Dr. Makiko Naka (Ph.D.)
Executive Director at RIKEN (Title as of the time of interview)

Career summary

　

1979	B.A., Department of Letters and Education, Ochanomizu University
1981	M.A., Graduate School of Humanities and Sciences, Ochanomizu University
1984	Research Assistant, Graduate School of Humanities and Sciences, Ochanomizu University
1987	Ph.D., Graduate School of Humanities and Sciences, Ochanomizu University
1987	Assistant Professor, Faculty of Education, Chiba University
1989	Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, Chiba University
1990	Visiting Scholar, Duke University
1999	Associate Professor, Faculty of Humanities, Tokyo Metropolitan University
2003	Professor, School of Humanities and Human Sciences, Hokkaido University
2017	Professor, College of Comprehensive Psychology, Ritsumeikan University
2017 – present	Professor Emerita, Hokkaido University
2021	Professor, Research Organization of Open Innovation and Collaboration, Ritsumeikan University
2022 – present	Eminent Research Professor, Research Organization of Open Innovation and Collaboration, Ritsumeikan University
2022-2024	Executive Director, RIKEN
2025 – present	Professor, University of Human Environments
2025 – present	Special Advisor to the President, RIKEN

Background to the project

Adachi: This project was launched with the support of the Elsevier Foundation, thanks to arrangements facilitated by Dr. Yuko Harayama, former Executive Director of RIKEN, to conduct interviews with researchers who have ties with RIKEN. Rather than focus on science per se, the interviews center on areas that may be helpful to aspiring researchers such as laboratory management and leadership styles.
Thank you for participating.

Naka: Thank you for having me.

Career vision upon completion of doctoral program

Adachi: When you completed your doctoral program at Ochanomizu University in 1984, did you immediately take up a position as a research assistant at the university?

Naka: Yes, that’s correct.

Adachi: I understand that you went on to receive your doctorate in 1987, which means that you were writing your dissertation while you were working as a research assistant.

Naka: Yes, that’s right.

Adachi: At that time, how did you personally view your career?

Naka: I had majored in psychology in humanities and social sciences, and at that time very few people went on to obtain their doctorates in that field. In addition, the graduate school doctoral program had only just been established shortly before I completed my master’s degree. Therefore, I really didn't have a clear idea about my future. When I was working on my master’s, I wondered what the future held for me. All my peers had already found jobs and were working, and I was the only one studying and doing research. I questioned whether this was acceptable, and I felt a little bit down. Once I started the doctoral program, however, I changed my outlook and decided to consider myself a “junior” scientist, and I made a decision at my own discretion that I would become a scientist. Completely irrespective of whether I would find an academic position, I already regarded myself as a junior scientist. In that context, however, I had no vision of the future. I had simply made up my mind that this is what I was. After finishing my doctoral program, I was offered the position of research assistant even though at that time I had not yet written my dissertation. In that same year, my children were born, so I was not in an environment where I could begin new research. While I felt it might not be a work that would advance my career, I completed my doctoral dissertation while raising my children and working as a research assistant. This more or less entailed consolidating my past research. Consequently, I felt the work I was doing was backward-looking.

Adachi: So during your time as a research assistant, you were also writing your thesis while at the same time assisting in the research lab of the supervisor of your doctoral thesis?

Naka: Yes. That arrangement was probably a bit unique to the humanities and social sciences, but everyone more or less did their own research. And from time to time, I'd visit my supervisor's lab and share my concerns, saying, "I'm thinking about this," or "I'm a bit worried about this," and we would discuss these issues. This helped clear my head and I would resume my work. So this was not an arrangement where I belonged to a lab and spent all my time there. My home was more like my lab.
In the previous place I lived, I even named my own apartment the Naka Lab and I thought of it as my private research space. I felt that I was making progress on my own with the guidance of my supervisor. That’s basically how I felt.

Transfer to Chiba University after obtaining a doctorate

Adachi: So, you obtained your doctorate in March 1987, and began working at Chiba University.

Naka: That’s right. I got a job and then obtained my doctorate around that year. So, everything I did was a bit in reverse.

Adachi: Did you look for jobs in the Kanto area?

Naka: No, not really. Well, that was just how things ended up. It is true that my husband was also in Kanto at the time, and my parents were in Chiba, so I happened to be applying for academic positions in the Kanto area.

Adachi: Were you applying to a number of places at the time you applied to Chiba University?

Naka: Yes. I was applying to several places when it was decided that I would go to Chiba University. My senior colleagues told me, “You have to apply for several positions,” so I submitted a number of applications, and I was turned down by a few places, but Chiba University accepted me.

Adachi: According to your CV, you were a lecturer for your first two years there. After that, you became an associate professor and remained at Chiba University for 12 years altogether. During that time, how did you conduct your research?

