date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2023/07/20
| 2,246
| 9,492
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am reviewing a paper from a fairly famous journal in computer science. I am mostly sure that the paper was generated by AI. The paper has many problems and deserves to be rejected on the merits. But it is difficult to prove that it was auto-generated: I couldn't find any appropriate free tool or website to check the whole paper, and this would be useless anyway if the text was paraphrased.
What should I do in this situation? Can I write my guess about this plagiarism and give reasons confidentially to the editor to decide himself? It seems like if I merely recommend rejection, the authors will not face any consequence for auto-generating nonsense and wasting everyone's time. But I am not sure whether it is ethical to mention my unproven (and likely unprovable) suspicions.
Details:
* Many basic requirements of a scientific paper are missing: no hypothesis, only a basic mathematical foundation, no experimental results, and the organization is very strange. Even the citations seem unusual.
* The authors have previous papers which show that they are totally familiar with the structure of a scientific paper and scientific language. However, one of their recent papers does seem to have many of the same problems as this paper.<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to have sufficient reasons to reject the paper on its (de)merits, whether or not it was written by a bot.
You can certainly tell the editor that you are suspicious.
I doubt that the editor has software (free or otherwise) that could tell whether the paper was bot generated.
I wonder if the many citations are real. Chatbots are notably nonsensical in that realm. You could quickly check a few. Even if real they may be irrelevant.
Finally, LLMs can indeed scrape SE posts. Whether they could use that information to learn how to do better is unclear.
**Edit** in answer to comments from the OP.
Just describe the mess you found when you tried to check the references. You do not need to prove anything.
It will not reflect badly on you if the editor disagrees with you (though it may reflect badly on the editor).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Two options:
1. You could write directly to the editor now, without finishing the review, to raise your suspicions.
2. You could finish the review, and include your suspicions in the "confidential to editor" box.
The more convinced you are that the paper is AI-generated, the more attractive #1 becomes, since it saves you from having to finish the review. The drawback is if the editor says "continue to review anyway" then the author would also be waiting longer, so only do it if you're confident.
It's because you are alleging misconduct that your suspicions should be kept confidential to the editor. Don't send it directly to the author, it is not likely to end well.
>
> I checked other papers of the authors also, they are experienced, and it seems that they should not be such unexperienced that doesn't know the most basic requirements of a scientific paper.
>
>
>
About this, there are a couple more tools that the editors should have access to that you don't: they can see which email the authors used to submit the manuscript, and they can check if that email matches the authors' institution webpages. The editors can also see the cover letter if there is one, and they might have communicated with the authors already for other things (e.g. on whether the manuscript contains any copyrighted material). They are better-positioned than you to investigate, so you should definitely leave it to them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Between Conversational AI afficionados, the questions about the value of GPT-generated text (i.e., about copyright, ownership, merit, ethicality etc.) are hotly discussed, so you may not find a single value answer on this.
My take currently is this: GPTs are a tool like any other. They are not persons or entities and thus cannot, for example, have rights regarding ownership or authorship. So if a human uses a GPT to create large amounts of text, that does not really matter in itself. What matters is whether the results are fit for the job or not.
There is no really good way to automatically determine whether a given text has been created by a GPT or not, at least since the likes of ChatGPT 3.5+. The default, regular, text, has been tried in blind tests, and humans were not easily capable to tell. *And* you can, using your prompts, strongly influence the kind of wording the GPT creates, so even if we had a tool to recognize the default language of a well-known GPT, the author could trivially flavour the text so that it would be impossible.
In this case, you found out that the paper is, basically, a pile of junk. This information, worded more professionally, is what the editor is interested in. You do not have to guess which tools the author used to come up with his drivel. It should not matter which text editor, which data analysis tools, which search engine, or which GPT they used. If using a GPT makes part of their process easier or quicker, then so be it.
Whether the usage of the GPT has to be disclosed is something which probably varies as well. If it is used just as a fancy evolved text editor (for example, you could use it as a "thesaurus" to just find different wordings for you; or to rewrite your content so it contains less grammatical errors or easier language), then a journal might be fine with it; if it somehow had a much higher impact on the actual content (frankly, hard to imagine at this point of time) then it probably would need to be disclosed. This would be up to the individual journal to regulate.
N.B.: there are of course areas where the usage of a GPT has to be tightly watched (e.g. questions surrounding copyright, or using personal or otherwise sensitive/protected data in the prompts and thus at least possibly disclosing them to 3rd parties), but that is not principally different from any other search engine and I'd say out of scope for this question. Copyright especially is an issue, in my estimation, that's more relevant to AI generated picture/movie material than text.
Regarding the question of whether us here talking about this could teach ChatGPT how to avoid this in the future... unlikely. It is always hard to predict the future, but that's just not how these GPTs work. ChatGPT's training is years old (and was so even when the hype started). Combining a GPTs massive training base with current text and events is the hot frontier of GPT development; but the more current info is usually handled in a very different manner than the base training, from a technical point of view.
If the developers/scientists of a GPT wanted to make their texts even harder to detect, they would not need our input here, but they would just work on their algorithms etc. directly (they know much more about how their software works in detail). They don't need to wait for the training of the next big GPT to somehow pick up on this StackEchange question. There is no intentionality within the statistic data that's fed into such a system, it's just thoughtless statistics on a scale incomprehensible to intuition.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I recommend reviewing the manuscript solely for suitability for publication in the journal you're refereeing for. If you have suspicion that the text was generated by AI, and you think the conclusion that observation would drive you to is different from the conclusion you reached based upon the suitability of the manuscript as an academic contribution, mention your concerns in whatever mechanism the journal provides for confidential comments to the editor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd strongly echo the opinions of other comments and answers that you should just appraise the thing on its own merits (or lack thereof) rather than the smell of AI assistance.
It may be premature, or insufficiantly "humanist", to propose that a really good AI-generated thing should be considered good "despite" its being AI-generated... but/and, not so long ago, in the U.S., things done by women were not even seriously considered (in any sort of supposedly merit-based competition). And various well-known racist stuff.
After all, if corporations are legally entitled to being treated as legit political entities, why can't AI's be comparably respected? Own copyright? :)
I'm not really inviting debate on the larger issues, but, by-the-way, I certainly do not expect students to mention that they used calculators, though perhaps crediting specific software packages, so that other people can learn. Is that "giving credit"? I don't know.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Ai-assisted writing is a tool to write content.
Paper writing is a tool to share content.
The scope of peer review is to filter non-relevant content for the peers of research.
The paper you are reviewing has crappy content. Is the content even crappier because the authors are using wrongly a tool? their bad, not relevant for the outcome of the review. There are people that did much worse errors because they wrongly used a tool to defend their "content", see for example [an infamous econ/finance paper where the idea was flawed, and its demonstration was based on flaw use of a famous aI (assisted Intelligence) tool](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-04-18/faq-reinhart-rogoff-and-the-excel-error-that-changed-history).
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/21
| 1,327
| 5,594
|
<issue_start>username_0: Out of kindness, my professor gave me and one other student extra credit for volunteering at an event.
The issue is that the “extra credit” actually dropped my grade. Instead of giving a 15/15 he gave us 10/15. That's a D: 66.666 It dropped my grade from a 99.066 to 98.431.
He is my favorite teacher. I don't want to seem ungrateful.
How do I broach this subject? Or, do I just leave it alone?
—————
I read all of the comments and they were very helpful. I decided not to broach the subject with him.
Final grades just came out. He must have noticed as my score was adjusted to make sure my score was accurate.<issue_comment>username_1: If it can drop your grade, it is not really "extra credit". Usually when you give a student an extra credit task it is something that is *capable* of raising their grade (if they do it well) or is ignored if it does not raise their grade. (In other words, the task is usually treated as if it were a "redeemable" assessment.) For that reason, one plausible explanation here is that your teacher might just have made a mistake in how the assessment for that item was incorporated into your overall mark.
Under the circumstances, it would be reasonable for you to broach the subject with your teacher. No particular finesse is required beyond a simple sincere enquiry that does not make demands, and shows appreciation for other aspects of the teacher's work. I recommend you go and see your teacher and point out that your "extra credit" work dropped your overall mark, and first just check if this was intentional. If it was intentional that it should be marked this way, it would then be reasonable for you to point out that the item being called "extra credit" work seems misnamed, and it seems unfair to you that it would drop your overall mark.
As to not wanting to seem ungrateful to your favourite teacher, it might be nice if you would preface your enquiry by telling your teacher that he is your favourite and that you appreciate what a good job he has done on his teaching. People like to hear when others appreciate their work, especially if he has done a particularly good job with you relative to the other teachers. However, [XanderHenderson](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117368/) makes an excellent counter-point in the comments below where he notes that this might come across as you "buttering up" your teacher, and he might prefer not to hear this part in that context. If after you've explained your concern, your teacher decides he wants to keep your mark as it is, and is comfortable continuing to call this type of task "extra credit" work despite its potential adverse impact on marks, then it would probably be best to thank him for considering the issue and leave it at that. (Let him then mull it over in his own time for use with future students.)
Finally, you will have observed in the comments to the various answers that there are some academics/graduates who do not like "quibbles" over what are already high marks, and so some will take an inherently negative view of anything that involves seeking to change a 98 to a 99. I am on the side of those who think that this part is irrelevant, and that it is still worth raising the matter to ensure that the marking is done correctly now and in future. I think [CaptainEmacs](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857/) puts it well in his comments below (for another answer) when he says that "[a] student that pays attention to these things is a student that achieves near full marks. That's the student you want to run your experiments or write your code or carry out your computations."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You are clearly on track for the highest possible letter grade in this course. No need to fuss about one half of one percent in the high nineties.
After the course has ended and you have earned your A you might consider asking your professor about a strange statistical anomaly you noticed: that less than a perfect score on what was nominally work for extra credit actually lowered your course wide average. They might want to look into that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Don't tell them to change your grade. Just tell that there might be a mistake in their calculation and show what happened. Do not demand any extra grade as it might be received as petty. It might be a good idea even to tell you are not after the grade. Instead tell them you are pointing this out just in case if there is a problem in the grade calculation. 99 to 98 is meaningless but if it causes someone else to drop from say A to A- due to being on the line, it could be an issue. Also there might be a deeper problem in the grade calculation which they might want to know.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Your professor gave you extra credit, with the intention to give you some benefit for some valuable work that you have done. Now that good intention has backfired because of some "interesting" way someone calculated the total quality of your work. I would strongly assume that had your professor known this, he or she would have told you "you really deserve some extra credit for this work, but due to the strange ways of this university, it would actually hurt you, so I won't give it to you."
So you should tell your professor, and most likely they will make a decision so change things so that you and the other student don't suffer for this extra credit. The extra credit may be withdrawn if that is the only possibility, or it may even be improved so that your average doesn't go down.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/21
| 1,441
| 5,477
|
<issue_start>username_0: What is the proper way to punctuate equations following a colon (:)?
Is it:
>
> The Pythagorean Theorem can be expressed as the following equation:
>
>
> $a^2+b^2=c^2$
>
>
> In number theory, triples satisfying the aforementioned condition are known as Pythagorean triples.
>
>
>
Or
>
> The Pythagorean Theorem can be expressed as the following equation:
>
>
> $a^2+b^2=c^2$**.**
>
>
> In number theory, triples satisfying the aforementioned condition are known as Pythagorean triples.
>
>
>
(The difference is the period after the equation)<issue_comment>username_1: European languages suggest the period belongs. It has nothing to do with math. Few will notice, I'd guess, since you write on separate lines so the line breaks serve as "something like" the period, separating thoughts. A copy editor would probably supply it if you don't.
And few mathematicians would think the period was part of the equation in such a case, though it might be different ins some others.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, I don't think either of your suggested alternatives is good typesetting. In each case you have three paragraphs, one of which consists only of an inline equation. You should either make the first two into a single paragraph, or use a displayed equation, i.e. one of the following.
>
> The Pythagorean Theorem can be expressed as the following equation: `$a^2+b^2=c^2$`.
>
>
>
>
> The Pythagorean Theorem can be expressed as the following equation:
>
> `\[a^2+b^2=c^2.\]`
>
>
>
Some people would omit the period in the second example, but that is not because of the colon. It is because they would omit the period after any displayed equation.
The colon doesn't change anything. In English, whatever follows a colon still ends with a period (or other appropriate punctuation mark such as "?"). So you should not treat this any differently than if you had said "The Pythagorean Theorem says that ..." followed by a displayed or inline equation as you prefer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are varying opinions. :) As in other comments and answers, there are rationales for including or not including the period. The colon preceding is irrelevant. Perhaps the "most popular" choice is to include the period... or other punctuation, such as commas and semi-colons, depending how the sentence may continue. (I admit that I do not like English punctuation in displayed mathematics.)
Apart from convention, there is indeed the practical issue of knowing whether or not a display is end-of-sentence. For me, since a period introduces a bit of visual noise (usually trivial, but not reliably so), the way I would signal end-of-sentence is to start the text after the display with a capitalized (English) word, as opposed to further mathematical symbols. If the after-display text is a continuation of the sentence, then likewise make this clear by having a not-capitalized (English) word before further mathematical symbols.
Yes, some co-authors and editors will coerce adding the period, so it's not worth spending toooo much time making choices based on one's personal aesthetic, if it's going to be subject to conformification *anyway* :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As the other answers indicate, opinions differ on the matter. If you are writing with a particular venue in mind, check their style guide.
For example, the [Physical Review Style and Notation Guide](https://cdn.journals.aps.org/files/styleguide-pr.pdf) says
>
> Punctuate mathematical expressions as sentences
> or parts of sentences.
>
>
>
The [guide for the American Chemical Society](https://pubsapp.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/acs_math-stylesheet.pdf), on the other hand, says that inline equations should be punctuated as text
>
> In-text equations are punctuated as parts of the sentences in
> which they are contained, including closing punctuation.
>
>
>
but not in display equations
>
> End punctuation is not used in display equations.
>
>
>
My impression is that maths/computer science generally recommend puntuation after display equations while chemistry/engineering generally don't use such punctuation, but I did not perform a thorough analysis checking every journal in each field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The [American Mathematical Society Style Guide](https://www.ams.org/publications/authors/AMS-StyleGuide-online.pdf) (p 100) reads
>
> Each mathematics equation reads as a clause or sentence and is punctuated accordingly. Authors, however, sometimes leave displayed math
> unpunctuated. Insert commas and periods as needed so that the equation(s), the preceding text, and the following text together read grammatically.
>
>
>
So
>
> `The Pythagorean theorem can be expressed as the following equation: \[ a^2 + b^2 = c^2. \]`
>
>
>
is correct for AMS publications (note the period at the end of the displayed equation). Note that *neither* of the options presented in the question is quite right, as those examples use a single dollar-sign delimiter, indicated inline mathematics. In that case, the most correct typesetting would be
>
> `The Pythagorean theorem can be expressed as the following equation: $a^2 + b^2 = c^2$.`
>
>
>
Note that the period occurs *after* the closing delimiter. This won't make a ton of difference in the final typeset document, but it can make a perceptible difference in some contexts.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/21
| 626
| 2,642
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently considering Ph.D. or postdoctoral opportunities in Europe and have a strong preference for research-focused positions. I am interested in pursuing a program or position where the primary emphasis is on research, and teaching assistance responsibilities are minimal or non-existent.
I understand that teaching assistance can be an essential part of many academic programs, and I am open to some level of involvement in teaching. However, I am particularly interested in finding opportunities where I can dedicate most of my time and energy to conducting research and contributing to academic advancements in my field.
Are there universities or research institutions in Europe that offer Ph.D. or postdoctoral positions with a primary focus on research and minimal teaching assistance responsibilities? If so, could you please provide some examples or share your experiences with such programs?<issue_comment>username_1: At least in the U.K. in STEM subjects, many PhD positions are part of doctoral training programs now. These are fully funded and do not require any teaching. However, individual universities may require some minimal amount of teaching - I think mine was four hours total across the whole program.
Similarly, in the U.K., in STEM, I’m not aware of any post-doc colleagues who have any kind of teaching mandated, it’s purely research.
On the other hand, I think it is much more common for students in the arts and humanities to have teaching as part of their contract, as there is obviously a lot less funding for those kind of positions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Short answer is, yes, there are.
A simple search on Indeed or Academicgate or LinkedIn or any other will bring them up.
---
The essence of a postdoc (or PGRA/PGRF - postdoctoral research associate/fellow) is to engage with research rather than academic teaching.
Whether a unit/dept/school/university allows that is a different topic. To 'run' away from teaching, one avoids associate lecturer, lecturer, assistant professor positions. Well, some allow for research-focussed track.
Lumping PhD and postdocs together as in this question might however do a disservice to the question.
The structure (*form* and *format*) of PhD varies across Europe. Even within the UK, there's the traditional funded/unfunded, the doctoral training, the industrial professional doctorate, other structured doctorate. More so , the UK/Ireland doctoral training format doesn't equate to Scandinavian PhD (generally speaking).
