Salary Survey Methodology

The survey was conducted via a web-based survey which was open from February 15 to June 2, 2008. Participation in the survey was promoted by e-mail and advertising to readers of The Scientist and visitors to The Scientist web site. It was also promoted by participating scientific societies to their members. Usable responses were received from 4,702 individuals in the United States. Since many individuals are subscribers to The Scientist, and/or

By | September 1, 2008

The survey was conducted via a web-based survey which was open from February 15 to June 2, 2008. Participation in the survey was promoted by e-mail and advertising to readers of The Scientist and visitors to The Scientist web site. It was also promoted by participating scientific societies to their members. Usable responses were received from 4,702 individuals in the United States. Since many individuals are subscribers to The Scientist, and/or registrants on their web site, and/or members of one or more of the sponsoring societies, it is not possible to compute an accurate rate of response.

Respondents were asked to provide demographic data about themselves in 18 categories, and give their base annual salary and other cash compensation. The responses were carefully filtered to eliminate duplicate or misleading responses. Not every participant provided all of the information requested. If the participant provided income data, plus information concerning at least one demographic characteristic, the response was included in the study. All salaries listed are a median of total cash compensation.

The survey was conducted and the analysis carried out by AMG Science Publishing (www.amgpublishing.com).

The Scientist and AMG Science Publishing would like to thank the following societies for their sponsorship of this survey and for promoting it to their members: The American Association of Immunologists, The American Physiological Society, The American Society for Cell Biology, The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, and The Endocrine Society.

Popular Now

  1. How Plants Evolved Different Ways to Make Caffeine
  2. Thomson Reuters Predicts Nobelists
    The Nutshell Thomson Reuters Predicts Nobelists

    According to citation statistics, researchers behind programmed cell death pathways and CRISPR/Cas9 are among those in line for Nobel Prizes this year.

  3. Sequencing Reveals Genomic Diversity of the Human Brain
  4. Reviewing Results-Free Manuscripts
    The Nutshell Reviewing Results-Free Manuscripts

    An open-access journal is trialing a peer-review process in which reviewers do not have access to the results or discussion sections of submitted papers.

RayBiotech