Naka: I think it was around the time that I started operating my own lab and holding lab seminars. After submitting my dissertation and receiving my doctorate, I went to Chiba University where I had students whose graduation theses I had to supervise. Unlike in the sciences or natural sciences, all the students conduct their research individually, and once or twice a week I held lab seminars where I listened to each of the students tell me about their progress and I gave them advice. That’s basically how I conducted the lab seminars. I operated my lab in that way for 12 years, and during that time my interest in my own research somehow shifted direction to the area of memory in a natural context. For example, do we remember things better if we write them down, or what kind of memories do we have of ordinary conversations? Or when children talk with their parents about their past experiences, what exactly do they talk about, or what kind of conversations do they have? I guess I did my own research on topics I really liked while I did what I could to assist my students.

Setting up her own lab

Adachi: Then, when you were a lecturer at Chiba University, which would be similar to what we call a PI at RIKEN, were you already an independent researcher and did you have your own laboratory?

Naka: Yes. That’s more or less how it was. At that time, I certainly didn’t see myself as a PI, but perhaps that is what I was essentially.

Adachi: After obtaining your Ph.D. and becoming independent as a professional researcher, did you feel some kind of gap between your former status and your new status?

Naka: First of all, I previously had to do most of my research on my own by myself. I had worked alone for the most part, so this was my first time to work with students. I was also responsible for teaching the students, of course. With teaching too, I had never studied pedagogy, so I felt each and every aspect of my job was new to me.

Adachi: When you were faced with these new challenges, what kind of preparations did you do?

Naka: I just went with the flow and did whatever was necessary. When something piques my interest, I tend to become so engrossed in whatever it is that I can’t stop thinking about it. In fact, we did many interesting things. Students would bring new ideas and I also got thoroughly absorbed in these as our work progressed. It was not that we had specific expectations; it was more a case of tackling interesting ideas or extremely difficult tasks we encountered, and somehow solving these. Or maybe not solving them. I think I just got by somehow.

Adachi: How many students did you have in your lab at Chiba University?

Naka: There was a set number of students, and they were divided among the number of faculty. I think I had about 10 students altogether. It was the Faculty of Education, and most of the students wanted to become teachers. As I mentioned earlier, students would bring in various simple ideas, like whether writing things down enables a person to remember them better, or people's memories of conversations, or how long a person can later recall things like, for example, the campus of the junior high school they graduated from. When we looked into precedent research on themes like these, we found that there was quite a lot of interesting research, and the work was really enjoyable.

Adachi: Were the students in your lab mainly undergraduates?

Naka: Yes. In addition to undergraduates, there was also a small number of students in the master’s program, once that program was established, but for the most part the students were undergraduates aiming to become teachers or public servants. Of course, there were also students who joined the corporate world. Doctoral students came much later after Chiba University established a comprehensive graduate school, combining humanities and social sciences with the Faculty of Engineering in natural sciences, and I became a member of that faculty. Therefore, there weren’t any doctoral students until close to the end of my 12-year tenure at Chiba University.

Adachi: Did you employ any postdocs or staff researchers in your lab?

Naka: Yes, I did. When a graduate program in the field of natural sciences was established, I also became a faculty member there, and by then I had several doctoral students. I also had postdocs as well as international researchers who wanted to come to our lab on a sabbatical, so it somehow became more like a natural science lab. That was in my last four or five years at Chiba University, I think.

Adachi: I understand that yours was one of the research labs in the Educational Psychology Department in the Faculty of Education around 1990. Given that your students were mainly undergraduate students, did you publish papers based on your own interests, drawing inspiration from your undergraduate students?

Naka: In a general sense, yes. There were occasions when students presented their research as it was at academic conferences. At such times, they were the main presenters while I acted in a supporting role, but they wrote hardly any papers. It was more a situation where I would later collect the research data again and write a paper.

Adachi: Either because there wasn’t enough time for students in the undergraduate program to write papers, or because that is how the course was organized, was it your practice to further investigate areas that interested you and write papers about them?

Naka: Yes, that is correct. For example, there were times when I thought, “I’ll try applying this to some of the research I am doing under these particular conditions.”

Overseas research at Duke University

Adachi: And while you were at Chiba University, did you go to Duke University for a year under an overseas research fellowship program?

Naka: Yes, I did.

Adachi: Can you tell us what prompted you to go?

Naka: I joined Chiba University in 1987, and after being there for about two years, I received information about a program and learned that I could apply. It was part of the MEXT overseas research fellowship program for young researchers. I had a sudden impulse to go, so I applied. When I had asked my colleagues in the same research areas (which are now called lab seminars but were then called classes) if they would mind if I applied, telling them that my application would probably be rejected, they were somewhat surprised but said, “Well, if it’s to be rejected anyway, go right ahead and apply,” so I did. And my application was actually successful. Upon learning this, those around me made comments like, “This is only your second or third year. Isn’t it a little too soon for you to be doing this?” However, I insisted that it was a rare opportunity, and I left for one year. It was a very invigorating time for me, and I also felt it was a window of opportunity for encountering new major research themes.