Hence, I'll say, rather approach PhD positions different from postdocs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/21
| 594
| 2,360
|
<issue_start>username_0: Universities have histories behind them. Some are public, others are private.
Some are founded by the state, some by political figures in their capacity as public officials or private capacity (for instant, Stanford).
Some are founded by individual through different means (and intent).
The founding of universities also varies from country to country.
For academic interest,
* What are the backgrounds of founders of universities?
* What degrees do founders universities commonly have?
+ Administration degrees?
+ Academic degrees? Or
+ are they usually prominent political figures?
* What informed their founding?<issue_comment>username_1: At least in the U.K. in STEM subjects, many PhD positions are part of doctoral training programs now. These are fully funded and do not require any teaching. However, individual universities may require some minimal amount of teaching - I think mine was four hours total across the whole program.
Similarly, in the U.K., in STEM, I’m not aware of any post-doc colleagues who have any kind of teaching mandated, it’s purely research.
On the other hand, I think it is much more common for students in the arts and humanities to have teaching as part of their contract, as there is obviously a lot less funding for those kind of positions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Short answer is, yes, there are.
A simple search on Indeed or Academicgate or LinkedIn or any other will bring them up.
---
The essence of a postdoc (or PGRA/PGRF - postdoctoral research associate/fellow) is to engage with research rather than academic teaching.
Whether a unit/dept/school/university allows that is a different topic. To 'run' away from teaching, one avoids associate lecturer, lecturer, assistant professor positions. Well, some allow for research-focussed track.
Lumping PhD and postdocs together as in this question might however do a disservice to the question.
The structure (*form* and *format*) of PhD varies across Europe. Even within the UK, there's the traditional funded/unfunded, the doctoral training, the industrial professional doctorate, other structured doctorate. More so , the UK/Ireland doctoral training format doesn't equate to Scandinavian PhD (generally speaking).
Hence, I'll say, rather approach PhD positions different from postdocs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/21
| 500
| 1,987
|
<issue_start>username_0: As simple question as this: does a preprint have a better chance of being published after peer-review, than a journal article that is not or was not a preprint?
Note that the manuscript was submitted to a call for journal ... and is temporary a preprint<issue_comment>username_1: At least in the U.K. in STEM subjects, many PhD positions are part of doctoral training programs now. These are fully funded and do not require any teaching. However, individual universities may require some minimal amount of teaching - I think mine was four hours total across the whole program.
Similarly, in the U.K., in STEM, I’m not aware of any post-doc colleagues who have any kind of teaching mandated, it’s purely research.
On the other hand, I think it is much more common for students in the arts and humanities to have teaching as part of their contract, as there is obviously a lot less funding for those kind of positions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Short answer is, yes, there are.
A simple search on Indeed or Academicgate or LinkedIn or any other will bring them up.
---
The essence of a postdoc (or PGRA/PGRF - postdoctoral research associate/fellow) is to engage with research rather than academic teaching.
Whether a unit/dept/school/university allows that is a different topic. To 'run' away from teaching, one avoids associate lecturer, lecturer, assistant professor positions. Well, some allow for research-focussed track.
Lumping PhD and postdocs together as in this question might however do a disservice to the question.
The structure (*form* and *format*) of PhD varies across Europe. Even within the UK, there's the traditional funded/unfunded, the doctoral training, the industrial professional doctorate, other structured doctorate. More so , the UK/Ireland doctoral training format doesn't equate to Scandinavian PhD (generally speaking).
Hence, I'll say, rather approach PhD positions different from postdocs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/22
| 464
| 2,025
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing my thesis at this point and I have some sections, which started as follows:
Throughout this section we follow \cite[Section 3.2.1]{...} for solving ...
I am wondering whether I have to cite the same source more than only the one time at the beginning of the section or not. This is because I use his/her work through the whole section.
Any explananation would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: If you clearly state that a certain section of the text is based on a named reference you do not need to repeat the reference again as long as you do not insert another source somewhere. The basic rule is generally that a reference is valid from its appearance until a different reference is encountered OR you reach the end of a paragraph. Normally references are not carried across paragraphs. So as long as you can clearly explain to the reader what in the text comes from the reference in mind, then you should be in good shape.
Another technique, used in papers that frequently reference a specific paper, is to create some abbreviation for the reference such as (Smith and Jones, 1975, henceforth referred to as "S&J") and then use S&J instead fo the reference itself. This is not a frequent solution but can be a solution where the paper otherwise becomes full of the same repeating refereence.
In the end, the important aspect is to make sure there is no question as to from where the information comes.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Be careful here. There is another consideration. Saying that you "follow" a source doesn't give you license to copy their words. Nor does it give you license to paraphrase so much of the work that the copyright owner sees a violation, which they would if they believe that you lessen the value of the original.
Plagiarism and copyright are, in some sense, orthogonal, and you need to consider both.
If you copy words, quote and cite each or make it clear that all quotations are from the same place.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/23
| 616
| 2,675
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a very specific question regarding peer review. We recently submitted our work to a well-known journal and received a fast peer review decision. One reviewer said that our paper was missing an important component, and cited our work to support their claim. They requested us to use the approach presented in our previous paper. This paper, however, was written by me. This make me believe the reviewer does not know my identity. Their comment does not make sense (they are clearly not familiar with the topic). Is it inappropriate to say "We did this like that back then but now we found a more optimal method"?
Unlike here ([In single-blind peer-review, can you reveal your identity without the editor's consent?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14358/in-single-blind-peer-review-can-you-reveal-your-identity-without-the-editors-c)), I am not a reviewer but the author.<issue_comment>username_1: No, you should not do that. The articles published by that journal become somewhat trustworthy because there is a quality control procedure in place that articles have to go through. Part of that is double blind review. It is the journal's decision when to deviate from that procedure, not yours.
Moreover that should not be necessary. You have substantive arguments for your choice, so present those. That is a more valid form of argument than "believe me because I am the author".
Regardless, the reviewers don't decide, the editor does, and the editor knows who everybody is.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Think about the reviewer's comment on its merits. It points to previous work in the area that they think should be cited. The fact that it's yours is irrelevant.
The reviewer is representative of your eventual readers. If the reviewer is confused there's a problem with the paper. Perhaps you need to revise it to refer to that earlier work and explain why it's not relevant in this one.
If you think that's really unnecessary, then respond to the editor explaining why you are rejecting the reviewer's suggestion.
Speculation about whether the reviewer knows you wrote the other paper is irrelevant.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: This comes down to "does the journal you submitted to practice double-blind peer review?". You should know this, because if the answer is yes, you probably rewrote your paper to anonymize it.
If you didn't rewrite your paper (and since you seem surprised that the reviewer does not know who you are) I would assume the journal does not conduct double-blind peer review, in which case yeah, go ahead and tell them the method they suggest does not work as well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/23
| 660
| 2,668
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a student at University *D,* and I am writing a computer-science paper as the first author. The paper, however, has no connections whatsoever with University *D.* Instead, all of my research was done as part of an internship at University *T,* and the corresponding author (my advisor) is also from University *T.*
I am planning to order the affiliations as follows:
>
> My Name2,\*, Advisor's Name1,†
>
>
> 1 University *T,* 2 University *D*
>
>
>
And label on the footnotes:
>
> \* Research done in internship with University *T.*
>
>
> † Corresponding Author
>
>
>
My question is: is this allowed in computer science? It is obviously the only logical choice to make University *T* the first affiliation of the paper, so the question can also be framed as follows:
**Must the first affiliation of the paper be the affiliation of the first author?**<issue_comment>username_1: No, you should not do that. The articles published by that journal become somewhat trustworthy because there is a quality control procedure in place that articles have to go through. Part of that is double blind review. It is the journal's decision when to deviate from that procedure, not yours.
Moreover that should not be necessary. You have substantive arguments for your choice, so present those. That is a more valid form of argument than "believe me because I am the author".
Regardless, the reviewers don't decide, the editor does, and the editor knows who everybody is.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Think about the reviewer's comment on its merits. It points to previous work in the area that they think should be cited. The fact that it's yours is irrelevant.
The reviewer is representative of your eventual readers. If the reviewer is confused there's a problem with the paper. Perhaps you need to revise it to refer to that earlier work and explain why it's not relevant in this one.
If you think that's really unnecessary, then respond to the editor explaining why you are rejecting the reviewer's suggestion.
Speculation about whether the reviewer knows you wrote the other paper is irrelevant.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: This comes down to "does the journal you submitted to practice double-blind peer review?". You should know this, because if the answer is yes, you probably rewrote your paper to anonymize it.
If you didn't rewrite your paper (and since you seem surprised that the reviewer does not know who you are) I would assume the journal does not conduct double-blind peer review, in which case yeah, go ahead and tell them the method they suggest does not work as well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/23
| 1,069
| 4,576
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated 3 years ago and defendeded my master's thesis without any problem. Since recently, I am planning to go back to academia, so my former advisor and I are working together to publish my master's project.
While doing so, I've recognized coding mistakes that affect results statistics. Thankfully, it does not change the whole implication and main findings
but it changes some statistics numbers and minor results (which are not essential to the research hypothesis).
I don't know what to do. It was a mistake that I did not recognize at that time. I cried over and over for two days, and could not sleep soundly due to nightmares. I am panicking.
I've heard that I cannot make errata for my master thesis. (I don't know the reason why) What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: If you cannot create an erratum, this means that your master thesis is not properly published - or is only "lightly" published. This means that you are really only worried about having obtained your thesis by mistake. This is however not the case. Your evaluators will have looked at your capability to write a thesis and found you not wanting.
You talk to your former advisor after correcting the errors and after going through your code once again. Since your mistake(s) appear(s) not to be material to the outcome of the research, your plans for publication can go ahead.
You are certainly not the first researcher who published (even in your case, you did not really publish) results based on errors and you were lucky in that it did not affect the outcome of your research. Especially in CS, errors in published work are a thorny issue because so much is published in conferences that do not allow errata either.
Other than learning about your capability of making mistakes despite trying your best and being open to your former advisor and now collaborator, there is nothing you can do.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is not unusual. It is good you detected it and now know more about the issue than you did before. The university has examined the thesis and decided you made sufficient achievements to receive your award. There is no need to go back and make changes to it.
If you have a personal research web page, or some other similar online media you could write blog about it that contains the update and errata. This way when people look at future publications they can read the errata, or you can cite it whenever you cite the thesis work.
The detection and documentation of the improvement shows your academic and research diligence and rigour.
How common is it: When I made my thesis only typewriters were available, so I decided to digitise it using OCR. I was shocked at the number of typos, grammar and spelling faults that were made. It was shameful! How we have progressed with our modern tooling!
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Congratulations on finding and fixing your errors.
Publish the correct numbers in the paper you are working on.
If you and your adviser agree, you can note that this paper is based on work you did in your Master's thesis, with updates and corrections.
In either case no one will ever look at your Master's thesis.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The first thing you need to do is calm down. Deep breaths, go for a walk and appreciate nature.
Correct the errors, discuss them with your supervisor and make sure the published article based on the project is correct (perhaps add a note to the published article pointing out the mistakes in the earlier version in the thesis and explaining how they have now been fixed).
No-one will read your MSc thesis unless you have a personal website and you put it on there.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Master and PhD theses are meant to be your first contributions to the research community and everybody knows that these contributions are primary aiming for training young researchers. Nobody will judge you for mistakes like the ones described in the question.
Steps ahead:
1. Talk openly to your advisor about your bugs and how they affect the results.
2. As the publication is based on your thesis, you have to cite your thesis (otherwise it might be close to self-plaritism). The citation could be a sentence like "this paper is based on the first author's master thesis [Tube2020] but covers additional aspect, more polished results, and refined analysis." The last statement can be more explicit ("fixed minor issues in the analysis").
3. Enjoy your master thesis and your published paper!
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/23
| 3,389
| 14,688
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was on a internship abroad. We started a topic that is also carried out by their other student. The new research was repetitive, so I decided to take my time and automate the process. I spent some really long days and evenings preparing a proper script, which greatly improved the workflow.
But what happened - well, it turned out that the other guy copied the script from my home directory to himself without even asking for permission. I immediately informed the supervisor about this, but the guy not only did not react, but from that moment on he completely changed his attitude towards me, he started ignoring me and stopped talking at all, as if he was offended that I dared to inform them about such reprehensible behavior of the student.
I returned home. After some time, I received a general email, addressed to me and, surprisingly, that PhD student, that a draft of the manuscript is prepared and attached to the email. It turned out that the authors of the paper would be three: me, the doctoral student and the host.
I was very hurt by the behavior of the supervisor, that is, his lack of comment on the theft of the code and his change of attitude towards me to completely negative, as if I had done something to them.... This is the first time something like this has happened and it is another practice in a row.
If I'm honest, I wouldn't want to be associated with them in any way. Preferably, I would completely erase this internship from my resume and forget about it...
What do you think about the whole situation? Do you think it is wise to resign from the authorship of such a publication? Or to leave it as it is, because it is, however, a job that I put all my time into?<issue_comment>username_1: Publications, particularly first-authored publications in certain fields, including Chemistry, is the main currency of academia. You worked hard to develop research for this paper, and you deserve to have it on your CV as an author.
It is a shame that your internship was affected by a conflict with another student, and that the promoter was not able to manage the conflict appropriately. Academics are often excellent in research but not always perfect in managing people, particularly when it comes to managing conflicts. It is common for a PI or promoter to not know how to behave in a situation like this. Combined with stress and sometimes fear of exposure, it can result in shutting down the communication, similarly to what you observed. This is of course a poor experience for you — I am sorry that you had to go through this.
However, this episode is now behind you. It does not seem that you need to significantly interact with your former collaborators in order to complete the paper and get it published. I appreciate that work on this paper may bring back unpleasant memories and contribute to stress. You may need to discuss it with a professional or a mentor you trust. However, I think, the benefit of publishing the paper and having yourself recognised as a first author is also significant.
If you plan to develop your career in academia or a research-related industry, please consider completing this work to publication. You can then cease any further relationship with this group.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Let me summarize the facts as I understand them:
1. As a visiting researcher, you wrote some Python code that
substantially improved the process of collecting and/or processing
the research data. Another student then used this code without your
permission, and the supervisor did not take action when informed of
this.
2. After you returned home, the student and supervisor wrote a draft
paper based on the collected data, with the intent of publishing it
with you as the first author. They sent you a draft by email.
3. Throughout the process, you feel aggrieved because (1) the student
used your code without permission, (2) the supervisor was
uncommunicative, and (3) you provided the majority of the
contribution to the paper. Consequently, you are considering
withdrawing yourself from authorship of the paper.
I'm going to answer on the assumption that the above is accurate.
Someone used my code without my permission
------------------------------------------
To me, this is a surprising thing to be upset about. In my experience
doing research in Computer Science in the U.S. and collaborating with
others in Europe and Japan, it is standard practice to freely share code
among the team, and when ready, to release it publicly under an open
source license.
Code sharing is not just a matter of convenience or social culture, it
is important to the scientific process. Quoting
[A survey of researchers’ code sharing and code reuse practices, and assessment of interactive notebook prototypes](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9406794/)
by Cadwallader and Hrynaszkiewicz (PeerJ, 2022):
>
> Sharing code improves reproducibility, especially when made available
> before publication (Fernández-Juricic, 2021). Lack of source
> code—along with raw data, and protocols—has been described as the
> main barrier to computational reproducibility of published research
> (Seibold et al., 2021).
>
>
>
Sharing and publication of code is not required, but it is expected, and
a different arrangement requires explicit discussion and negotiation
(both among the team and with the employing institutions), ideally in
advance of doing the work. Furthermore, when sharing is not the
intention, the code should carry some sort of notice to that effect.
If I were the collaborating student in your scenario, I would be
somewhat irritated that you had simply left the code in your private
home directory, rather than putting it into a shared repository and
proactively telling the rest of the team about it. (That
said, I still would not have looked into another user's directory
nor used what I found there without prior authorization;
that part is questionable.)
If I were the supervisor in your scenario, I would be confused about why
you were complaining about the student using your code. I think the
supervisor probably should have done a better job at working with you to
understand the issue, explain the local research culture, and come to
a mutually acceptable resolution.
They wrote a paper without me
-----------------------------
First, let's review the criteria for authorship on scientific papers.
I'll quote
[Guidance on Authorship in Scholarly or Scientific Publications](https://provost.yale.edu/policies/academic-integrity/guidance-authorship-scholarly-or-scientific-publications)
from the Yale Office of the Provost:
>
> All co-authors should have been directly involved in all three of the
> following:
>
>
> * planning and contribution to some component (conception, design,
> conduct, analysis, or interpretation) of the work which led to the
> paper or interpreting at least a portion of the results;
> * writing a draft of the article or revising it for intellectual content; and
> * final approval of the version to be published. All authors should
> review and approve the manuscript before it is submitted for
> publication, at least as it pertains to their roles in the project.
