Persistence and Progress: A Scientist’s Path Through Adversity and Innovation
Dr. Elizabeth Neumann shares how resilience, mentorship and innovation shape her mission to advance neuroscience and empower future scientists.
Complete the form below to unlock access to ALL audio articles.
Dr. Elizabeth Neumann earned her bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Baylor University in 2015, where she began her training in mass spectrometry as an undergraduate in Touradj Solouki’s lab. In 2019, she completed her PhD at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign under the supervision of Jonathan Sweedler. During her doctoral studies, she deepened her expertise in analytical chemistry, mastered single-cell analysis techniques and applied them to neuroscience research. Following her PhD, Dr. Neumann joined Richard Caprioli’s lab at Vanderbilt University as a postdoctoral fellow. In 2022, she was appointed assistant professor in the Chemistry Department at UC Davis.
In just a few years, she has established a dynamic interdisciplinary lab focused on unraveling the molecular and cellular architecture underlying neurological diseases and other complex biological systems. Her lab employs cutting-edge techniques – including matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry imaging (MALDI MSI), highly multiplexed immunofluorescence, spectroscopy and transcriptomics – to create molecular profiles of biological samples within their spatial contexts.
Beyond her research, Dr. Neumann is deeply committed to mentorship and outreach. She is passionate about inspiring students to pursue careers in science and supporting their journeys toward success. In this interview, she shares her experiences and vision for the future of her career.
How do you help students define a research question?
Elizabeth Neumann, PhD (EN):
Usually, the first task is to ask them broadly what they would do if they could work on one thing during their life and solve it. What would that be? But because most of my students are first-generation college students, I have to address their imposter syndrome first. Lots of these students think they don't belong (and I felt that way before, too, so I get it!). Thus, I have to convince them that they do belong and that it is worth asking these large questions, and then we have fun brainstorming.
The final research question almost never resembles the one initially proposed, but it gets close. One of my students, for example, was very unconfident but is now doing amazing work on a very difficult project. She's sectioning spinal cord, bone and teeth that are non-decalcified and unfixed. People for the last decade have said that that is impossible, but I asked her to act like this doesn't matter. So, she doesn't have any of these biases and is now doing something someone else said was impossible. The beauty I see in some of these spaces, especially with first-generation students, is that they're willing to take risks that other students are not.
MG:
EN:
The answer is yes. As a graduate student, I had to file a Title IX lawsuit* against my university. I experienced significant sexism that qualified as federal workplace harassment and hostile work environment. I had to go to court to seek an order of protection against a senior graduate student who abused me while I was in lab. And, yes, he's still in science.
Fortunately, it's one of those things I've grown from, and it's part of my motivation for being a PI – you need people who have experienced this type of violence to know how to help others. It is important to me to admit that these things happen, that they're very severe, but also highlight that I didn't let it stop me and I could make it to the other side. I still got many papers as a graduate student, even though my time was immeasurably shorter because I frustrated people. Jonathan, my PI, was incredibly supportive throughout this process. But other people weren’t. For example, one of the higher-ups at the university said that if I wanted to graduate, I needed to learn to play nice in the sandbox, as if I were the aggressor. I graduated in about three and a half years. Instead of crying, I buckled up and published papers and then decided to get a postdoc. I spent years in therapy. I was very blessed to have lots of people around me who invested in me and understood the impacts of being victimized. I'm very stubborn and believe in creating a safe space for people who come after me. That motivated me to push through some of those inherent difficulties and create space on the other side. There are very few people who become a PI who are open about their experiences with sexual or physical assault. I know mine is a very severe case, but these cases happen.
Equally challenging is sitting on an NIH panel and hearing people be very sexist. Often, they just happen to be harsh if the PI is female or has a name that the reviewers can’t pronounce. It may not be intentional, but there's clearly bias there. At the faculty, discussions for things like space are tougher for me than for my male colleagues. I also see some of my female colleagues who are on maternity leave get less respect than my male colleagues on paternity leave. These might seem minor issues in some regards, but they are still very severe and affect scientific productivity.
*A Title IX lawsuit is a legal action filed against an educational institution for violating Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded schools.
MG:
EN:
I think this goes into two different buckets, and I've lived both of these experiences. One comes from the victim/survivor mentality. When you're physically or sexually abused, you're victimized. This leads to mental health issues that detract from your ability to do science and be competitive. Separately, any kind of imposter syndrome you have becomes multi-fold. The problem is that our society is not set up to be victim/survivor-forward. It's always perpetrator-forward. Society often asks victims to act as perpetrators, such as pursuing orders of protection or advocating for oneself. So, victims/survivors have a really hard time. I think one of the challenges is to become more victim/survivor-centric. Can we think about how we are asking victims/survivors to act? How do we re-integrate victims back into the workforce in a way that makes sense? Do we have resources for them? I think that's the first hurdle.
The other challenge is dealing with the inherent bias in selection processes. I work in a fantastic department; I have senior colleagues who are female. Lots of my female colleagues have tenure. Some of them had children before they got tenure, which is super rare. Yet, we still experience sexism here quite frequently. I think this naturally will get better as more women reach senior positions, but as a society we need to investigate the selection processes to remove these social biases. I think women can be good role models for each other and should advocate on each other’s behalf.
MG:
EN:
The piece of advice I tend to give is that yes, there's bias, yes, there's sexism, but you can deal with and overcome it.
There are people who care about you, and most of society does believe that you can succeed. People want scientists to exist. They want new inventions. They want to cure diseases. So, don't get bogged down by the loud minority. And if you find yourself starting to get bogged down by the minority, find some friends, mentor students, create that safe space and just know that you can rise above all this noise. None of it is so severe that you can't persevere through it. It can be a slow road, but I think it is incredibly possible to start from any background and do anything. As long as you have a growth mentality, you can make it as far as you want.
MG:
EN:
My proudest achievement is seeing the success of my students. Some of the students I mentored when I was a graduate student are following a successful career in science and seeing them achieve this is incredible. Also, seeing how far my current students have come in two years is by far the most rewarding thing.
I love research and think it's exciting – I wouldn't do this job if I didn't. I still remember getting the high of an accepted paper. But, when my students get good data and I see that light in their eyes, that's way cooler because I can empathize with that feeling and it’s a shared experience. Seeing these students creating their own career paths is very enlightening.
MG:
EN:
The next step for me is to get the tenure position, and I want to continue being an advocate. In 5–10 years, I would like to have a couple of generations of students. I wouldn't mind being in an upper administrative role, because I think you can do a lot of good there. But I also enjoy creating a lab and pursuing research. I would like to understand how astrocytes work in the context of autism and PTSD. These are two incredibly difficult diseases to study and to even get samples on. I've already started with more traditional disorders like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. If, in 10 years from now, I could start looking at molecular changes in PTSD and other chronically neglected neurological diseases, I would be incredibly happy.