Adachi: Had you been feeling that you wanted to do research abroad for some time?

Naka: Not at all, actually. I had studied abroad for a year when I was in high school, and at that time I was so consumed by the experience that I came back to Japan feeling that I'd had enough of living abroad, so I didn't have any real desire to go overseas again. I think about 10 or 20 years had passed since then, since I had returned. Maybe it wasn't quite that long. More like 17 or 18 years, perhaps. I somehow felt that I would now like to go overseas again. On the other hand, I had small children. I also felt that America might not be a safe place. I was in a state of turmoil about what I should do, and without even mentioning the United States, I asked my father, “Don’t you think it’s better for a person to do something and regret it, rather than do nothing and regret it?” His response was, “Hmm, I guess so,” and with that reply, I decided to go. Thinking I might have regrets whatever I did, I went to the United States, and I had a truly wonderful time.

Adachi: I understand that you were very considerate of the people around you but, in the end, you persevered with your plans. Some people place too much importance on the feelings of those around them and give up on their aspirations, but how did you make allowances for both?

Naka: Well, to be honest, I really didn’t take the feelings of others into consideration. I had asked my colleagues to allow me to apply, telling them that I didn’t think my application would be successful, but in the end it was. Those around me made comments like, “You told us you wouldn’t be successful, didn’t you?” “Isn’t it a bit too soon to be going off like this?” But I stood my ground and basically told them, “I’m going.”
I have twins, and my husband told me, “Leave one with me, and you take one. If you take both, we’ll have to start thinking about a divorce!” I thought about this for a moment but on second thought, I felt that maybe he would change his mind, so I went ahead with my plans. I had my children in day care in Japan but arrangements in the United States were very simple, and I could put my children in school from the very day I took them there, which I was very grateful for. Despite my husband’s initial response, he came to visit us three or four times during the one-year period, and I got the feeling that he wasn't entirely displeased with my decision. I just want to tell those around me that when you somehow feel that you can go, it’s better to go ahead with your plans, with the knowledge that things will later work themselves out.

Adachi: Did you ever think of staying overseas and finding a job there?

Naka: No, I didn’t. I was actually given a one-year study abroad grant, or grant to stay abroad for one year, and then to return. My visa at that time required me to return and to do some work. My understanding about that may not be entirely correct. At any rate, getting a job and living abroad was not in any way something I considered. I intended to come back and continue my work. During my time abroad, I was able to come into contact with research on memory in various natural contexts, and upon my return to Japan, I happened to come across research on eyewitness testimony, which I believe significantly changed the direction of my research for the next 20 to 30 years thereafter.

Encounters with new research themes

Adachi: You just mentioned that you encountered research on eyewitness testimony. Was this something that you sought out yourself, or did it just come to you by chance?

Naka: It was both, actually. I found various eyewitness studies interesting, so I read a lot of papers on the subject. At that time, there were almost no electronic journals, so I copied a lot of papers at the library at Duke and brought them back to Japan with me. I read these with great anticipation, thinking that I wanted to do this kind of work. By chance, I received a letter from a lawyer asking whether an eyewitness testimony was accurate in a particular case. He then requested my cooperation with research of this nature. It was probably a letter he sent to numerous people, and I happened to be one of them. I also happened to be collecting papers on that subject, and after reading his letter, I wrote back and told him about various existing studies on the subject. It seems the lawyer had sent out a lot of letters but received very few responses. I then received a request from him for my cooperation. This involved actual eyewitness testimony, so I was really drawn to it. Therefore, although I had already done some work on the subject, it was the lawyer who contacted me.

Adachi: So you came into contact with this person for the first time through a letter, and after that you continued to collaborate with him for decades?

Naka: Yes, that is correct. That is how it was. In 2000, we started an academic society together with some of the colleagues around us, and this organization became the Japanese Society for Law and Psychology. I reckon we can meet people in all kinds of places.

To Tokyo Metropolitan University

Adachi: After returning from Duke University, you continued your work as an associate professor at Chiba University, and then transferred to Tokyo Metropolitan University (TMU) in 1999. Was there a particular reason for your transfer?

Naka: It seemed that the Faculty of Education gradually began to feel the need to teach more practical education, and I began to be assigned to lecture subjects like educational counseling rather than proper psychology. I felt that this was somewhat different from what I had been doing up until then and, by chance, I was approached by a person at TMU, who was researching topics like cognition in natural environments. I was invited to join the faculty there, and I transferred.