>
>
> Some diversity exists across academic disciplines regarding acceptable
> standards for substantive contributions that would lead to attribution
> of authorship.
>
>
>
You already contributed data for point 1. You've now been sent a draft
to review, satisfying points 2 and 3. So you should be an author,
assuming you follow through by contributing to the draft.
You might feel that the paper is already "done"--it is not! You still
have plenty of opportunity to make major changes if you feel they are
appropriate and valuable. Personally, what I would do in this situation
is read the draft, give it a day, then imagine I was going to present
the work at a conference. What is the most valuable contribution? How
was this achieved? What might be good next steps? Having come up with
your own answers to these and other important questions, now go back to
the draft and ensure it conveys what *you* feel is important. Change as
much or as little as is required. Then be prepared to work with the
other authors to arrive at a paper you all are satisfied with.
I did all the work
------------------
To be blunt: no, you didn't.
At a minimum, the student and supervisor wrote the first draft. The
student also did data analysis; they did so, at least in part, by using
your code, but *they* still did that work. Data analysis is far more
than just running a script and blindly accepting the output. Whether
that student's contribution is precisely "equal" is unimportant, and
you're not in a position to accurately judge that anyway.
It seems to me that your collaborators are fairly acknowledging your
contributions by making you first author.
They didn't communicate enough
------------------------------
This part seems like a valid complaint. But remember that there are
likely significant cultural differences, and they are probably unsure of
exactly how to collaborate with a foreign researcher. None of the facts
I'm aware of in this situation suggest malice or disrespect.
Furthermore, improving communication can be done by either party. If
you think there's a problem in that regard, start by expressing that (in
a constructive way). Instead of addressing the problem, it seems like
you chose to work really hard on learning and coding, which of course
has its benefits, but in this case led to a build up of resentment.
Conclusions
-----------
For this publication, remain as first author, but be sure to earn it by
actively engaging during the writing process (points 2 and 3 of the
authorship criteria). Try to put the science ahead of your personal
misgivings regarding your collaborators.
Going forward, regarding code sharing, either adopt a different attitude
toward sharing, or make it clear to your collaborators and employers
ahead of time that you consider your code to be personal intellectual
property--but that will likely limit your opportunities. And when you
find yourself in a difficult work situation, don't just work harder
while ignoring the problem.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Since others have already given very good responses, I wanted to try to add another view that might be helpful: From what I can gather, I believe this is an example of questionable behaviour from **all** parties involved.
Starting with the obvious:
* Using somebody else's work without at least acknowledging it, is questionable at best. The other student should have asked if they can use your script or they should have at least acknowledged it directly to you.
* When bringing it up with your supervisor, they might have had multiple reasons to be unsure about the situation or think that it is best for them not to get involved. But at the very least they should have responded and given you pointers about the appropriate behaviour and not "leave you hanging".
But I am also unsure about your behaviour in this situation:
* First, did you not contact the other student about the situation? It sounds to me that you immediately went to your supervisor without trying to resolve the issue directly. That might also be a reason why your supervisor reacted distanced to the problem since it is not their job to resolve your issues for you (only to mediate and - as a last resort - intervene).
* Second, I find it a bit odd, that you were working on a shared project, with a task that was shared between others and chose to keep a tool that is useful in finishing this (shared!) project just for yourself and are even offended when others deem your work useful. Again, the way they used your work is questionable but at the same time it is also questionable to treat your contribution as a disconnected task that everybody needs to reinvent on their own.
* Third, I understand that you are offended that others went through your personal folder (though how personal are they if others have access to them?), I would be too. But I keep wondering how you found out that the other student copied your script to their personal folder? I am not pointing that out to fault you, but to highlight how easy it is to end up "sniffing" in other peoples folders without any bad intent. Are you sure that the other student is aware that you wrote the script yourself? Maybe they think you copied it as well or it was even supplied by your supervisor. The way most OS link previously used files at several places, the other student might not even be aware that the script originated from your personal folder.
Nevertheless I agree with the already given responses that you should not pass on a chance of a first authorship so early on in your career. If you ever choose to work in academics you will regret not being able to put that in your CV.
Maybe it helps to contact the other student and tell them about your grievances. They might not even be aware that this was an issue for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As someone who has spent a lot of years studying human behavior, I can tell that you are either quite young or you lack social exposure, or both.
There is nothing so wrong with what the other student did, sure he or she lacks a decent level of courtesy, but the real problem is your ego, it's why you feel entitled to the permission to use your code in a team project.
Your grievance was baseless and so was your escalation of the matter, you could have processed the matter from a positive light which means your code was worth using and be proud of yourself for distinctively contributing to the project. The student probably already told the supervisor where the code came from.
The probable reason why your supervisor did not react is because he may have had reservations about your behavior before this came up, maybe your unwillingness to share, your sense of entitlement, or your self centered approach to team work.
Don't get me wrong, I did not write this to make you feel bad, but if it does, then it's because the truth sometimes sting. And seeing how you easily get "very hurt" you need to take a chill pill and learn to take criticism.
You wrote this story here to make yourself look like the good guy, but experience has taught some of us that there are always three sides to a story, in this case, four, yours, the student's, the supervisor's, and the truth.
Finish that project and if possible request a meeting between the 3 of you to iron out the misunderstanding. And make sure you leave your ego at home when you go for that meeting. All the best.
Upvotes: -1
|
2023/07/23
| 362
| 1,491
|
<issue_start>username_0: What's the purpose of 1-week, 2-week, 10-week..."X-week"... (online) professional certificates? I mean, they cost money, right(?) Where do they find implementation? Where can they be used?
There are famous universities around the world that offer professional education online or on campus or both, and they provide you with a certificate. And of course you pay. My question is if this kind of certificates help in finding a job either to the market or academically.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, the purpose of short courses it to equip students with knowledge and skills required at their workplace without a significant break from their workplace. You can think of it as training, but focused not just on skills, but also on a more theoretical knowledge and ability to apply theory in practice.
The specific purpose depends on a particular degree.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> What's the purpose of 1-week, 2-week, 10-week..."X-week"... (online) professional degrees?
>
>
>
One of the main purposes of this kind of professional degrees is to bring revenue to the company that offers them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: What I think you need to do with all these quasi-qualifications is check if they are independently certified.
Without independent certification, you have no way of knowing how qualified the staff who will be teaching it are, aka if they know what they are talking about.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/23
| 1,180
| 5,139
|
<issue_start>username_0: After Ph.D. I went to pursue a position in industry. But after 2 years I figured that the company culture is not suited for me. Will the hiring professors in academia accept the fact that I wasn't always in academia and hire me as a researcher for example in a university lab?
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Although the exact answer is somewhat field-dependent, in general I would say that industrial experience is highly valued in academia. You should try applying to research positions of your choice and see how successful your applications are. Good luck.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When I worked at one University, which has VERY strong links with industry, (in fact the Uni built specific courses for the companies) they often took people from industry to teach courses.
One colleague, who was a good teacher, decided that he preferred industry life and wanted to move back. His issue was he was under contract and was worried how they would handle it. Would they force him to complete the contract, or pay it out etc etc.
I told him they would make all efforts for him to leave very quietly: for the simple reason they did not want to "frighten" others from coming to try their hand at teaching.
Sure enough he went back to industry, the contract magically "disappeared" and was easy all round.
Don't ask me for evidence - I know his name and the Uni, and the company he went back to, but they deserve their privacy.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: **No**. After I finished my second post doctoral position and left the academic environment, I was never able to come back, even if I had the doctoral degree and multiple publications that were not so bad (normal journals, peer reviewed) and (initially) quite recent. I wrote really many applications but looks like in most of the cases was not even briefly considered as a possible candidate. During these years I was able to find a new job in the industry several times as needed, and quite easily.
I do not tie my failure to return to science with something relevant to my personality or lack of achievement, and more suspect that this path violates some unwritten rules. I have few other friends who ended up the same way. It is not possible to get a post doctoral position after few years of work in the industry. It is not possible to get any lower position. Maybe some really extreme history may allow you to become a professor, but I cannot even think out what it could possibly be.
At very least, the industry almost never allows to have publications, even if you are so extremely lucky as permitted to do research work there.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is extremely field-dependent. It will also depend on whether you want to mostly teach, do research under a professor, or lead a research team in academia.
In engineering, industry experience can be extremely valuable. People who have worked in basically any engineering position in industry for decades can get teaching-focused jobs without much difficulty. People who have done R&D work in industry can get research-focused jobs, especially in a hot field, and especially if they are continuing to publish while in industry. People who have worked in industry are seen as extremely qualified to do research in a technician or research scientist position under a professor, but are rare in academia because they are almost always too expensive for a faculty member to be able to afford to pay them on grants.
In biology, industry experience is not viewed as valuable in the same way. Once you leave the path of undergrad -> tech/lab manager (optional) -> grad student -> postdoc -> PI, it's very hard to get back on that track. Even if you are still in academia -- for example, taking a research scientist position after a postdoc instead of moving up to PI -- it is really hard to get back on the road to becoming a PI. I know a few biologists who have chosen "alt-ac" careers in which they still sometimes interact with academics, and one of them recently shared that they don't feel that they are respected as a scientist anymore. I do not know of anyone who got a PhD, worked in industry, and then returned to a research scientist or technician position, but this would almost certainly be easier than trying to get a job as a PI. The question is just whether your experience would make you more or less desirable to a PI in comparison with a graduating PhD student or super-postdoc who has not spent any time in industry. I'm not sure of the answer to that but I think it would depend a lot on the specific work you were doing in industry and whether it produced publishable research.
Those are the two fields I have the most familiarity with. From the little exposure I've had to philosophy, they seem to operate similarly to biology in that there is a defined track and if you deviate from it, it's very difficult to get back on. I can't venture a guess about any other field, though.
You should reach out to people in your field to get a sense of whether people successfully do this and how they are perceived.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/23
| 645
| 2,527
|
<issue_start>username_0: The following examples are representative situations in scientific writing. I hope to understand whether there are any preferred or correct tenses, and whether there are grammatical reasons and stylistic conventions.
1. Refer to published work:
*In his famous publication [1], Einstein [shows/showed/has shown] ...*
2. Talk about earlier parts of the paper:
*Earlier, in Section 2, we [show/showed/have shown]...*
*The previous discussions [show/showed/have shown]...*
3. Talk about later parts of the paper:
*Later, in Section 22, we [show/will show]...*
*The following discussions [show/will show]...*<issue_comment>username_1: 1. ... **showed** ... is perhaps best as it is a "point in past time" and the past tense is more precise than the perfect **has shown**. The present tense **shows** for a paper published in 1905 (?) is syntactically wrong although in colloquial English it is often heard and the context supplies the meaning adequately.
2. ... **Earlier, in Section 2, it was shown**...
3. ... **Later, in Section 22, it will be shown** ...
It's better to use the passive voice to make it less personal and to focus on the paper's argument rather than on one's own role, cf. journalists and authors referring to themselves as "the writer of these lines" or "this observer" rather than I when writing a serious piece with objective arguments.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: For 2 and 3, there are certainly people who think that everything in a paper should take place in the present tense, and would use "show". However, I personally think that is unhelpful, as it means you have to be much more careful to specify whether you are talking about the immediate proximity in the paper or about something earlier or later.
Therefore I would normally use past, present or future depending on what part of the paper I am talking about. However, I would make a distinction between whether the subject is a person/people or is an argument/paper. So I would write "Earlier, we showed..." but "The previous arguments show...". The argument hasn't stopped showing it, but we (the author(s) and reader(s)) have moved on.
I would use the simple past "we showed" if the past is indicated elsewhere in the sentence e.g. by "Earlier..." or "In Section 2...". In the absence of something like that, "We have shown ..." would be preferable.
For similar reasons I would say "In his famous publication [1], Einstein showed ...", but "Einstein's famous publication [1] shows ...".
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/24
| 1,208
| 5,161
|
<issue_start>username_0: Will someone be considered dishonest if they do not list papers published in predatory journals? I'd like to know in the following scenarios, when
1. applying for a job
2. listing on, e.g. a personal University web page or a Google personal profile of Google Scholar
3. asked by researchGate to confirm “Am I the author?”
Does it conflict with the idea that **honesty** is the most important factor for researchers?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Will someone be treated to be dishonest, when not listing papers published in predatory journals?
>
>
>
I'd prefer not to see predatory journals in someone's publication list, because those aren't scientific journals. Also, the fewer mentions predatory journals get, the better (except, of course, in predatory journal lists).
You mention that "honesty is the best policy", so just keep the honest journals.
"Selected Publications" lists are typically much more selective that weeding out predatory journals, so I don't think it'll help your case, as you seem to aim for an exhaustive publication list. But obviously if you aim to do a shortlist with your best papers, then your shouldn't mention the predatory journals.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For 2 ... I often see personal web pages with "Selected Publications". If that is the label, then it is not dishonest to omit some publications (for whatever reason).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Whatever the quality of the journal is, do you consider what you published there as good enough that I should read it, with good conscience?
The difference between this publication and one (by you) in a better journal would be: You might have put in more effort to get accepted in the better journal. It will have had a better review process, with you making improvements as a result. Or it might not have been accepted by the better journal at all.
But it is your decision, is the publication good enough for the audience, even if the journal in general isn't? Even if it isn't your best work, because it wasn't of that much importance to you, does it benefit me? That's the question to decide.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You pose an interesting ethical dilemma.
However, in general, honesty does not imply to provide all information. It would be dishonest to withhold information that puts the other information given in a bad light, along the lines of: "I was never convicted of murder" ("but I was convicted of voluntary manslaughter"). This would be dishonest because most people would assume that manslaughter is murder. But this is not the case here.
If you published in a predatory journal and you made a mistake, there is no reason to advertise this mistake. If you published because a co-author desperately needed a publication, even a bad one, then you do not need to advertise your good deed.
In my (Christian-Catholic) faith tradition, there is a distinction being made between information to which the receiver has a right ("Did you just cut me off in the parking lot?") and to which the receiver has no right ("No, Herr SS-Officer and Herr Gestapo, there are no jews in the attic" is the proverbial example). This avoids choosing the minor infraction of God's law, which is what we do not do. But you do not have to be in the same tradition in order to use this reasoning. The secular world is full of examples where you do not have to reveal something that is going to do harm to you. Scientific integrity is mostly about what you publish in your papers and present at talks.
From a utilitarian perspective, having published in a predatory journal is not relevant to an employer or grant giver, just as having made a mistake on a calculus exam in your first year undergraduate is irrelevant. But including the journal in your list would indicate that you believe it to be a valid publication, which would be contrary to the truth, or it would force you to discuss this in a document that is inappropriate.
So, in good conscience, leave it out.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm sorry but I don't understand the question, as well as some of the answers here. It is dishonest to publish on predatory journals in the first place. Research is supported by funding from the state (tax payers) or private research foundations (donations). Research funds are meant to support rigorous and ethical research, in order to advance human knowledge. Predatory journals are not scientific journals and do not publish research articles. They would publish any piece of garbage you submit to them without any peer review process. I understand that some inexperienced researcher may have accidentally published on a predatory journal without even knowing that the journal was predatory. Honest people learn from their mistakes. However, if someone intentionally and repeatedly publishes on predatory journals using grant funding, the university or the institute they work for will certainly take actions against them. To conclude, if you have published several papers on predatory journals, listing these papers on the CV or university web page does not make you look more honest.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/24
| 317
| 1,362
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was interviewed for a postdoc position in the USA and got a confirmation mail 2 months ago. It's been 2.5 months not getting an offer letter yet. How much more time would it take?<issue_comment>username_1: It takes what it takes and while 2.5 months seems long it may be because they think you are satisfied with the status quo and all else is but a formality. You can ask them, especially if you have any doubts about its eventual arrival.
But it might just be that the season implies that they are working with reduced staff and have what they consider more pressing concerns to get ready for the coming academic year.
It could also be that the formal process requires several signatures and some of those folks are away for a bit.
Ask and ye shall (probably) learn.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I can't speak for how it works in the USA, but in my experience the key parameter that governs when you get the formal offer letter and contract for a postdoc is amount of time remaining until your start date, not the amount of time since the informal offer. If the start date is still some way off, even if it has been months since you had a positive outcome, the person whose responsibility it is may well regard it as not being urgent.
Of course, you can reasonably ask them when you can expect to receive it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/24
| 437
| 1,773
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that was refereed, accepted, and published. The referee's report was overwhelming positive and enthusiastic about my paper and results.
Now that the paper is fully published, is it appropriate for me to ask the journal to get me in touch with the referee of the paper?
If relevant, this is in the field of astronomy/astrophysics and the journal is The Astrophysical Journal.<issue_comment>username_1: The handling editor is the right person to ask. Tell them why you'd like to contact the reviewer. If it for possible future collaboration, it might be possible. One way for the editor to handle it is to pass your request to the reviewer, letting them decide whether to contact you.
