering improved your computational skills—you'll be telling a compelling story.
Remember, depth is important too. Committees want to see that you can make meaningful contributions and stay committed to projects. If you switch labs too often or take on too much, it might raise concerns unless you can clearly show how each experience fits into your overall plan.
Here's a possible plan:
- Stay with the genetics lab to keep a consistent track record.
- Join the second lab, even if it's only part-time or during the summer, and focus on the specific skills you're gaining.
- When applying, highlight how these experiences work together and support your long-term research goals.
Adding a second lab can really boost your PhD application. It can help you gain new technical skills and experience in different fields, especially if it ties into bioinformatics. Admissions committees look for candidates who show curiosity, initiative, and a range of skills. If you can explain how each lab has contributed to your learning—like how genetics gave you a strong foundation and biomedical engineering improved your computational skills—you'll be telling a compelling story.
Remember, depth is important too. Committees want to see that you can make meaningful contributions and stay committed to projects. If you switch labs too often or take on too much, it might raise concerns unless you can clearly show how each experience fits into your overall plan.
Here's a possible plan:
- Stay with the genetics lab to keep a consistent track record.
- Join the second lab, even if it's only part-time or during the summer, and focus on the specific skills you're gaining.
- When applying, highlight how these experiences work together and support your long-term research goals.
Thank you so much for the detailed answer! I appreciate you giving me a possible plan, it really helps me resolve my conflict.
Meghana