Adachi: In other words, you yourself had not been applying for positions at that time?

Naka: No, I hadn’t.

Adachi: Was your main work at TMU conducting lab seminars for undergraduate students, in much the same way as when you were at Chiba University?

Naka: The university already had a doctoral program and each faculty had a research lab, so it was more a science-based environment. Whereas Chiba University had a comprehensive graduate school, as I mentioned earlier, that was not the case at TMU, which had research labs within the psychology research area. Therefore, I conducted research and also took over supervising two doctoral students and a master's student, who had been students of the previous faculty member. I did that for four years. I had many new experiences there as well, which was very interesting for me.

Adachi: Did you gain experience there in mentoring graduate students as budding researchers?

Naka: Yes, I did. I think it was at that time that I began writing papers with students.

Adachi: How did you find involving students in writing papers, rather than just writing on your own?

Naka: I feel you end up developing a certain style over time.

Adachi: Did you find the process difficult? Were there any particular methods you developed?

Naka: Yes, there were. My time at TMU was brief, and when I transferred from there to Hokkaido University, some students also transferred from TMU to Hokkaido University. Around that time, I began supervising graduate students but initially there were aspects of my role that I really didn’t understand. I was not always sure about how much advice I should give, and later I sometimes had doubts about what I had said and changed my mind. At times I caused confusion by making statements like, “On second thought, maybe it would be better to do it this way, or that way.” This problem wouldn’t have occurred if I were working alone. I felt it was difficult to work with graduate students while guiding them. But there were also many enjoyable moments too.

To Hokkaido University

Adachi: After spending four years at TMU, you transferred to Hokkaido University. What prompted your move?

Naka: In my second or third year after transferring to TMU, I was invited to take up a position at Hokkaido University, but at that time I was just settling in at TMU and felt I could not leave. In the meantime, my husband transferred from the Kanto area to Kyushu Sangyo University in Kyushu, and I felt that we were already living apart. That being the case, I felt I could live anywhere. Although my work at TMU was very enjoyable and rewarding, I decided I'd give Hokkaido University a try also.

Adachi: You became a professor at Hokkaido University, but did anything change when you went from being an assistant professor to a professor?

Naka: Well, yes. I had been an assistant professor at TMU. Until then, I didn't sense any difference between being a lecturer, assistant professor, or professor, and it was not of any concern to me. Around the time that I thought it might be pretty difficult to become a professor, a position for professor had opened at Hokkaido University, so I thought I’d give it a try. In terms of what was different, it actually wasn't that different. However, when I went to the faculty meeting, I found that out of about 100 faculty members at Hokkaido University, there was only one other female professor. The female faculty ratio was extremely low. At TMU, there were far more female faculty members. In the same department where I was, there were three women, so not as many as half but about 40% of the faculty were women and I couldn’t help but think, “Wow!” I was somewhat surprised.

Adachi: Until you went to Hokkaido University, you were really in liberal arts departments, and I heard that at the end of your time at Chiba University, you had a mix of experiences that included science and engineering. Was there anything different in that regard? The position of psychology varies from university to university. It could be in the faculty of education, the faculty of letters, the faculty of engineering, or an interdisciplinary area.

Naka: Ah, I didn’t feel there was much difference. When I was at Chiba University, it was really like a lab seminar with undergraduate students, and eventually it was incorporated in a natural science organization later on. I think at TMU, it was in what was called the Faculty of Humanities at the time. There were research labs and individual labs, so in that sense it felt a bit like a science department. When I moved to Hokkaido University, my predecessor had been doing physiological research, and I was told that animals had been kept in the room I was allocated as a lab and that it still smelled a bit. So my first job was to get rid of the odor. I think it became a more natural science-type environment. But the research itself did not change. We were allocated multiple labs where we conducted experiments and wrote papers, that’s how it worked.

Adachi: What kind of structure did the lab at Hokkaido University have? And how many students did you have?

Naka: The number varied from year to year but being a university with a graduate school, we had some doctoral as well as some master's students, but not that many. There were generally two to three or three to four students in each program, and the number of undergraduate students was also extremely small, say about two or three. Our research lab generally had around seven to eight students, around 10 at the most. I tried counting how many degrees were conferred, and I found that there were 16 in all. The majority of these were from graduate schools of Hokkaido University. There were also some students from Ritsumeikan University, where I later transferred. The students entered as undergraduates, master’s, or doctoral students, and about 10 students seemed to enroll every year.

Adachi: Is the possibility of successfully obtaining a doctorate quite high in the field of psychology?

Naka: Well, things have really changed. In the 1980s, the acquisition rate for doctoral degrees in psychology was very low. It took me six years to get my degree. After I joined Hokkaido University, getting a degree in about four years, if not three, seemed to have become the norm for students. Just around that time, I took part in the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology's Graduate School Reform as a university representative, and we promoted arrangements where students could obtain their degrees in three years. Because of that, there are far fewer students who completed their doctoral program without receiving their degree.