If you just want to thank them, then the editor could pass that on and maintain the anonymity.
Contact with the reviewer would probably make it impossible for them to review any future paper of yours, I suspect.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> *Now that the paper is fully published, is it appropriate for me to ask the journal to get me in touch with the referee of the paper?*
>
>
>
Is it possible to ask the journal to get you in touch with a/the referee(s), yes you can.
Is it ***appropriate***, that is subjective. Responses will differ. An overriding factor will be ... *why are you or why do you want to get in touch* ...
* to thank; possible, however the handling editor might just be '*pass on person*' and keep *confidentiality*
* to engage further, it is possible, the handling editor will likewise facilitate
* for further collaboration, also possible, the handling editor will likewise facilitate.
Once there's engagement beyond *just thanking*, ***conflict*** (would normally) kick in.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/07/24
| 606
| 2,462
|
<issue_start>username_0: My paper got accepted for publication in an ISI/Scopus index journal, and they charge the APC. We requested to extend the deadline for APC paying because we are looking for money. In the meantime, the journal's production team also asked us to do some tasks to publish our paper. Today, my paper got published by that journal, although we haven't paid the APC. My questions:
1. What should I do right now? Should I tell them I haven't paid the APC yet or keep silent?
2. Do they remove our paper if they realize that we haven't paid the APC? If that happens, does it negatively affect my profile?<issue_comment>username_1: You've assumed they made a mistake publishing your paper. That's not necessarily the case. It's possible they published anyway because they trust you will pay the APC. Why would they trust you will pay the APC? The most obvious reason is because you published previous papers with them and always paid the APC. Other reasons could be because you or your co-author are a Big Name (or member of their editorial board, etc.) and they are accommodating you.
So: don't worry about it, keep looking for the money, and pay them when you get it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> *We requested to extend the deadline for APC paying because we are looking for money ...
> What should I do right now? Should I tell them I haven't paid the APC yet or keep silent?*
>
>
>
Keep calm, continue looking for the money, and frantically make payment.
While at it, you can, *though I'll think not compulsory*, inform the managing editor (or handling editor) about the '*slipped through*' publication and your commitment to making APC payment nonetheless. Doing so would *fulfill* moral reasonableness.
PS: there might be \*unseen" nuances/underlying factors leading to the publication or it might just be an inadvertent error.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It's been this way for many years, before the advent of open access. From personal experience paying overlength charges, voluntary page charges, and color fees from the early 2000's is that publishers will often assume you will pay and send an invoice to be paid later.
I think this is due to the bureaucracy at institutions. It can often take 2-3 months for large sums of money to work their way through the system, and such unexpected delays will wreak havoc with publishing processes, especially if there's topical or special issues.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/25
| 426
| 1,668
|
<issue_start>username_0: My official passport name is very long <NAME> that's why I use <NAME> on my publications, also on most websites I use shorter name. Will it cause any confusion in the future and what should I do if someone asks to prove that publication is mine.
Thank you for answers!<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it's okay to use a shorter name.
But make sure that:
1. Your Department is aware of your assumed name for publications so that calls can be redirected to you.
2. That no one else in your Department has a name (or assumed name) close to your assumed name at the time of publication.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Can you use a *shorter* name. Yes, you can.
Try to be '*unique*' within your organisation. Obviously, if you move to other organisations (change job), you cannot guarantee uniqueness.
>
> Will it cause any confusion in the future and what should I do if someone asks to prove that publication is mine
>
>
>
Given that the uniqueness of your '*known*' name might not be unique at all material time over your career, what you can do is to register an [identity on ORCID](https://orcid.org/) with your name and include the *shorter* one as *also known as*.
Try to be ***consistent*** in your research engagements (journal, conf, grant, reports ...).
Within your field, put *a face* to your known name (in networking , conferences...).
If for any reasons you're ask to prove *identity* (your publication),
* show your ORCID, and
* (relevant) correspondence for the publication. This might just be email or if need be, extracts from journal or conf submission process.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/25
| 1,238
| 5,376
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am now serving as a reviewer at a computer science conference. I could identify that one of the papers I am reviewing comes from a prestigious lab based on
* The type of research problem the paper is trying to address is in line with what they have always been doing (I am working in a relatively niche field), and the research methodology looks quite familiar.
* The list of papers they cite bias towards the publications from their lab.
* The style of graphics and presentation of the contents look pretty familiar.
However, as much as this lab previously generated many good papers (in fact, they opened up the area I am working on), this particular paper is quite borderline; I am leaning towards rejecting it.
What concerns me is there may be some way they could know who gave this rejection decision, given the fact that they may know the PC member (the person responsible for matching papers with reviewers), who could *incidentally* and *subconsciously* give them a few names. I hope the academia is better than this, but I could not help thinking of the bad consequences like my own paper and even myself will receive unfair treatment in the future; even if these things happen, I do not have any solid evidence to prove it.
I am not sure what I should do at this point. Should I go against my initial judgement and accept this paper (there is a "weakly accept" option for my conference).<issue_comment>username_1: Ethically, you should deal with the paper as it is and ignore the other aspects. If you aren't comfortable with this, then you should quit reviewing, as such decisions affect what is published and what is not.
If the paper is worthy recommend acceptance. If it is unworthy, recommend rejection. The lab from which it emerged, and the authors, themselves, should be irrelevant in any decision about the paper.
You can, of course, ask the Program Chair to take special precautions about your identity and that you don't want it known. This should be standard for a reputable single blind conference in any case, but it is ok to remind them.
If you can't do the job, quit. Sorry to be blunt.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If the journal’s editor is even somewhat ethical- you should be fine. This is the point of anonymous review.
I don’t think anyone can 100% absolutely guarantee that your identity will not be exposed, but again this is really unheard of. If the journal is reputable, exposing reviewer identity is grounds for removal from the editorship position most likely, and other consequences might arise.
On another note, if the lab is truly prestigious they should welcome critical, constructive feedback on their work. You learn a lot from rejections, they can often make the paper better. Even if I knew the identity of my reviewers I would not take negative reviews personally, as long as their tone is constructive and polite.
Finally, an editor can theoretically ignore the reviews and just accept the paper. This kind of bad behavior has far fewer repercussions towards them than revealing your identity. If authors have so much leverage over the editor that they can get reviewer names, they also have enough to just get their paper accepted despite bad reviews. Again this last point is irrelevant if the journal is halfway reasonable.
**Edit:**
When reviewing for a conference there are usually several more checks and balances in place (at least for CS conferences). There are reviewers, meta-reviewers, area chairs and program chairs. All of them are expected to report and handle inappropriate behavior on the side if authors/reviewers.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This may be received as a stupid idea, and it possibly is.
However, it *could* be a test of the peer review process: If they are so prestigious and they acknowledge this, they could be afraid that peer reviewers are disinclined to reject their papers, just because they are who they are.
So, by sending in a bad paper, if accepted they know the peer reviewer is biased because of their reputation.
Rejecting it as you should, sends the signal back: We don't care who you are, send in garbage and we reject it!
As I said, maybe this is a bit far out, but it *could* be a possibility...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> What concerns me is there may be some way they could know who gave this rejection ... I could not help thinking of the bad consequences like my own paper and even myself will receive unfair treatment in the future
>
>
>
Let's assume for the sake of discussion that they will know it was you. If you do not feel you can stand behind your review in this situation, and live with any potential consequences - then, frankly, you are ethically compromised, and should have a long hard look in the mirror.
Peer reviewing should be considered a sacred public duty. Something that you do for humanity, for science, for posterity - not in the sense that it has to be extensive (because people can always read the paper for details), but because of the weight your reviewer opinion will carry.
Now, you might say I'm being too strict and idealistic; but inappropriate reviewing is part of what makes many conferences so full of fluff and junk which should have been rejected - often because it comes from the lab or research group of somebody important.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/07/25
| 1,586
| 5,865
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a background of psychology and have been offered a PhD which will investigate an area in psychology (with aspects of computing).
Although the PhD will be investigating psychology, it is offered and funded by the computing department, so is technically not a ‘psychology PhD’ but rather a PhD in computing sciences which investigates psychology (I will be taught the computing aspects I need to know).
Will this impair my future applications to doctorate roles/psychology jobs requiring PhD’s? Will they not care which department it is offered through, as long as my research in in psychology (which my thesis will be)? as my final certificate will say computing I believe.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> *technically not a ‘psychology PhD’ but rather a PhD in computing sciences*
>
>
>
Yes, technically. Realistically it's a (smooth) blend.
>
> *Will this impair my future applications to doctorate roles/psychology jobs requiring PhD’s*
>
>
>
Ideally, shouldn't.
However, this might depend on which sub-field you want to *narrow* to.
Psychology and computing have a long history; symbiotic relationship in a way. The interrelationship goes for decades; kind of a century.
Crisscrossing or cross-carpeting seems natural; more like a norm, especially where they interface.
One area is cognitive which has shaped theories in computing (and information systems). Psychology has been used in CSCW/HCI, education technology, cybersecurity (notably human-aspect, cyber-skill/use); neuroscience, NLP/LLM/AI are not left behind.
The close-knit comes to fore in joint-degrees, for instance [UCC, Ireland](https://www.ucc.ie/en/ck121/) and [Yale](https://catalog.yale.edu/ycps/subjects-of-instruction/computer-science-psychology/) psychology and computing degree program.
HCI (Human-computer interaction) is essentially a study at "the region of intersection between psychology and the social sciences, on the one hand, and computer science and technology, on the other" ([Carroll, 1997](https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.61))
Ref:
<NAME>. (1997). Human-computer interaction: psychology as a science of design. Annual review of psychology, 48(1), 61-83.
Sample application:
[<NAME>. (1981). The psychology of how novices learn computer programming. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 13(1), 121-141](https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/356835.356841)
[<NAME>. (1996). Psychology of computer use: XL. Addictive use of the Internet: a case that breaks the stereotype. Psychological reports, 79(3), 899-902](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pr0.1996.79.3.899)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, nobody in academia cares too much about what is written on your degree certificate; you will be defined by your research output rather than an arbitrary university administrative decision. However:
* Your departmental affiliation may impact your exposure to the field more broadly: the seminars, networking opportunities, friendships and conversations that you find in a computing department will be different from those that you would receive in a psychology department. This may well influence the shape of your future career.
* If your PhD programme has requirements other than the thesis (e.g. taught courses) these will probably have a different slant depending on your departmental affiliation.
* Depending on your background and personality, you may find it harder to integrate into a computing department than a psychology department: coffee-time conversations and social activities may be less aligned to your interests. This depends hugely on the shape and culture of your department: will you be the one psychologist in a sea of compiler-design nerds, or are people drawn from a wide range of interdisciplinary backgrounds?
* Often, opportunities to get involved in teaching are organised at departmental level, so you may find it difficult to gain psychology teaching experience from within a computing department. Indeed, if you are coming from a non-CS background you may find it difficult to get involved in teaching at all. Depending on your future career goals, this may (or may not) weaken your CV.
Most of these potential issues can be mitigated by making a deliberate effort to engage with the psychology community outside your immediate department.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Depending on which country you plan to work later on, it may have a huge impact.
In some countries (i.e. Italy) you have to obtain an habilitation to apply for a professorship, and habilitation are linked to certain "knowledge areas" and the requirements are different for different "knowledge areas".
It may end up in the absurd situations that your PhD formally-in-topic-A is not recognized to become a professor in area-B-where you have all your publications.
However, knowing which countries will have opportunities for you it is so far down the road, and knowing that getting a professorship is so unlikely even knowing exactly which 10 countries you aim to look for one makes the discussion pretty useless, unless you have a specific country in mind.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Several good answers already. Let me add two things. My PhD is in psychometrics, given by a psychology department, but I spent my working career as a statistician. No one ever cared that my degree was in the "wrong" field.
Second, you ask
>
> Will this impair my future applications to doctorate roles/psychology
> jobs requiring PhD’s
>
>
>
but you don't say which jobs! If you are talking about posts as a professor in a psychology department, then knowledge of computing may make you very popular.
If you want to work in areas other than academia then it could be more of a problem. (PhD s in psychology work in lots of different kinds of jobs).
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/25
| 771
| 2,955
|
<issue_start>username_0: In September I'll be starting my second year in my master's in which I'm writing my master's thesis. I have everything set up and I am starting to go through some of the literature during the summer.
As this is my first 'larger' project I am involved with, I wanted to ask for some tips on how to handle and structure a thesis, or larger research projects in general. I want to implement some good practices when starting my thesis and try to avoid common mistakes made by grad students.
I'm open for any kind of answers, from personal anecdotes and 'lessons learned' to e.g. software for organizing ideas like Obsidian.<issue_comment>username_1: The best time to start organising ideas and taking note is from the first year. The second best time is ***now***. So, you're still *good* to go.
In your writing up, have/develop a story line. Your literature, methodology, findings/results and discussion all end up fitting into your narrative (story line); not just discussion.
For your literature, annotation and referencing, you can't go wrong with [Zotero](https://www.zotero.org/). I actually moved away from Mendeley to Zotero due to Mendeley *encrypting* their SQLite db.
If your institution offers [Endnote](https://endnote.com/), feel free to use as alternative to Zotero.
I'm aware you mentioned master's thesis. Tips for PhD writing will equally be important.
<NAME> provide [guidance for writing thesis](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMgdrrbOPUKNNQQITqJEAFAXMhzfHdgpB) and good ol' [tools/tips](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrC2vS9j30g&list=PLMgdrrbOPUKNZzz4qg3g08FPmqTQKrdQQ&index=13&t=82s).
Just to mention that most universities have good resources for writing up. Check with your university's writing center and postgraduate center/school.
---
<NAME> has a *comprehensive* [tour of Obsidian for PHD Students](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XE_CGBlQ17o)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Document everything! OK, this might depend a bit on what kind of work you are doing, but for me as a lab rat that is one of the most important things. Once you sit down to write your thesis it makes such a difference if you have good structured notes to go back and remind yourself of exactly what experiment you did and when/how, what observations you made, what conclusions you drew, etc. This is important even for experiments that didn't work.
Also in a really big project it is really easy to get lost and feel like you don't really know what goal it is you are actually working to. It will take some time for you to wrap your head around everything, so try to break it up into smaller problems. This is also where your supervisor's guidance can be really important. I have sometimes made the mistake of not asking my supervisor for help when I've been stuck and they could have given me a push in the right direction. Better to ask one too many times than one too few :)
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/26
| 615
| 2,698
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently working on a research proposal and have come across a problem: This research proposal builds on a previous research proposal of mine. I am a historian and it deals with the same topic but for a different time period.
Now, that means that I feel I have to cover some of the same literature and background information that I have also covered in the past proposal. Specifically, particularly the first few paragraphs cover similar literature and background information as the previous proposal. I do not take anything over verbatim of course, but in terms of who I cite and what I say in the beginning (where I also make clear that this project builds on the past project) is pretty similar in terms of structure and content to the last proposal.
Now, my question is whether this is generally fine or not? The thing is I do not really know how to do it differently unless I wish to intentionally worsen the proposal by leaving out major parts of background information and literature.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> ... *have to cover some of the same literature and background information that I have also covered in the past proposal*
>
>
>
Refocusing or repurposing or covering part of previous literature and background is generally fine when it is essential for the research or proposal at hand.
What is improper though is to dump or regurgitate the old into the *new*.
>
> ... *deals with the same topic but for a different time period*
>
>
>
The different *time period* necessitate a different *problem statement*. Likewise, the literature, while rehashing or reusing *previous* literature, will *speak* to the new time period.
In-between, one doesn't (completely) discard ones publications when developing/submitting a new research/manuscript. Where they're related or has a degree of overlap, one builds on the *former*.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't see anything wrong with recycling some key portions of an older proposal into a new proposal - especially one that explicitly builds upon the older one. Logically you are going to have *some* overlap because it's a continuation of the same project. You already have done the work to compile relevant introductory material and so it seems a bit silly to look for *other* sources arbitrarily. You still need to expand the introduction to discuss the new elements of the proposal.
Copying and pasting sections is out of the question but you aren't intending to do that anyway. Using the same source/example/evidence twice is not problematic. You're building on your previous work, which includes the review of the literature you included in the intro.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/26
| 733
| 2,683
|
<issue_start>username_0: In areas such as information and computer science, what is meant by teaching in different contexts? I have noticed some teaching positions require a document detailing contexts one has taught in. I have been searching on this topic and have found examples such as [this one](https://web.media.mit.edu/%7Elieber/Teaching/Context/Context-Intro/Context-Intro-bis/sld001.htm) , but I doubt this is what universities require. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Teaching in different contexts often means teaching in different ways using different methods and different situations. All these differences are combined into the covering phrase "contexts".
It is asking you to explain if you have taught in a large lecture room, a small group tutorial, in a laboratory practical, one-to-one support tutorial, pre-recorded video and how you changed your approach for the different situations. They want to measure your teaching experience and approach against other candidates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You are right, the exemplar you refer to is not what they want.