Adachi: Did you do anything in particular to assist students to obtain their degrees successfully?

Naka: In psychology, students start by doing literary research. They then plan their experiments, conduct them, and write their dissertations. In the past, in research involving about 100 participants, students were able to write their dissertations, for example, on three research themes with 20 to 30 participants for each, or, alternatively, on two research themes with 50 participants each. Anyway, everyone worked hard, and they were able to write their dissertations. Some took a little longer than others, but it was really wonderful.

Transfer to Ritsumeikan University

Adachi: After being at Hokkaido University for 14 years, what made you decide to transfer to Ritsumeikan University in 2017?

Naka: The retirement age at Hokkaido University is 63, and I was 61 when I transferred. An acquaintance at Ritsumeikan University had tempted me by saying, "Naka-san, this is a private university. If you come here, you may be able to pursue your research a little longer.” I certainly preferred having a little more time to be able to do research. There’s no denying it. A person turns 60 in the blink of an eye. This is what happens when you’re doing something you love. So that's why I transferred when I still had two years left. I think I was 61 at the time. I then stayed at Ritsumeikan University for four years.

Adachi: How was the lab seminar structured at Ritsumeikan University?

Naka: The situation at Ritsumeikan University was a little different. There was a large number of undergraduate students. At Hokkaido University, for example, there were two to three fourth year students. At Ritsumeikan University, students start being assigned to a lab seminar in their third year, and there were about 10 students in each year. There were 10 third-year and 10 fourth-year students, so 20 in total. There were also one or two graduate students, but lab seminars were more like lectures held in classrooms.

Adachi: I imagine there would be quite a difference between seminars with a small number of students and seminars with a large number of students. How did you find them?

Naka: The approach was quite different, actually. In seminars where the number of students was small, the students generally shared the same research area and conducted similar research, but when there were around 10 or so students, the students tended to have their own particular ideas, so the approach was more student-driven. It was probably very similar to the approach at Chiba University. The students had their respective research themes, and I offered them advice. At Hokkaido University, it was customary for us to hold lab seminars for several hours in the evening, and afterwards all go out to eat together. At Ritsumeikan University, we had time slots for lab seminars, so we followed the timetable. It was more like attending lectures. That arrangement was also interesting, but I feel the approach was quite different.

To RIKEN

Adachi: What made you decide to become an executive director at RIKEN while continuing to hold your position at Ritsumeikan University?

Naka: I was 65 and had just finished my tenure at Ritsumeikan University but I was told I could stay on as a specially appointed professor for another five years or so. However, this meant leaving my position in the department. I thought it would be more enjoyable for me to engage in a more lively atmosphere, and I decided to come here.

Adachi: What made you decide to take the plunge and come to RIKEN, a place that has very few psychologists? What were your thoughts at that time?

Naka: Well, I like adventure and I have a hyperactive side, so I wanted to go somewhere interesting. That is why I came here. Dr. Reiko Mazuka is also at RIKEN. I had met her at Duke University where we both spent a year. My husband had also done joint research with researchers from RIKEN. I had heard about RIKEN from him and thought, "Maybe I should go and check it out," and came here without giving it much thought.

Adachi: Are you doing research at Ritsumeikan University at present?

Naka: In July this year I finished the thesis defense for my last doctoral student at Ritsumeikan University. That student finished writing his dissertation and submitted it in March this year, and the defense ended in July. I also had another two students or so, but I passed them on to other professors. I now have no doctoral students left. What I am doing at Ritsumeikan University at present is research on conducting interviews of children who may be victims, through an interview method called “forensic interviews,” where we have to get children to talk based on their memories. In this context, the results of psychology and developmental psychology are useful. At Ritsumeikan University, I am also conducting training activities in forensic interviewing and research activities related to these. I don't have any particular lectures at the moment, so I feel that I am more or less here at RIKEN all the time.

Happiest moment as a researcher

Adachi: When you look back on your career as a researcher, what was it that made you happiest? We ask all science researchers what made them happiest as a PI.

Naka: Well, I’m not sure if it is what made me happiest, but I've been gradually building on my work little by little. For example, I obtained a RISTEX (Research Institute of Science and Technology for Society) research grant and worked on a project for four years. Later, as a representative of the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas, I worked on the same area for another four or five years. It was a similar project, a kind of forensic interview. After that, I became a PI for a RISTEX research project, which I spent five years working on. So, for about 15 years, I received a very generous amount of research funding, and I feel as if my colleagues and I developed the field together. Recently, for example, the law changed in regard to interview methods, and the Code of Criminal Procedure was revised so that when such interviews are conducted, the audio and video recordings can be used as evidence in court. To say that our work has been applied in society in this way is too much of an exaggeration but the idea that psychology research is being put to use in connection with society makes me really happy.

Adachi: How many were in the group for which you received a large amount of research funding?

Naka: Initially, RISTEX was just our group, and I became the representative of the MEXT Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas. There were about 10 other research groups, each with four to five people, plus the open application group, so I think we had about 50 people in total. I had the representatives of about 10 groups assemble and implemented a form of governance as a general group.

Adachi: How did you get about 50 people involved? I don’t imagine you knew all 50 at the start.

Naka: No, I did not. When the project was launched, the Japanese Society for Law and Psychology had just been established, so we reached out to those who were interested. Of course, it was an open call, so everyone knew about it. And, oh yes, there were difficulties even at that stage. I felt that anyone who was interested would join, but later I received feedback from some people who felt that nobody had approached them at all. I realized that I had been lacking in consideration. As we were dealing with law and human sciences, we divided our research into four subcategories - matters related to crime, matters related to investigations, matters related to trials, and subsequent support for and recovery of victims - and we structured the project based on whether we approached people who were doing research relevant to the four subcategories or people who approached us.

Adachi: Did you volunteer to be the representative?

Naka: An acquaintance of mine suggested, "I think we should apply, but Dr. Naka, please be the representative." My reaction was, “Huh? Me?” Although that was my initial reaction, I actually felt I wouldn’t mind being the representative, so I gave it a go. We failed with our first submission, passed with the second, and we succeeded in participating in the project for five years.

Adachi: Did you find managing 50 people difficult?

Naka: We had to submit a report at the end, or even when applying as well, but each person’s style of writing differed, and we were required to make a lot of adjustments in a rather top-down manner. Mock trials were another interesting activity. Hosted by a university and held once a year, these mock trials were on topics the respective researchers were interested in, such as bullying at school or cases where children were victims, and we all gathered at these mock trials to discuss and collect data. I feel these mock trials were a unifying force.

Adachi: Did you start the society too, Dr. Naka?

Naka: No, it wasn’t me. As I noted earlier, people who were researching subjects like eyewitness testimonies came together to establish the society. When I think about it, the number of women was really very small in terms of ratio. We have been operating the society for about 20 years since its inception. We now have a different president but I was president for the two terms before that. I was also told to give it a try, and I just felt, okay, maybe I would. I believe that if there is something that seems a bit interesting, you should go ahead and commit to it rather than worry too much about this or that, whether or not you can manage it because of family commitments, or whether you are too busy with your research. If you give it a go, you may find a new world opening up before you.

Adachi: Did you ever encounter difficulties when supervising students or managing a large research group?

Naka: Although I don't intentionally say things that might be at odds with things I’ve said previously, on occasion my students have said to me, “Professor Naka, what you told us the other day is different from what you are now saying.” This has sometimes caused confusion and frustration. At such times, I have responded with feelings of remorse, telling them, “I’m sorry, I’m really sorry.” On occasion there were also arguments among students, and various squabbles over petty matters. So, yes, there were times when I encountered difficulties. But I feel there are times in life when all you can do is say either thank you or sorry. So when something untoward happens, I say sorry. And when something goes well, I say thank you to everyone in the best way I can. Yes, in the end, I think everything comes down to that. If we pared back everything we need to say, perhaps those two utterances would suffice.

Looking back at a career turning point

Adachi: When you look back on your career as a researcher, was there a turning point at which you felt your career changed significantly?

Naka: There was no one particular point, but I felt each and every experience in my career has led to where I am now. If I hadn't gone to Chiba University, TMU, or Hokkaido University, I think my career would have turned out differently, and, likewise, if I hadn't been permitted to go to the United States at some point, I also think my career would have turned out differently. Furthermore, if I hadn't decided to try eyewitness testimony after my return to Japan, I think my career would have been completely different. I think each and every experience I had was a connection to something that aroused my interest or enticed me to give it a try. When I was working under the RISTEX research project, I was initially asked to join its advisory board. It was only then that I learned such an area of the project existed. In that case, I decided to apply for the program because I wanted to be a player rather than a member of an advisory board. In short, I believe there was a succession of opportunities and decisions about what choice I would make. There were times when I experienced failure after failure. There were also times when I thought that things didn't work out.

Adachi: Was there a time when you thought that maybe you should have opted for another choice at such a time?

Naka: A number of times I was approached by universities but I had to turn down their offers, telling them I could not go because of my current situation. I do at times think that if I'd taken up the offer at that time, things might have been different. But I've made up my mind that now is probably the best time after all. Yes, I have.

Adachi: As we were talking, you mentioned life events and your family. How did you manage your work-life balance?