---
Generally speaking, teaching context is your reflective approach.
>
> *In areas such as information and computer science, what is meant by teaching in different contexts?*
>
>
>
Just as you have *context* in information systems research, it is so in teaching. Essentially, what is/are the context(s) under which your teaching took place and how do you go engaging within those context.
Context covers the nuances, sociotechnical, structures, agencies, mechanisms beyond just demographics or description.
In IS, (IT, CS) teaching context goes beyond mere introducing and using '*technology*'.
With technology enhanced learning (edtech), teaching context would also speak to
* rationale for introducing the *platform*
* how the *platform* was dynamically engaged from a scholarship of teaching, learning and assessment
* what interventions took place for learners learning: learning outcomes, equity & diversity, learning experience...
Context implies reflexivity, the research-based teaching.
---
A thought from [PennState](http://www.personal.psu.edu/dgm122/docs/EDUC591_context.doc).
Some literature '*context*' on teaching contexts
* [book chapter on understand teaching context](https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/practice-teaching/understanding-the-teaching-context/A7AFE13E31C260DED7CB5C72E81FB632)
* [article towards supporting well-being](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0309877X.2021.2023733)
* [approach to teaching](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075070600680539)
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2023/07/26
| 2,771
| 11,501
|
<issue_start>username_0: First a little background:
I am in the middle of my PhD and recently came down with pretty severe depression. I would not say my PhD work is the cause of it (I am not in a toxic lab), but the immense pressure to always deliver is definitely not helping.
I feel like I am still affected by the general culture in academia and that it is not very accommodating of my struggles with mental illness. Living up to the *"student really passionate about their research dedicating their life to it"* is pretty damn hard when you sometimes lose control and cry for days, can't get out of bed, and battle suicidal ideation. This makes me frustrated, because I feel like that is not fair and inclusive of people who struggle with mental illness.
Mostly for myself, I started to write a personal narrative essay describing my experience and frustration. Then I had the thought to submit it to [Science Working Life](https://www.science.org/topic/careers-overline/working-life) — maybe there's someone out there with similar struggles that would feel seen and inspired from reading it?
Now the question(s):
Maybe this is my anxious side all over again, overthinking everything, but if you were me, would you submit deeply personal writing like this? Do you think it could have value? Would you, as a reader, value something like this?
P.S.: To anyone else struggling, you are not alone ♡<issue_comment>username_1: If you do write and publish a personal piece such as this, be aware that (potential) employers, students, colleagues, etc will google you and find it. Some of them may find it inspiring, many won't care/read it, unfortunately a few may consciously/unconsciously hold it against you. If any person/institution is mentioned/implicated it could cause problems for them (and potentially you) as well.
I think it's important to have stories like this out there for exactly the reasons you mention. But unfortunately the reality is that there can be consequences.
If it's possible to anonymise this could eliminate most negative consequences while maintaining the positive ones.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Like username_1, I would expect that you would see the need to protect yourself and your career in writing under an assumed name.
Once you are protected, I would answer your three questions in a resounding affirmative.
There really **are** things that need to be said about academic pressures on PhD students. One can't rely on universities to raise this as it would bring their own management into question. Nor can one expect mainstream education correspondents to seek it out: it's not the usual sexy off-beat "story" that catches their eyes.
This issue is bigger than something merely of relevance to PhD students or even modern academics. Intense pressure of the workplace, be it on junior doctors, vets having to put down animals far too often, working people on forever-temp contracts, high school teachers in poor neighborhoods and so many more other situations are contributing to an unacceptable annual suicide toll.
It might arguably be better to seek to get it published in a mainstream Sunday newspaper or general interest magazine.
So yes, it's a worthy investment of your time for others' sake. And it might help you to work through the issues you yourself are facing, hopefully leading to a healthier solution for you.
My only other advice is that you do not slacken off sharing your concerns with other important people, i.e. family, friends, family doctor and so on. We all have to get ourself fit first before we start to try helping others.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The essays themselves could certainly be valuable, so long as they are insightful and well-written. (The peer review process should be able to give you feedback on this so go ahead and submit if you like.) As you say, there could be others experiencing similar problems (or dealing with people experiencing similar problems) who would find your writing about your experience useful. So, in principle, it might be useful to a reader.
You should bear in mind that it is sometimes possible to submit and publish work anonymously (e.g., submit from an anonymous email without your real name and see if the editors will agree to anonymous publication, and ensure that your essays give no identifying details). This might be an option in the present situation, depending on the needs and approach of the journal in question. Anonymous publication for highly personal issues has some benefits and downsides that you would need to consider. On the plus side, anonymous publication would preserve your privacy. The downside is that it might hamper communication with interested readers (though this might still be possible through an anonymous email).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I applaud your desire to publish your story, and affirm your sense that the career culture in academia is deeply broken.
But where everyone else has advised you to anonymise your story (which I fully agree), I would advise you to go one step further and *obscure easily identifiable details*.
The selfish reason for doing this is that if your identity can be deduced from details in your story, then there's no point anonymising your name.
The altruistic reason for doing this is that your story will inevitably include descriptions of other people's behaviour. While *you* are obviously consenting to (anonymously) tell your story, *other people* have not consented to have their story told, and they have the right to not be identified in a story which may not represent them in the best light.
Of course you have to balance this against the detail your story *must* include to back up your experience. But many such details do not make your group identifiable -- for example, "I had to trudge three miles through snow every weekend to discombobulate the widgets because my supervisor would rather fund conference travel than pay for a widget discombobulobot" is both vivid and discreet. Here are a list of identifiable details that I modified from a grant guide on preparing anonymous grant proposals:
1. Your name
2. Your institution’s name
3. Any project codes or names
4. Gendered pronouns
5. Heavily referencing your / your group's papers
6. Current and previous grant results
7. References to named partners
8. Specific details of team make-up
9. Career length of yourself or teammates
You may certainly have to include some of these details -- but try not to include too many.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Rather than join the anonymization bandwagon (the answer author community here is generally of the "it's terrible out there - people are horrible! Protect yourself!" bent) I would propose the following more nuanced and step-by-step approach:
### By all means *write* the essay! It brings good in several different forms
1. It can be therapeutic, at least in a palliative care sort of way. I don't think it will provide rapid relief from clinical depression, but it does offer one a window on what's going on that may be helpful. But do it with the help of a mental health professional or counselor so that they can step in if it spirals out of control and you start focusing on those sneaky, nasty destructive or hopeless thoughts that the "depression monster" likes to generate to make us feel even worse.
2. If the time to publish comes, you've got your writings. You may be in a different state by then and want to add some further perspectives to it, but you've got the contemporaneously written material recorded forever.
3. Speaking of contemporaneously written material, if ever something happens and you are harassed or discriminated against by your environment, you have this as additional documentation that something is really going on and there's a reason you might be performing differently at the moment.
### But continue to question if this is the right time to actually publish
That decision is easier if you fully anonymize, but in the 21st century with the internet, writing style analysis, nosy people who spend lots of time online, etc. is it ever foolproof?
Publishing under your name *could potentially* have positive benefits. More enlightened coworkers and supervisors, realizing that something powerful was happening without them realizing it may really reach out and be supportive. Of course exactly the opposite may happen as well. Life is full of choices (or a box of chocolates as [Forest Gump explains](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/life_is_like_a_box_of_chocolates))
>
> My mom always said life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get.
>
>
>
Future readers may be future employers and if they are like-minded or enlightened might really see "extra value" in you. (As you can tell, I'm not of the "everyone is horrible" bent). This could become a lifelong filter that steers you away from employers who are unenlightened when it comes to mental health, and towards people who are. *Who would you rather work for, anyway?*
But yes, it could blow up in your face as well. Life really is like a box of chocolates and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
### You can also ask yourself if depression is the best time to make impacting decision
The fog of clinical depression also makes it really hard to make this kind of decision. I mean it can make it really hard to decide to even stand up and walk across the room to feed ourselves or take some medicine!
**Bottom line:** By all means write it! But work with friends and mental health professionals you get along with well on the question of publishing right away vs later.
---
>
> P.S. To anyone else struggling you are not alone ♡
>
>
>
Indeed! After my first (of several) bouts with clinical depression that didn't respond much to medication subsided, I was able to "write in stone" a messages to myself that I could use in the subsequent bouts.
>
> It gets better. This too shall pass. It's not real even though it feels so real. It's temporary.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Say you are **not** using a pseudonym as discussed by five other answers, however without using the proper term.
And say a potential future employer dislikes your essay.
Would this hypothetical situation be disadvantageous?
Would you like to have a job in a place where you would have to hide your weaknesses and fight every day to just survive like in your current position?
Or would you prefer only to get jobs in places where people will understand that having the competencies and will to deal with your own personal problems is a strength?
Several [top scientists](https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Nash) have struggled with mental illness.
You should prefer to always be honest about yourself.
A well-written and honest book will always be of great value, as you suggest yourself in the P.S.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: People tend to think that academia is 'above' the rest of the world but it's not. Some may find your work inspiring others may use it against you... just like life. I myself wrote a critical analysis of the entire concept of mental illness, situating it in a cross-cultural perspective. I used <NAME>'s work as a backdrop but also applied comparative mysticism. The professor in question was not helpful. I don't regret writing that essay, but I was naive in thinking that some jerk would not use it against me. And it wasn't even about me!
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/26
| 1,192
| 5,121
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a PhD student and have been advising an undergraduate student on their thesis, which will eventually contribute to part of my own work. Their committee currently consists of my faculty advisor and another faculty member at my university. The problem I see is that neither my advisor nor the other faculty member have substantial research/experience in the area of the thesis since I am exploring an intersection of 2 fields and the university does not have any faculty in this specific area.
I feel that the current committee is well suited for evaluating the quality of the research methods but not the novelty or accuracy of the work done. This student has put in a lot of effort and I want them to receive feedback and critical analysis on their work. I can easily provide this feedback in our regular interactions, but I don't want other universities' admissions departments to disregard the work due to the committee selection.
My own work in the field is not well known or well cited so my name doesn't bring any value to the list of names on the thesis committee, but as we don't have other faculty in the area, I am not sure what else to offer.
Is it reasonable for me to suggest being added to the committee? Is it common/acceptable practice for a PhD student to be on an undergraduate thesis committee?<issue_comment>username_1: This question depends too much on the country and the institution to be answered by us. However, a good committee / advisor can draw on existing expertise outside the committee. You can offer, if you want, to serve as an outside, unpaid resource if you feel like it. Whether you offer is acceptable, depends on the circumstances.
Edit: Since you are in the US, I would wager that the university does have clear and concise rules, but most likely, no-one in the department remembers them. Often, the department admin can find out using informal channels that would lead to the relevant document. If there is nothing, then a department meeting could put in a rule, which most likely will be forgotten about within a few years. Since undergraduate thesis are rare (at least in CS) and are used often as an incentive for grooming students to follow up with advanced degrees, they tend to be treated rather informally or they may be treated through analogy with an MS Thesis committee. Often, there is some rule or custom that allows a qualified outsider from industry to be part of a thesis committee (MS or PH.D.), even if they lack formal education. This is US specific and might not be true for even the majority of institutions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As @username_1 has already stated, this is very much dependent on your location and local uni policies. But nevertherless, here is some perspective from personal experience:
At my university, the main supervisor always has to be a full professor, but the second supervisor ("Zweitgutachter" in German) - there are only two in the committee - could be anyone who has the same qualification as the person writing the thesis wants to obtain. That is, anyone holding a bachelors degree could (technically) be the second supervisor for a person writing a bachelor thesis, a person with a masters can supervise a masters (for PhD the rules are different). Of course the person needs to also be knowledgeable about the subject of the thesis on top.
So as a PhD student, you would be perfectly eligible to be in a thesis committee for an undergrad at my university. Of course, other rules might apply, but it doesn't hurt to ask - it is not a completely unreasonable or unheard of proposition.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: This only indirectly answers your question, but I think may be relevant. I've probably reviewed >100 early-career CVs (PhD candidates, post-doc applicants, early career fellowship applicants), and I can not recall a single time I even noticed tertiary supervisors/committee members, let alone took them into account in the evaluation of applicants. So I can't comment on if including PhD students on committees is common or not, as it's not something I would notice. That might be different if there was a Big Name attached, but the presence or absence of a PhD student is going to be marginal at best.
So, while it's good of you to be trying to look out for the student, I don't think it's going to make a significant impact for them either way. It may actually be more useful for your CV (as it shows clear evidence of supervision etc.).
(I'll add the standard disclaimer here that academia is highly heterogeneous and there may be fields/countries where this is more of an issue, and you might get better answers if you specified both of those points.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Are you worried about the committee members' grade/comments on the thesis or what they will write in reference letters?
For either case, perhaps talk to the committee members about whether they would be willing to discuss these points with you and/or offer to write a short document that they can use when writing the reference letters.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/26
| 1,757
| 7,283
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm 31 years old with a Bachelor's in Sociology and an M.A. in International Security and Conflict Studies. I finished my M.A. degree in 2015, and since then I have not been involved in Academia whatsoever - instead I have been working in Sales in the Tech industry.
Researching and writing is still something which really makes me tick and therefore returning to Academia to do a PHD has always been on my mind - those closest to me share the same sentiment and think a PHD would suit me down to the ground. My dream job is also to be a professor, and I'll talk a bit more about that below
The research topic I am interested in is violent extremism and radicalisation, specifically the rehabilitative methods that are most successful as well as the drivers in the first place.
Upon beginning to research PHD's, I have noticed that there is an abundance of Criminology PHD's in the UK, and that extremism is actually listed as one of the sub-topics in the course description (at least in some of them).
The more I have researched into these programs, the more I think I will find them interesting and engaging - ***even better, despite the tenure track job market for Humanities/Social Science PHD graduates usually being very rough, it appears Criminology based Professor roles are in demand (at least in the UK)***.
The part I'm curious about is, whether (1) The fact I have been out of Academia since 2015 greatly reduces my chances of being accepted into a PHD; (2) Whether my academic background, particularly my M.A in International Relations and Security, might not be overly relevant to Criminology and can therefore 'rule me out'.
Looking forward to your feedback on this - thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: If you have specific research questions that would be appropriate for a PhD and there are professors you'd like to work with, this would be a good indication you would be well suited to enter a programme.
It's difficult to answer specifically in your case without knowing more. First step is to find those professors you'd like to work with/learn from and reach out, a direct conversation about your interests and theirs is the best way to find a match with a supervisor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: A quick warning. You seem to like the fact that the labor market in for criminology in the UK is good. However, it is going to take time before you are on that market. At a minimum you will need to have finished your PhD, and in many fields there is a soft requirement that you have some additional years in a post-doc.
The problem with that is that there are only so many tenured positions for criminologists in the UK. Once they are filled with a tenured person, those positions are off the market till that person retires. So it is not uncommon for a particular field to for a short time have lots of positions open, they all get filled by people of that cohort, and than that field is "clogged up" by that cohort until they retire.
There is some movement possible in those 20-30 years of clogged up state: People move, unfortunately some die early, etc. But the competition for those rare places is going to be fierce. To make things worse, the number of free places is going to be smallest just after that window of opportunity closes: the people just started a job and are less likely to move and they are young so less likely to die.
So when the market is good now, the market is in all likelihood at its worst when you become eligible. This is something to consider, when you want to enter on this path. So look at why the market is good now, and if those conditions are likely to persist for say 10 years.
I am not saying you should not do it, or that it is impossible. I am saying you should make your decision knowing this. When you do choose to enter, have a plan B (and C, and D) ready. It is not just important to have those plans but also to have clear deadlines of when you are going to activate the alternative plans so you won't miss those windows of opportunity either.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: For the present forget entirely about academic appointments as these require more than a PhD (1-2 postdoc fellowships is normal today) and the job market is not predictable over such a time span. Let's just treat your situation as one of career change.
You have a number of serious questions to deal with prior to making any application for a PhD programme.
**1. Why no social sciences or international relations work to date if this arena really is the sort of work that you have a strong yen for ?**
You may well have good reasons for working in tech indutry sales, e.g. you wanted to get married and needed a good paying job to support a spouse (and child on the way?) and this offer came along. But these reasons must be convincing to a putative supervisor and consistent with the rest of your candidacy. I don't think it would impress the supervisor were you to nakedly say that there was a lot of overseas travel in the sales job and this factor attracted you: there isn't much time for considering Euphrates water rights delicacies when you have to sell a shoal of tech systems to Middle Eastern companies.
**2. What have you been doing to keep in touch with this field since your MA ?**
This is also a very crucial question. Talk is no good here. You'll need actual evidence of serious critical reading and thinking on these matters over the last 8 years. Your supervisor will soon suss out a waffler here.
**3. Doing a PhD will bring about a huge drop in income. Can you (and your dependents) sustain this quantum drop in standard of living for 3 years ?**
If so, the next question is going to be **how** - and you'd better have the income vs expenditure figures at hand.
**4. Have you discussed your PhD intentions with your spouse ?**
The nervous strain of doing a PhD - usually surrounded with immature and very selfish 22 - 26 year olds plus several NPD academics - will seriously drain you. It will also put a severe strain on your relationships at home. Quite apart from the economic and moral reasons to do so, it is only good sense to discuss the proposition with the people who matter (and provide the ultimate support) first and foremost rather than have them suddenly pull the plug in mid-programme later.
**5. Research is always frustrating, usually unfair (you'll get limited insights after a mountain of work yet see dosser researchers ignorantly blunder into career-making splashes) and very demanding of social skills since university departments have a range of nationalities, beliefs, age ranges, motivations and morals - do you really think you have what it takes to not only adjust to this new environment but to thrive on it ?**
If so, why ?
I believe your supervisor will regard the choice of research topic to be secondary to all the above considerations. However you both must find a topic that is satisfactory, reasonably likely to be fruitful and of enduring interest.
It might be helpful to you to draft a long statement of candidacy that properly covers the above questions and all other factors affecting your proposed change of career.
Then pass it to people who know you and listen to their feedback.
<NAME>.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/27
| 1,641
| 6,999
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in my 5th year of my PhD and handed in the draft of myentire thesis in December 2022. I discussed wanting to defend in August 2023, and was told that this was doable and to look for an external. I found one but was told to hold off contacting them – this I understand but it's now dragged on for a long time.
I expected revisions to take some time, but it has now been nearly 8 months and I don't find I am anywhere closer to nailing down a defence date or even getting any of the chapters to the rest of the committee. The supervisor insists they want to review everything before sending it off, but a number of things have happened.
1. There was some issue with the theoretical framework, resolved (more on this later)
2. I was told to revise methods, findings chapters...then told to hold off as they want to revise (again) the TF...and to wait for them.
3. Revisions I have handed in get sent back repeatedly for things that seemingly were resolved in early revisions.
At this point I feel like I am just going in an endless loop of revisions on chapters that I thought were resolved and we aren't moving forward. Again, I understand that revisions to some chapters have cascading effects...Everytime I push a bit I get more revisions sent back or some seemingly new issue. These revisions requests are becoming even more infrequent (as I think they are just stalling), but we aren't progressing.
Not sure what I can do about these endless revisions. I mean it could very well mean my thesis has major issues but that was never indicated at any point. Not sure how I can convince the supervisor to agree to some hard deadlines we can try to hit so I am not just being stringed along endlessly.
I mainly contact them by email, but they take a while to reply, now more so that in the past. They refuse or are not likely to Zoom, get on the phone or meet.<issue_comment>username_1: This seems egregious to me, but your instinct that you have no real leverage here is correct. That your supervisor is now dodging or refusing meetings in addition to gumming up the works by insisting that everything go through them is a major problem.
There must be someone at your university you can talk to about this, with some level of confidentiality. It may be someone outside your department formally, like an academic ombudsman. It may be someone inside your department (not your supervisor) who has special responsibility for graduate students or interfacing with the graduate college. It may just be the department chair (assuming that's not your supervisor.)
Find this person, and set up an appointment, just you two. Explain the problem, as calmly and deferentially as you can. (To be clear, I would be boiling over after eight months, but it isn't helpful.) Be ready to talk about the whole timeline in detail, and comb your e-mails (which I hope you saved) as evidence that you're being ignored.
Also, this is not meant as justification but as caution: It might be your supervisor underestimated some professional commitment, and this is leaking out into their relations with their students. Or it might be your supervisor has problems outside academia that aren't visible to you. Again, this is not justification, but-- to make up a random example-- you don't want to be the person lashing out at someone who has been taking care of an elderly family member in hospice, or something.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is hard to answer without reading your thesis. So let's establish the two extremes, and you can then figure out where between the two ends your case lies, and from there find a solution.
On one extreme you have the thesis with serious problems. Maybe the proposal should have never been approved in the first place, and you ended up with unusable results (say, experimental data without controls, samples that can't answer your question, etc.) Or the thesis is so badly written than your advisor feels overwhelmed and decides to give you piecemeal revisions. I've seen both cases. In the first type of case, the student almost always ends up saying "You approved the proposal, and I ran the experiments, now you have to pass this thesis, even if it contains no science or original contribution to the field." At some departments, this strategy works, and the professor and/or committee is forced to accept an unacceptable thesis just to make it fair to the student. At other departments (most?) the student is told that even though he/she is right in that the proposal should have never been approved, they still have to produce an acceptable thesis even if it means starting from scratch. In the case of bad writing, the student is so unprepared to write a thesis that, from the perspective of the advisor, to give detailed feedback on everything that needs to be fixed is pretty much writing the thesis on behalf of the student. So the advisor says things like "rewrite the intro", and the student brings the intro from a 1/10 to 2/10, then more revisions that bring it from 2/10 to 3/10 and so on. While the student gets exasperated, this is the only way to bring a badly written thesis to acceptable-land. If the student were capable of writing an 8/10 thesis, they would have done that already.
On the other extreme, you have the lazy, overwhelmed, and perfectionist advisor, asking for minor revisions without end. They tell you to revise from A to B, and you give them B, they say C would be better and when you bring C, they say how about A? Or they contradict earlier advice, and never read their old email, taking every draft you give them as a first draft. Or the perfectionist type that does not understand that the world runs on deadlines.
My advice is that you find others to read your current drafts and give you an honest opinion on where you stand. If the thesis itself is the problem, your only option might be to switch advisors and start again with another project. I know this sounds like the worst possible outcome, but forcing the department to accept and unacceptable thesis is bad for everyone. If your thesis is indeed acceptable, and the constant revisions are indeed trivial, and your advisor is not giving you timely feedback, you have to go up the chain of command. This usually means the director of graduate studies at your department, then the department chair, then some assistant/associate dean, then the dean's office and ultimately the Provost's office. Don't be tempted to jump steps, as it usually backfires. Another option, and one that I used myself when my MS advisor would not approve the final draft I gave him, was to publish every chapter of the thesis in good journals. The peer-review standard is much higher than an MS thesis standard, so he looked kinda stupid and petty in front of the committee trying to justify more revisions when I had reprints from the journal at hand. This route, of course, can take 6 months to a year, and the results can vary, but it does work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/27
| 745
| 3,131
|
<issue_start>username_0: A colleague of mine tend to upload her researcher paper to chemrXiv just the day she submitted it to the journal.
What is exactly the purpose of that and is it always permitted?<issue_comment>username_1: Always permitted? Check the journal. Some journals may consider this "prior publication" and thus not accept the paper. I think this is rare nowadays.
What is the purpose? This is called "preprint". In the Olden Days (before the Internet), a researcher would photocopy a bunch of copies of the new paper and send it to (a) other researchers in the field and (b) anyone who wrote (a postcard or letter) asking for a copy. This was how you helped people find out about your paper! Actual publication would only occur a year or so later.
Nowadays, you merely upload it once to the preprint server, and then everyone can get it. Much easier.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The purpose is to immediately disseminate your work as widely as possible.
As a researcher, if you want to build your reputation -- as you must if you hope to apply for jobs, get grants, earn tenure, attract grad students and collaborators, etc. -- then you want others to read your work, to cite your work, to discuss your work, to invite you to speak about your work, to ask you questions about your work.
To do this, they need to be able to access your work in the first place. Posting to a preprint server ensures that it is easily available to all.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Some definite advantages of posting on arXiv or similar preprint servers are the following.
* You get to advertise your work much earlier, and more effectively, than waiting for it to be published. (I say more effectively because many people subscribe to get daily mailings about new articles appearing in specific categories.)
* People can start citing your work, again much earlier than publication.
* You get to establish priority. If you don't bother putting up a preprint, then no-one will know what you have done, and someone else may obtain the same results independently. Even if they don't put up a preprint either, their paper may still end up getting published first.
* When you include your submitted papers in your cv, it is easier for a hiring committee to see that they are genuine (and look at them if they want).
* Your work will get indexed by Google Scholar, etc., much earlier.
As far as "always permitted" goes, there may be some rare exceptions. But for example here are overarching policies from Elsevier and Wiley.
>
> Please note that preprints can be shared anywhere at any time, in line with Elsevier's sharing policy. Sharing your preprints e.g. on a preprint server will not count as prior publication (see 'Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication' for more information).
>
>
>
>
> [Wiley Journal] will consider for review articles previously available as preprints. Authors may also post the submitted version of a manuscript to a preprint server at any time. Authors are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a link to the final published article.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/27
| 1,080
| 4,781
|
<issue_start>username_0: Earlier this year, I was accepted into a PhD program that commences this fall. Regrettably, due to unforeseen circumstances, I was unable to complete my final undergraduate course because I had already reached the maximum course overload cap. Consequently, I will be unable to provide an official transcript encompassing my entire undergraduate degree and will have to complete my last course for my B.S. this fall. This situation is quite unfortunate as submission of an official final transcript is a prerequisite before enrolling for fall courses.
My initial thought is to communicate with my program advisor, under whose supervision I have worked for the past year, and apprise him of my situation.
I am seeking advice on whether I should attempt to defer my admission to the program, or whether I should explore the possibility of enrolling and concurrently undertaking the outstanding undergraduate course alongside my graduate course. Though every institution is different, I am interested in hearing what you recommend as the next steps.
This matter pertains to a U.S.-based institution, and the degree program is in the field of Biology. I appreciate your help!<issue_comment>username_1: Contact the university department that accepted you and ask for advice. It might be possible as long as you are otherwise in good standing, which seems likely.
But only they can answer whether you need to defer or can begin as scheduled. Your advisor might be helpful, but can't give a definitive answer. If you can't begin on schedule, then your advisor is probably the right person to plan with. Good luck.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Don't give up, but, unfortunately, this seems to be trouble. Technically, the situation is clear: you will not finish your BSc until end of fall, and you are required to finish your BSc before enrolling into PhD. These are facts (based on your text), and, as is, they seem incompatible with you starting a PhD program at fall. Correspondingly, *if* there is any possible solution, it will be heavily personalized, and it will depend on your current and the receiving institutes, as well as on your contact people at both of these. So it's hard to give a definitive answer.
You should talk with the head of your department, and/or an ally high enough in the hierarchy. Consult the student office at both universities (if they're not the same), and ask if there's a solution. Make a soft but confident attempt convincing them to bend the rules in your favor somehow. Be ready to present examples of your previous excellence and research perspective, it may help in convincing them. Once you see some light, contact your to-be PhD advisor, inform them about the situation and the possible resolutions, and ask for their aid in the process.
Finally, if no doors open, and it seems to be certain that there is no solution, ask your to-be PhD advisor if it's possible to delay the formal beginnig of your PhD by half a year. Offer that you would still work on the topic like a PhD student until then. Maybe they can come up with a solution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the other suggestions, I would also ask your undergraduate department about the possibility of doing a short special topics reading course and whether it could be completed before the end of the fall semester. If you are only missing one or two credits you might be able to complete your requirements with such a course.
I had a similar situation between my undergraduate degree and the start of my PhD, albeit the difficulty for me was that I ended up one credit shy of the honors designation for my major, not the degree as a whole. Nonetheless, a one-credit reading course was the solution my department came up with. I was already going to be working with my undergraduate thesis advisor to finish up some work before I went to grad school, and he offered to supervise the reading course. (I didn't double-count the research I was doing, the reading course was separate). If you had an undergraduate research advisor, it may be worth asking them about the possibility.
It may be a bit late to get someone to agree to a reading course, but if somehow your undergraduate department could swing it, this could be preferable to taking a full course.
You would still need to coordinate with your PhD department of this solution if it worked out, as this would likely delay the time by which you could receive your final transcript. In lieu of an official transcript, you might ask if a signed letter from your undergraduate department confirming completion of all degree requirements, or something like that, would be temporarily acceptable for the purposes of enrolling in fall classes.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/28
| 2,450
| 10,011
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate and have been doing some work that is part of a program being done by a research group of this department for around 6 months now.
However, I have developed new interests and I no longer like the project I’m working on now.
Will my professors be mad if I leave the group or are they used to these things ?<issue_comment>username_1: Welcome to the academia.SE!
The word "betrayal" is not good to use in a professional environment, certainly not in your current situation. You are just an undergrad, and it is very much understandable that interests change at that age. Your mind is keeping on looking for more interesting things to do. Perhaps, your current assignment was not good enough for the kind of work you wanted to do, or you would like to make a career in.
Now, you might be feeling a sense of guilt, thinking that I am leaving them midway. But, trust me, academia, and any other organization for that matter, is always like this. People get better things, and they move on. So don't be hard on yourself, and discuss this with your current mentor/group. A reasonable mentor will always understand this situation from your perspective.
If you have time before you jump on to the next project, you should complete the current assignment(s) or at least assist/train someone else to complete them. That would be a fair thing to do. But, again, if you really have no time for that and you don't have any official agreement for your current assignment, you should just leave. But, remember, don't burn the bridge.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Will my professors be mad if I leave the group (I was doing most of the work), or are they used to these things?
>
>
>
The rule of thumb is that hiring an undergraduate is much more for their benefit than for the supervisor's (professor's) benefit. In my mostly-computational field, it usually takes more time for me to mentor an intern (undergraduate) than it would take for me to do it myself. Even setting aside the intern's cost.
So no, I am not mad if an intern leaves. On the contrary, I am pleased: (1) the intern has learned something valuable, so I am proud of myself and happy for them. And (2) I don't need to worry about them going forward, which is less work for me (or I can hire a new intern, which lets me have an impact on an additional person's life).
Of course, your mileage may vary. Not all supervisors are as delightful as I am, and there are some fields (e.g., wet labs) where undergraduates do tedious but useful work, and replacing them is a hassle. But even in this case, you should do what you need to do; your supervisor will get over it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: People move on from positions and projects all the time - especially students. No-one is expecting you to dedicate you life to a lab. You're at a point in your career where you *should* be exploring your interests. So don't feel guilty that you find yourself drifting towards something different. No "betrayal" there.
That being said, there is a right way and a wrong way to go about this. The wrong way - ghosting your professor to hop to a more interesting project. The right way - having an honest discussion **ahead of time** i.e., now, about how your interests are shifting and you would like to switch projects/labs.
You may find that your professor is fine with you leaving now. Or they may want you to stay on and see the project through (personally I think you should do this either way). Or they may want you to stay on just long enough to get another student set up.
The takeaway here is to be courteous and professional. As @username_1 said, don't burn bridges.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As others said, it is perfectly normal for your interests to change. Plus, you are at an early career stage and have many different options to explore.
I agree with all the other comments above.
What you did not mention in your original question, is whether you ever discussed the expectations with your current supervisor. Did they take you on for a couple of months? For a year? With no end date? If there is some sort of agreement, then I would do my best to honor that. Sure, circumstances and interests may change - but in a professional relationship it is also important that you follow up on things you promised and that could in this case mean until X has been achieved on a project or any time frame that you discussed earlier.
Of course this is not set in stone, if you are slowly growing miserable then you need to discuss that and maybe leaving is better in that case, but don't just drop things because you think there's something better out there or because you don't like it anymore. Most jobs have aspects to them that we don't like and we usually have to do those parts as well.
In either case, go talk to your supervisor and be prepared so you know what you are and are not willing to do. Maybe they will be ok with you saying ideally I want to stop at the end of the month and maybe they will want you to stay for a whole new academic year. If you know your own preferences and boundaries you should be able to negotiate a solution that works for both of you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You are not really part of the research group yet as you are just an undergrad. (Not unless you are a Schwinger anyway)
So while your supervisor may be "disappointed" - he/she is unlikely to feel mad at you: it's just part of undergrad development.
They will find others to do what you might have done. It's often better to get new blood in from other universities at PhD level.
Your experience to date should stand you in good stead in future career choices.
It's important to make sure that new areas of research will be of **enduring** interest before we take them on.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Look, I totally get it. You've been slaving away in this research group for months now, doing most of the heavy lifting. But now you're just not feeling it anymore. The project bores you. You've got new interests you're jazzed about. I mean, six whole months - that's a long time when you're an undergrad! Your attention span has limits.
But you've also got these professors who brought you into their elite little group in the first place. Will they freak if you walk away? Are you gonna burn bridges? Betray them after all they've done?
Here's the deal. Professors expect this stuff from undergrads. One day you're obsessed with nematode worms, the next it's black holes and dark matter. They get that your interests are evolving. You're not married to them or this project.
So have a straight talk with your lead prof. Explain it's been a great learning experience but you're moving in a different direction now. Offer to finish up any loose ends so you don't leave them hanging. Train any newbie who's replacing you. Make it a smooth, collaborative transition.
If you communicate openly and tie up loose ends, you're doing right by them. Don't feel bad chasing your new passions. It's all part of the journey. No professor worth their salt will take it personally or see it as a betrayal. Just be real about why you’re moving on and show gratitude for the opportunity. You can part on good terms.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: No, I worked with 4 different people during my undergrad and ended up doing my PhD with none of them and still will catch up with them when I'm back at the Uni I did my undergrad. So either:
1. The worst case is that they are disappointed about losing a potential student, but they still will have the professional connection if you continue in academia and may work with you or your new group in the future.