Naka: When I really think about it, I feel the word "work" gives the impression of performing some kind of duties. Life is living for your family, like making a living. But, I feel work is also performing duties, and life too is performing duties. For me, work is going to meetings and writing documents. Life is cooking meals and cleaning the bathtub. When I think about my most fundamental self, I more or less see myself as being alone and doing what I like. So, it’s six of one, a half dozen of the other; both life and work are essentially performing duties. Whether I balance them or not, I see all or most of these tasks as performing duties. In some ways, I feel I neglect both family and work. At the same time, I find both interesting. When I spend all my time on my official work, I somehow get bogged down, so I also do some duties related to life. And when I get a little bored of doing life-related duties, I’ll turn to my official work, so I think it's good to always have the two. I apologize if this is not much of an answer.

Adachi: You commented that it was rare for all of your family members to be living under one roof. Can you elaborate on your comment?

Naka: Well, my husband and I got married as students, and lived together in a dormitory in Tsukuba for a year or two while we were students, but that was more or less the only time we were able to live together. My husband's workplace was quite a distance from home, so he came home only a few times a week, and that situation continued for some time. Around the year 2000, he eventually went to a university in Kyushu, so even now we are lucky if we can see each other once a month. Well, we do have breakfast over Zoom, but we are apart most of the time. I lived together with my children until they were in junior high school, but they went to school abroad after that, and then to university, so we no longer lived together. We all really live separately from one another. But this is something that we also say can be managed, or maybe we haven’t. I feel that it’s probably good for our lives to follow various patterns.

Adachi: Thank you. That’s all for my questions for now.

Naka: Thank you.

Adachi: Ms. Matsuo, you may begin.

Work-life balance

Matsuo: As I listen to you speak, I don’t really detect any sense of the difficulties you faced in balancing work and family life, but I'd like to know more about that. When you first left Ochanomizu University to start job hunting, you decided to do so as a “junior” scientist, in your own words. and you had also started raising your twins, so I imagine it must have been the most difficult time for you. How did you balance your work and family life at that time?

Naka: To be honest, I felt the nursery school was raising my children. I had to go pick them up from the nursery school at six or seven o’clock in the evening, so I didn’t really have any time to myself. At that time, my husband was also working at a kind of research institute, and he didn’t finish until late. He often came home in the middle of the night. However, one day a week, on Mondays, we had an arrangement where I was allowed to stay behind at the university and do research until any hour that night. I worked as much as I could on that day, and on the other days I would go home at six or seven in the evening. I really couldn't do any new work at that time, so I just organized all the research papers I had done up until that point and made them into my doctoral dissertation. After that, when I got a job at Chiba University, my children were about two years old, and the nursery school was open only until seven in the evening. I was usually the last parent to arrive, and my children would be ready to go home, with their shoes on, and waiting at the entrance. But I still had a lot of work to finish. Chiba University was about a 15-minute walk from the nursery school, so I walked back to the university with my two children in tow. There was a video store on the way, so I would rent a video, go back to the university, and let my children watch the video - an animation like Doraemon, for example - in some place like the conference room. I would then go about doing the rest of whatever work or research I had to do. In the morning, I would take the children to nursery school at around 8:30, so I would get up at five or six in the morning, go to the university once early in the morning, do a little work, go back home, and then take my children to nursery school. Because I was still young, I think I had a lot of energy and stamina, but it was extremely difficult for me to make time. Yes, I remember now. Much later, when I was taking care of my father, who has since passed, someone in the family would take videos and photos whenever we all got together. These are now in an album in the cloud, and occasionally they come up on my screen. My father is in these photos and videos, and even though he was getting on in years and the family was gathered together, I can be seen off to one side, working away at my computer or doing my own thing. I sometimes think that I just used everyone's time to do what I wanted to do. Just the thought of it brings tears to my eyes.

Matsuo: You got to where you are today because of that.

Naka: No, really, it’s no excuse.

Matsuo: You mentioned your father, and I heard that when you decided to go to Duke University, you asked him for advice. Why did you ask him?

Naka: I'm sure that if I asked my husband, he would have told me my plan was unreasonable. My colleagues also did not approve and told me it was a bit too early to go. So I wondered what my father would say. In the end, I just wanted him to give me a nudge, and so without telling him what I was going to do, I asked him in the manner I mentioned before. His response was something like, "Yeah, I guess that makes sense," so I thought that was good enough. That's how I felt.

Matsuo: As you mentioned earlier, your husband at one point even mentioned the word “divorce.”

Naka: That’s right. He had already said that word.

Matsuo: Despite that, you were resolute in your decision to go to the United States.

Naka: Well, I really didn't think it would come to that, so I went. The first time I went, I had to take my two children with me, so my husband accompanied me. The four of us went together. And he didn't seem displeased. In fact, he seemed to enjoy the trip, so I felt everything was fine.