2. They feel its a betrayal, in which case you have just escaped a bad supervisor.
In either case leaving the group is the better choice if you feel that you want to experience a different field of research.
Take your time to explore different fields and opportunities during undergrad and maybe you'll find the variety of knowledge you have useful in the future, and possibly knowing multiple groups/fields of research may help you to cross-fertilise between them or act to introduce these groups to each other.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: Just leave
==========
(*he won't be mad. And even if, that should not be what you base your decision on*)
I don't disagree with other answers. But I want to emphasize that there is **only one way forward**.
You're "just" an undergrad
--------------------------
Even grad students are still "at the bottom" of the chain. Especially undergrads.
This also adds that I can, personally, only recommend you to *explore*: the world is in front of you and live ahead, don't get stuck in habits and comfort, that happens early enough. So enjoy, try out, be curious and *have the courage to change and break with things*!
That has a name
---------------
It's called the [bus factor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor#:%7E:text=6%20Further%20reading-,Definition,disappearing%20suddenly%20from%20the%20project.) and describes that people just leave. People change, live changes. They may find a partner and move. They have other interests, maybe they wanna be a tourguide in the Atacama desert or a cook. There are hundreds of reasons people come and go.
Academia is about "want", not "have to"
---------------------------------------
Nothing works in academia if you force someone to do research and be inventive. All of it runs because people want to think. So if someone doesn't want to do what they do, they're of no help. People know that.
Disclaimer
----------
People can always get mad for any reason. You're not letting them cut the line? They're not getting the free upgrade as they got already once? You never know how people react. So a more general advice: base your decision on what's *right and wrong*, not on how people may react. Once you do that, you're controllable and people can be *toxic AF* (!)
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/28
| 871
| 3,767
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a U.S. grad student about to wrap up my first semester of my program. In one of my classes, we had a relatively large group project that ended a few days ago. Group leaders were not assigned, but I ended up more or less becoming the de facto leader for my group. One of my self-assigned tasks before submitting the project was checking the text on slides against the sources given by my groupmates, making sure the sources were relevant, making sure direct quotes were marked accordingly, etc.
Today I happened to be perusing one of the sources just out of personal interest, and I realized that part of one slide in a groupmate's section was extremely similar to a specific section within this source. I discovered that this text (we'll call it Source A) was a paraphrase of another document (Source B). My groupmate included text from Source A without quotation marks but attributed it to Source B, and I didn't catch it because I was comparing the text on this slide with Source B as that is what was provided for this slide.
Once I realized this, I pretty much immediately wrote an email to our professor, not to name names but just to explain the situation and why I didn't catch the issue and to ask if I can/should edit and resubmit our file; I haven't gotten a response yet. Does anyone more familiar with academic conduct procedures have any insight (or consolation) since I caught the error after submission but before grading/feedback? I've honestly just been freaking out about this all day and feel like I'm in limbo.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: You are asking to predict the future, which is difficult to do. What we think is mostly irrelevant; this is in your professor's hands now.
Still, let's consider:
1. This is mostly a bookkeeping mistake. Your group had cited a source (i.e., you were not passing this off as an original insight); your colleague just mixed up the source.
2. Once you discovered the error, you immediately reported it. I doubt anyone would blame you for not personally double-checking every source.
3. This error probably would never have been caught if you hadn't reported it.
Given the above, I strongly doubt there is any need to "freak out." You behaved in pretty much the optimal way, and your colleague made a mistake, but not a career-ending one. Personally, I would have given your colleague a warning and you a "thanks for letting me know" message. But as I said, this is in your professor's hands now.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm a little confused about what exactly happened. Correct me if I'm wrong, someone copied source A *exactly* and source A was a summary of source B. Then they cited source B and not source A?
This seems like such a strange thing to do purposely. Perhaps it was laziness, or a misunderstanding, or an oversight. Without any other information or evidence I think it's worth giving the benefit of the doubt. This sounds like a mistake. Maybe the other student doesn't know/understand how to cite properly and was confused since source B is summarizing material from source A - though they should not be copy-pasting without indicating it was a direct quote.
In any case, I think you did the right thing. You noticed an error in your presentation and so you contacted the professor. Just wait to hear back. I doubt this will lead to any negative repercussions for you. Maybe a discussion with your group about how to properly cite/quote/etc... though it sounds like it was just one person and in just one place and so I doubt this would warrant any serious follow-up (for you).
If you're concerned that a group-mate did this on *purpose* then maybe mention that to your professor and let them handle it however they see fit.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/28
| 2,796
| 11,599
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am from Europe, I have a PhD in biology and I'm doing my postdoc in a prestigious US university. I like the lab and I love my job. However, I noticed some important differences compared with EU standards. First and foremost, our boss doesn't want to buy computers or other electronic devices for us because, according to the lab rules, we should either bring our home computer to the lab or buy one with our own money. The lab is pretty wealthy and I'm sure that buying middle-range computers for everyone will not be an issue. I think it is more a matter of principle. You get your own lab space and this is it. How you organize your research is your problem. I know for certain that other labs in our department have the same policy.
I just wanted to ask this community how common this is in the US. I can tell you right away that in Europe this would never happen. It is not my intention to criticize this system. I am simply asking if it is common and if you find these conditions acceptable.<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, the rule at academic Biology US labs is that everybody brings their own laptop. Having said that, it is my opinion that there are two separate issues.
The first issue/question is if it's fair for an employer to ask an employee to purchase their own work-related equipment. The answer is more complicated that it might seem at first glance. For example, there are tax implications, and the tax rules are not easy to interpret and/or apply. If your employer requires you to use a specific tool as a condition of employment, the employer is usually required to pay for it, or to have you buy it and reimburse you. Some employers use this as a loophole to pay for tax-free perks for employees, for example, computers, cells phones, cars, etc. There have been several high-profile criminal cases in the US press lately that centered around the use of "work-related" equipment as a way to avoid taxes. A computer is hard to classify as either business or personal, since it can easily be used for both. But my point is not to argue one way or the other, but that it's not an easy line to draw and that the university policy might have less to do with principle than to avoid complicated tax situations. Another issue is keeping confidential data on employee-owned computers, but that issue is not simple either and universities deal with it in many ways, e.g., having data management rules that apply to both personal and university-owned computers, requiring whole-disk encryption, or that student data be kept at university-owner servers and not as local copies.
The second issue is if this a big deal a reasonable request, or a fight worth having. At least for the biologists I know, computer choice is very personal. People are either Mac or Windows, and a minority (myself included) are Linux-only diehards. Some people just use their machines for email, others are doing computationally-intensive tasks on them, the type of task that falls between what a mid-range computer can do and what you'd send to a cluster. And universities vary in their policies. In some places, every breathing person gets a computer on day 1 regardless of the actual job. For example, I once worked in a lab where a field technician, a person who never had to sit at a desk, got a computer assigned. She just set it up in the lab for everybody to use. But at that same place graduate students were never given a computer, even if the PI wanted to buy it with research money, the university objected citing tax issues, internal policies, NSF, etc. etc. At another place I worked, you could get a computer, but these were always the crappiest models available. At yet another place I worked, I was assigned a bare-bones laptop, which after 4 years of OS updates it became too slow to use. So I requested a replacement, and they gave me a used computer, identical to the one I had. So I went back and demanded a NEW computer, and they gave me a new (as in the box) 4-year old computer. Only at MIT did I get a brand new computer to my specs, but that was MIT.
So what I urge to do is look at the overall compensation. For example, what are really big issues in the USA are health care costs, childcare costs, the cost of rent in coastal cities, etc. Consider your overall pay package. If the health insurance is good, the salary is reasonable, the lab environment good, the local rents are affordable, etc., then spending $900 on a laptop every couple of years is not a big deal. BTW, I quit my job at MIT, because the overall compensation was too low, so I moved to a much better job, and just buy my own computers.
I used to get worked up about this being "unfair" of having to buy my own laptops for the benefit of my employer, but in light of the issues listed above, I have no problems spending my own money on the most important tool I use. This is also common in other workplaces, e.g., most car mechanics have to bring their own hand tools when getting hired at a shop, carpenters bring their own basic carpentry tools when joining a crew, hair stylists usually bring their own scissors, real estate agents buy their own cars, etc. This does not mean that these workers bring all of their equipment to work: mechanics don't have to bring lifts, carpenters don't have to bring Lulls, and stylists don't have to bring the chairs where clients sit, etc. In this same way, a biologist does not have to bring their own PCR cyclers, sequencing machines, or micropipettes, but they do bring their own computers.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll note that in the US, it would be extremely unusual if a person starting a post-doc, or even doctoral studies, or maybe even secondary education, didn't have their own laptop already.
It would be different if the lab specified a system that a new employee were required to purchase on their own, but having a system of the user's choice (and at their expense) wouldn't seem unusual. In fact, the opposite would be unusual here.
For international students, especially those coming from a quite different economic system, it might be a strain and a lab would be wise to provide assistance for such students. But it would probably imply lack of choice in the characteristics of the system.
So, to be explicit about your headline question, it is probably unusual to ask a new postdoc to purchase a system because the assumption would be that they already have something suitable.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In my experience (been in 1 lab in a US university, knowing some other people from several other labs of that uni) the lab provided the work computers of all employees and PhD students (laptop or desktop, whichever they preferred). I agree that it would be very weird otherwise! This is work and you shouldn't spend your personal money for work expenses.
I did notice that it was not always *assumed* that you would need a work computer though, and some of my colleagues had to ask to get one (while in the EU labs I've worked at, you'd automatically get a work computer on Day 1).
Edit: I was intrigued by this so did a (very informal) poll on social media. The poll was aimed at academics in general (PhD students, postdocs and PIs). I got 100 respondents, 27 of which from the US and 54 from non-US countries (for comparison) - the rest were not academics.
Results:
#### 70% of the US academics had their work computer bought by their workplace (PI, university...) vs 30 % who bought it themselves
78% of the non-US academics had their work computer bought by their workplace (PI, university...) vs 22 % who bought it themselves
Conclusion: it does seem customary for the workplace to provide one's computer in the US.
The US proportion seems slightly smaller than for non-US countries, but that wasn't significant using a basic chi-square test.
*Limitations: small sample, question was for all academics and not just postdocs*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: At my U.S. R1 math dept, there are pressures to have a machine (desktop or laptop) that is controlled by the IT department... but you'd get the cheapest possible barely-viable version unless you can play some tricks. Most NSF grants do not include any money for computer hardware. Arguably, to require everyone to have access to email (apart from high-end computing), *some* sort of device "should be" (ahem) provided by the department.
So, right, especially for ("unsupervised") work at home, I just spend my own money (not NSF's nor departmental) to get the computer set-up I want. Fortunately, by this point in my life, that's feasible. :)
Likewise, while years ago paper, pencils, pens, chalk, erasers were provided, the quality has greatly degraded (chalk is impossible to write with, and equally possible to erase), so that I buy my own fancy chalk (Hagoromo...) and large car-washing microfiber sponges to repurpose as "erasers".
So, on one hand, don't be surprised at such unreasonable requirements, ... but, yes, they are unreasonable, and you could try pushing back a little.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Finance person here in the US who has seen the finances for hundreds of PIs before and can shed some light on this "wealthy" comment.
First of all, no PI is required to fund anything, period. They can have $20M in discretionary funding and still not want to spend it on laptops. That is their choice. The reasons to do this can be numerous, and sometimes it can be about setting precedents. It can also be because of someone like myself saying no. I personally refuse to issue postdocs a laptop because they are two-year appointments, and our IT policy depreciates laptops over 4 years. This means we get stuck with said laptop and no one wants to use it. The PI doesn't want to keep track of it. How do I know it won't walk away? Once we know it walks away, we would have to notify IT to remote wipe the PC. How do you think that would go over?
How can I enforce these policies? My personal solution has been to offer a one-time taxable bonus of $1,600 and they buy their own device. Our IT dept is required to lock the device down due to our data security policy. You have to know your own institution's rules to know what is possible. You could then try to approach your PI based on the computing policy, but again, the discretion is with the PI, and no means no. PIs need to plan carefully to spend money over decades to ensure they do not have funding cliffs and have to terminate all their staff. What looks like a lot of money today can dry up within only a few years. Even if your PI seems agreeable, there can be a research administrator telling them this is a bad idea for various reasons that do not directly impact you. Another answer here covered some examples of policies that make some institutions squeamish.
As for sponsored funding, many sponsors explicitly do not fund general use computers. These costs should be picked up by the institution as part of their "facilities and administration" or "indirect" costs. I have only written computers into a budget a few times because they are computation focused and require specific GPUs to accomplish the scope of work. When researchers try to push a computer purchase on me (particularly on sponsored funding), I ask things like, "so you can guarantee you will never check your email, be on social media...?" Suddenly this device is not only to benefit the grant, it is in fact a somewhat personal device. This is why I came up with my solution mentioned above for PIs who want to issue devices.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/07/28
| 427
| 1,825
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper in a journal, and in the minor revision email that I received, I am asked to "Please make sure to submit your editable source files (i. e. Word, TeX)."
The thing is, there are a lot of files related to my paper for the latex paper to compile (.tex, .bib, .png, etc) and some of them are inside another folder in the root folder of the paper (for example in the content folder)
But in the uploading section of the editorialmanager, you can only upload files it seems. I tried to zip them altogether and upload that instead, but this website then tries to unzip it!
So what is the proper way for me to upload all of my latex files (all the files that are required for my latex based paper to compile) in editorialmanager? Because I need to upload all the required files for them to be able to compile it properly without a hassle it seems.<issue_comment>username_1: Since you want your paper to be published in this outlet, you need to follow their production process. This means concretely that you have to edit your latex files so that you have a completely flat file hierarchy, where you only embed files that exists in the same directory. It is usually not that complicated. I would also create a bibtex file with only the references that they need.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can use an export script to flatten your document to a single file plus images. Several options for doing this were provided as answers to this question on the TeX Stack Exchange:
<https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/21838/replace-inputfilex-by-the-content-of-filex-automatically>
(As compared to editing your source directly, using a script like this lets you maintain your structure internally, then give the publisher the view they need for their purposes.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/28
| 475
| 1,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have contacted a professor (in Germany) to ask if he would take me as a PhD student.
I have written to him a follow up email 7 days after the first contact, and now it's two weeks with no answer.
Is it appropriate or advised to make a phone call to the administrative office of the chair, and understand whether the professor is out of office due to e.g. holiday?
This way I would know if and when to try the third email.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is fine to contact the office, such as the department secretary. You may or may not get the information you need, of course.
However, if you were responding to a call and it had a date for submission, then you might not get any communication from the professor until that date passes. They have other things to do, including, as you note, vacations. A few weeks at this season is probably quite short.
I wouldn't, however, contact the professor again for a while, unless you have some actual need to know, such as another pending deadline.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I live in Germany half the year, and I can attest that these guys take their holiday time seriously. It's common for people to take a full month, even two months of vacation, and to them no email during holidays means no email. And we are straight in the middle of summer holiday season. So by all means contact the secretary, but be aware that he/she might be taking their own holiday.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In general, I would not expect answers in July and August and only follow up after. Part of the summer people can be expected to be out on holidays, for the other half they are away at conferences, wrapping up the prior academic year or preparing for the next, or finally focusing on some core tasks like writing grants and papers after the teaching is done.
In either case, cold e-mails are likely to be less of a priority to respond with during that time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/29
| 1,499
| 6,003
|
<issue_start>username_0: I find myself particularly drawn to the subjects of analysis and linear algebra. Although I am currently a rising Sophomore and unsure about the specific field I'd like to pursue for my graduate studies, I am eager to enhance my profile by gaining research experience through REUs (Research Experiences for Undergraduates). Additionally, I see this as an opportunity to determine whether research is genuinely a passion of mine or not.
But the common understanding seems to be that research in analysis-related fields is inaccessible to people like me without background knowledge of at least measure theory and Lp Spaces which I guess would take me at least 1.5 to 2 years to get by self-study which would be my Junior year summer time. Till then I am not sure how should I get involved enough in this field to make myself capable and indulged in the research experience. Research in discrete math seems a viable option till then (but extremely tough to get) but that's not what I would be aiming for in grad school. I am in NYC and discrete math seems to be popular here with probability.
Also an important point, I am an international student so REUs are very limited and I have part-time work to do, so can't fast-track and spend my all free time accelerating the learning process.
So my question now is:
***Are there projects in analysis-related fields where a basic first course in real analysis and Linear algebra would be good enough to get started for my Sophomore summer?***
My Real analysis study from Zorich Mathematical Analysis 1 should get me to Chapter 7/8 by March 2024.
My linear Algebra is from Titu Andreescu's book (till Chapter 7/8 by March 2024) and lectures online.