Environment surrounding female researchers

Matsuo: When you transferred to Hokkaido University, you said that there were few women there, unlike TMU, where there had been more women. Did you feel that there was any difference in the ease of working in that environment?

Naka: No, not really. Up until then, I had always been thinking about only myself, so the small number of women, or what was going on around me didn’t really concern me. It wasn’t until I was in my 60s that I really started to consider how few the number of women was. When I looked at the situation again, I noticed that there were many more men. At the time, however, I didn’t pay much attention. When it came to committees or other gatherings, however, I noticed that the female members who came from various faculties were all the same. Before the RISTEX project that I mentioned earlier, there was the “Good Practice” program of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology which provided generous funds aimed at strengthening graduate schools. I was also asked to be the representative of that program and looking back at that now, I feel there was a tendency for women to engage in education-related content. However, being able to participate in that program led to my subsequent participation in the RISTEX project, so I feel that things tend to work out quite well.

Matsuo: In your experience as a researcher, I imagine there must have been many women around you who struggled with balancing work and research. Do you remember ever giving them a nudge of encouragement or advice?

Naka: I did gradually become aware of this situation. I had been a managing director of the Japanese Psychological Association for a long time, and there had always been only one female director there. When selecting committee members or chairpersons, I've made efforts to reach out to women. This was also the case with the RISTEX project, and I’ve been relatively proactive in reaching out to women by inviting female team leaders. Earlier I mentioned the fact that 16 students had received their doctoral degrees, and when I counted the number of female students among them, it was six. I just calculated that, and I found that is equivalent to 37%. I think the percentage of women was high compared to the normal rate of doctoral degree recipients. I am not sure if I was able to help people who were having difficulties, but I think I was able to include them. I don’t know if I answered your question adequately.

Matsuo: Thank you.

Trials as a researcher

Adachi: What was the biggest crisis you faced in your career as a researcher?

Naka: A lot has happened over the course of my 40 years of work. I cannot say for sure, but whenever something occurred, I felt I had to deal with each matter on an individual basis, so I don’t think I really thought of any situation as a crisis. There were, however, times when I had to confront people. For example, when someone presented my work as if they had done it themself. Or when my research funds were used in a slightly different way from the way they were intended, I took a stand by saying, "Excuse me, this is my work, so please cite it properly." This felt a bit like a confrontation. I'm not the best at confrontations, so I'm not really good at singling out people, but I think on three or four occasions I told people I wanted to talk with them. There were also times in my career when I felt I was being singled out and given a lecture on a daily basis by a certain person, even though that person may not have meant it in a bad way. I would go home and cry my eyes out, but I realized there was no point in crying like that, so one day I made up my mind and spoke to that person, saying something to the effect, "Well, I don’t know how to put this but although I appreciate your advice, it's sometimes hard to bear." That person seemed somewhat surprised to learn of my suffering and stopped admonishing me in that way. So I think the people who say such things like this probably don't always mean to be so overbearing. I believe there were a number of times when I mustered up a bit of courage and went and spoke my mind.

Adachi: Have you ever had difficulties with students?

Naka: On occasion I have wondered why my name wasn’t on research that I did together with a student. However, looking back over my own long career, I might also have felt as if I had done all the work on my own, but I'm sure there have been many times when the people around me thought, "You got to be where you are now because I helped you.” I do think that there is probably a part of me that applies positive thinking, and believes that everything I achieved is a result of my own thinking and actions. Even if there are times when I feel as if I have been overlooked, it doesn’t really concern me much any longer. I feel the best attitude for me to adopt is that when something good happens, it's for the sake of the younger generation, and when some problem occurs, I will take the blame. Things don't always go as planned.

To young researchers at a crossroads in their careers

Adachi: As I listened to you talk about your career, I got the impression that you have gone from place to place all over Japan, and I imagine that when young researchers are looking for an academic position they have difficulty in making choices due to their family situation and various other constraints. Do you have any message for young researchers in such situations?

Naka: I think that in most cases, things work out somehow. Even if you feel as if you are struggling alone, there are people who will reach out and help you. At such times, I think it might be a good idea to muster up the courage and just take the leap. If things don’t work out, you can always go back to where you were or change direction. In that sense, I believe that part of life is about courage and adventure.

Adachi: Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

This interview took place on November 14, 2023, in Wako, Japan, at the Administrative Headquarters Building 3F Special Conference Room.

RIKEN Elsevier Foundation Partnership Project
Camera and editor: Tomoko Nishiyama (Center for Brain Science)
Aiko Onoda (Center for Brain Science)
Assistant camera: Masataka Sasabe (Communications Division)
Interviewer and assistant: Hiroko Matsuo (Diversity Promotion Section)
Interviewer and producer: Emiko Adachi (Diversity Promotion Section)

View full transcript of the video