OR
***Is accessible research topics like those from Combinatorics/ Graph theory the only research experience I can think of? (keeping in mind that even these are extremely hard for me to get)***
If so would it be wise to dedicate some of my time here to be prepared enough to apply for the projects? I have liked the idea of Algebraic Graph theory but yeah I only have an idea about it not even a preview of the subject.
My mind is toying with a rather silly notion: to prioritize a minor increase in my research experience chance over dedicating time to real analysis self-study. Keeping in mind that real analysis is crucial to learn, not only due to my personal interest but also because it is a fundamental requirement for almost every graduate admission, demanding proficiency in this subject.
Also, an important sub-question, do people usually do REU in a field say A, and go on to do their graduate school in say field B?
How does graduate admission look at this fact?
TLDR: Confused and just overthinking due to spare time.<issue_comment>username_1: ***Are there projects in analysis-related fields where a basic first course in real analysis and Linear algebra would be good enough to get started for my Sophomore summer ?***
No. Your ambitions are way too high by your level of know-how at present. As an undergrad of engineering science our freshman course went far deeper than <NAME>'s book (we used [Noble & Daniel](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Applied-Linear-Algebra-Ben-Noble/dp/0130413437/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3TY6PYZN9QVK3&keywords=Noble%20and%20daniel%20linear%20algebra&qid=1690646229&sprefix=noble%20and%20daniel%20linear%20algebra%2Caps%2C119&sr=8-2)) and there was no way I'd see myself (even then!) of use to anyone in a math job, least of all in research.
Frankly, you must - for the present - postpone any thought of math research till you are much more proficient not only with those parts, e.g. linear algebra or analysis, where you are interested but also the other core areas of a good math BS course. Employers will fairly expect this from candidates.
I would think that, unless a student is by unanimous consensus of classmates and professors very talented, these [REU](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Experiences_for_Undergraduates) programmes could do more harm than good - both to their career development and personal confidence. They are competitive, both officially as only the best candidates are selected and unofficially as a result of "natural" competition between candidates within the program. Not every mathematician thrives on this environment.
As an alternative - and this is purely for post Y3 vacation work - you might start looking into local internships in places like government bureaus, large companies, meteorological centers, etc that might have a use for math interns.
***Is accessible research topics like those from Combinatorics/Graph theory the only research experience I can think of ? (keeping in mind that even these are extremely hard for me to get)***
Look, you are just finished Y1 now. Stop looking so far ahead, stop reading articles and interviews by "famous" math people about new research areas.
Enjoy what's left of your summer. Make as much dough as you can before going back to college. [Hang loose](https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hang-loose), man. That's the way to deal with the manifold options of our career and our life's future.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Currently, *many* of the summer REUs do indeed attempt to provide a stimulating environment for U.S. undergrads who don't actually have much mathematical background (since, in the U.S., many math majors won't see serious abstract algebra or analysis until their last year, and the summer REUs are for the summer prior).
This inevitably leads to at least two sorts of "easier" summer programs: seat-of-the-pants graph theory, and various naive computational projects.
To my perception, the benefit of such programs is not really the literal mathematical content, but, rather, the possibility for math faculty to become acquainted with you, and gauge your *future* *potential* (regardless of your summer project). And, specifically, to write letters of recommendation for you to express that appraisal.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/29
| 802
| 3,482
|
<issue_start>username_0: About two months ago, I started working at a university lab as a Research Associate. The application stated that 0-2 years of experience was necessary and that training would be provided, prior to this I had zero years of experience. Now, this is a lab with only one other RA, who helped but had to split training time with their own responsibilities in the study, so I was understandably making mistakes under a lack of supervision. Last week, the PI walked in and told me that he didn't have the resources to properly train me and I'd be laid off in a few weeks, this despite telling me that training would happen on the job.
I was advised by the PI that I should spend the time before being laid off checking if any other of the PIs in the department had openings in their labs with more experienced mentors available, but that advice seems kind of sketchy. Has anybody heard of a transfer like this happening or was this just hollow advice meant to console me?<issue_comment>username_1: I think you would be wise to assume it is honest. It could result in a good outcome. Maybe better than your original job if you get to work with more experienced people.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As an administrator, I am privy to more of the behind the scenes reasoning for staffing decisions. They could have run out of money, it could be a bad fit, the PI could be inexperienced at running a lab, they could be overcommitted, have personal problems that is decreasing their capacity, hard to say. It's all speculation at this point. At my institution, a research associate is actually not a trainee position, it's more like a years 3+ postdoc.
As for your question, people shift labs without an issue. You just need to spend the time finding a new home. See if you can find something else local, or maybe ask this PI if they have colleagues at other institutions you can be introduced to. Now is not a great time to look for a job (seasonally), but sometimes folks are needed at off-beat times and you could get lucky. Junior faculty with incoming NSF or NIH funding (starting this fall) may need someone to help get their project off the ground. You can look up recent awards in their respective awards databases.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would take this at face value. There can be any number of things going on behind the scenes that might end in a lab "downsizing". But your PI has no real reason to lie to you.
I think the offer is probably well meaning - it doesn't sound like your PI *blames* you. Perhaps he/she had not trained someone from scratch before. Or maybe the other RA isn't up to the task but does good work in general. Who knows.
You admit you have been making mistakes and, honestly, that isn't really as normal as you are playing it off. You might need help (and obviously training) at the beginning but repeatedly messing up is going to get anyone fired - trainee or not.
It sounds like the PI just underestimated how much hand-holding you would need to get started. I would say they are being pretty reasonable. They're giving you a few weeks to sort things out and actively encouraged you to search around the department. They pretty much acknowledge that they can't properly train you right now, but obviously someone else might be able to. I would ask around and see what comes of it. Labs often like to hire from within the department so you've already got your foot in the door.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/29
| 1,928
| 7,870
|
<issue_start>username_0: **TL;DR:** I finished my bachelor of mathematics this year and I will not be able to enroll in the master program I wanted to get into until January 2024, so I will be a NEET (not in education, employment or training) for 6 months.
My advisor for my masters will be the same I had for my bachelor, and my master will be a continuation of the work we previously did.
I was intending to use this "free time" to learn practical stuff, but my advisor seems to take for granted that I will keep working on my dissertation topic during the next six months.
I would like to ask him to give me this time for myself, since I'm still not being paid, but I don't know if it's reasonable of me to do so, since doing it will delay the publication of a joint paper.
---
My original plan was to enroll in the master program offered by my local college this August and to keep working with my advisor, but he delayed the writing of my dissertation because he kept wanting to explore more topics and writing down the new results (he did so even when knowing I wanted to keep working with him and was willing to do the job while being enrolled in the master program). This made my dissertation to be twice its original
size, and made me miss the dates to enroll in the master program.
I haven't even defended my dissertation, and I will be a NEET (not in education, employment or training) for the next 6 months.
The fact that I still need to make my defense and complete some paperwork stoped me from finding a regular job (as a secretary, waitress etc) to start making some money.
I intended to use this 6 months to learn some useful stuff (like honing my Java/C++ skills and familiarize myself with some
data science techniques with R databases) because, after finishing my master, I'll probably will not enroll in a PhD program and instead will look
for a job out there. I don't know if I will have my family's support since I know they want me to do a PhD, that's why I want to start saving money (currently I don't even have a bank account).
My advisor went to a trip during this summer, and recently wrote back to me. The way he was talking
makes me think he is taking for granted I will keep fully working with him during the next 6 months. He even asked me to start preparing a poster and a talk
for a congress this fall. We have enough material to start writing a paper,
and I believe he wants to start writing, polishing it and filling some holes on the theory. I know this will take a lot of my time.
I appreciate his guidance and being his student, and I know he appreciates me as a student and the work we've done so far,
but I'm a 23 years old person with no income and would like to keep working with him when **we both** are being paid for doing so.
And this will not happen until I enroll in the master program and get a grant.
Is it reasonable to ask him to let me free during the next 6 months?
I would not like to harm the work relationship we have, but I
neither want to keep working for free. So I fear to be perceived as being greedy for asking those 6 months for myself (but I also feel he is being greedy
for wanting me to work when I'm not being paid).
Of course I can try to both keep working with my advisor while also learning what I want, but from experience I know
he likes to schedule up to 2 meetings per week (that can last up to 5 hours) to discuss, and that doing the work I need for each
meeting (reading a paper, finishing a proof or writing down the final results) is very time-consuming.<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe. I think you're thinking about things wrong though. Grad school is not necessarily a job. You may get paid to do lab work - and some of what you do might fall under the "job" category. But *your* project is *your* project.
So there are two ways of looking at this. On one hand, you are doing work "for free" for your professor. You don't want to do this and you have other plans. That's fine - I'm not a fan of unpaid labor either.
On the other hand, this work is really for you. Coming into a graduate program with a mature project (one that might even have a paper submitted) is a good head start. It would almost certainly put you ahead of others in the program and I think would lead to more opportunities down the line. I would guess that this work benefits you more than your advisor. Plus 6 months is a *long* time to just drop a project. You're planning on continuing this with the same advisor and so putting it aside for that long (without a decent reason) doesn't sit well with me personally.
I think before you make any decisions, you should talk to your advisor. Just tell him how you feel. Maybe he can hire you as a research assistant for the 6 months. If that is impossible then maybe consider working less intensely. Establish a boundary - say 10 hours a week - and make sure you are clear about not going over that. Or maybe take a month or two off then start up working again, I think that's a more reasonable break.
Whatever you do, I'm not sure you can drop off the grid completely without ruffling some feathers. Obviously this is a work-in-progress and it sounds like *your* project. Leaving it for 6 months (or expecting your advisor to do the work in your absence) is a bit unreasonable. I'm sure there is a middle ground that you can find. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
A couple of side points - working on this *would* be learning "practical stuff". Research and writing are literally practical skills.
>
> The fact that I still need to make my defense and complete some paperwork stoped[sic] me from finding a regular job...
>
>
>
If you don't want to work prior to starting school again (or while you have to deal with your defense) that's okay - but lets not pretend that you *couldn't* just find a regular job.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You have not tagged a country, so I am answering with the circumstances of my country Germany in mind.
If the defense of your bachelor thesis is required to graduate (it usually is here), then you would still be a student until you have everything checked for graduation, defense included. It sounds though as you already got your diploma without defense, which would not be possible here.
However the details on that part, working on a project for a professor/university without that project being an official part of your studies or you having a work contract with the university (commonly called 'Werksstudent' or 'hilfswissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter') is unheard of and not even legal here.
For a personal anecdote: I did both my bachelor and master thesis with the same professor and even on the same project. But there was of course a roughly 1.5 year gap in between where I solely completed other courses required to graduate and did not even look in the direction of said project. Keep in mind though I never aimed to stay in academia, only got my degrees and went on into industry.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In the US, for a variety of reasons, the amount of access you will be allowed may well be determined by if you're legally considered a student or not.
Flip the question the other way -- should the school entertain your work if you're not a student? If you're not a matriculated student, then you are not paying for all sorts of things, including the time faculty spend supervising your work and progress.
You may not have access to any of the school's library resources, you may not have legal access to any of the school's site licenses. There may be liability issues around whether you're allowed to work in a lab.
All this said, if the school allows it, and if you consider this the most valuable use of your time (nobody but you can make that determination), there is no reason why you shouldn't get a jump on your Master's work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/07/30
| 1,270
| 5,151
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a soon to be fourth year doctoral candidate this coming academic year. I previously completed a Master's in Experimental Psychology (now called Psychological Sciences. No Ph.D program there) that had assistantships which would pay a salary, yet did not have any tuition waived at all for being a lab manager. It should be noted that no tuition waiver was standard for all students in the program as well. Thinking that this was the norm for MAs based on what I read and through connections I had at the time, I went through with the decision. Both my Master's and Ph.D programs are in the U.S.
Unfortunately, I did not learn until midway through the program and after I finished it that it had an extremely bad reputation despite the university's good reputation as a whole. There were also multiple red flags I ignored other than the fiscal aspect at the time in the middle of the program (which I won't state here).
I realize I am making this post with the risk of others downvoting me based on paying tuition at a state school program, but I only knew what I knew from those who I thought I could trust at the time. **I just want to know at this point, despite graduating with my Ph.D soon (fully funded there and my Ph.D program accepted my Master's and my thesis no less even though it was from another program), will my no tuition waiver program look bad to others post Ph.D?** I should note that my current Ph.D program also has MA students, but they are totally unfunded by the department itself. Instead, advisors pay them from dedicated lab funds without a tuition waiver. This created some tension between MA and Ph.D students, unlike my MA where everyone had the same treatment, thus no resentment.
Edit: Shortened the title and post length a decent bit.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you‘re asking the wrong question. No one but you and your bank will know whether or not you had a tuition waiver. And I'm certain no one else will care.
PhD's (at least full-time ones at reputable places) are *usually* funded. But there are lots of variables there. I wouldn't pay for a PhD (4-7 years of tuition + living expenses? *I have a bridge to sell you*…) but, depending on the field, some people do. I don't think it's all that unusual to start unfunded in the hopes of finding funding down the road. Whatever the case may be, a lack of funding may *indirectly indicate* something about the program but alone it is not a measure of quality. Certainly there are fields where one would not expect funding at all - for example some professional or "clinical" doctorates. Yours is funded, so no worries there.
On the MA side of things, I have not come across many fully-funded masters programs. Graduate support like the one you describe is fairly common though. This really has nothing to do with the quality of the program. I would not expect most people to have a tuition waiver for any MA program and, again, I can't really imagine a scenario where someone would care about that *specifically*.
>
> I should note that my current PhD program also has MA students, but they are totally unfunded by the department itself. Instead, advisors pay them from dedicated lab funds without a tuition waiver. This created some tension between MA and PhD students, unlike my MA where everyone had the same treatment, thus no resentment.
>
>
>
I'm not sure this is relevant. Are you saying that some MA students paid more or less, since it depends on the lab/professor's budget? In any case, this has nothing to do with the perceived or actual quality of a program. This sounds pretty normal in terms of funding for masters degrees anyway.
So, where does that leave you? Well it means that you don't have to worry about having paid tuition for your MA. The bigger issue is that you say your former program has a "bad reputation". Whether or not this follows you depends on just how bad that reputation is. A program having a "bad reputation" could mean anything ranging from "Not the best program out there" to "literally a degree mill". As long as it doesn't hit the "literally a degree mill" end of the spectrum, I would think that it will be overshadowed by your PhD.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The question cannot be answered because
1. the qualifiers: "good reputation" and "bad reputation" are not specific, and quantified enough.
2. There is a confusion between MA and PhD. You are asking about your MA. But actually you are going to be judged by your last degree, which is PhD. If this is the case, then of course, nobody normally cares for what you did prior to the PhD.
Explanation:
You say that the university has a "good reputation overall". That's a plus. But the program has a "bad reputation". That's a minus. But how bad the reputation of each is?
If MIT has a badly reputed program, it still is going to be not that bad of a program, right?
But if a QS-ranked 300 university has a badly reputed program then it's going to be detrimental to your success.
So we need to know the approximate "numbers" of bad/good associated to your qualifiers "good/bad".
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/07/30
| 815
| 3,259
|
<issue_start>username_0: A prestigious professor emailed me and requested that I submit work for publication with the renowned series that he edits.
He needs this work because it is a gap for something he is engaged with.
I am hesitant to submit since I have to produce a full set of results within a short period of time - which does not assure quality. They will, however, close his gap quite nicely, whatever state they are in.
He takes weeks to reply to emails, making the process somewhat frustrating.
I want to believe that I will have a shot at getting published with the series but at the same time am wondering how he will end up citing me, should my work remain unpublished.
How do I deal with this and not insult the guy?<issue_comment>username_1: Since the prof seems to have confidence in you, I'd suggest you say "yes" and give it your best shot. You don't indicate that it would interfere with more important things. If you don't get something adequate for your values or his you can withdraw later (not submit).
If you want to say "no" then saying that you don't feel qualified to do sufficiently good work. That wouldn't be insulting.
But a flat "no", while not actually insulting would leave him disappointed, both in his project and in you. Decide if you can live with that and if your relationship is otherwise strong enough to withstand it. There is a chance of course that he won't let it go easily, but will apply some pressure.
And, of course, having a publication in a "renowned" series is a plus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This summary sounds strange to me.
Given the limited information you provide, I would
advise you to write back saying (politely) something like "sorry, there isn't enough time before your deadline for me to do this job (properly)".
If you agree to the request and do a shoddy but adequate job your name will be on the shoddy work.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Just rethink: is it hesitation or procrastination? I think it's worth the effort to publish in a renowned series. It will be rewarding in the long term.
It's quite easy to underestimate our skills. You can see value in your work.
But a polite 'no' due to restricted timeframes, existing work commitments, or clashing timelines would not harm.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> A prestigious professor emailed me and requested that I submit work for publication with the renowned series that he edits.
>
>
>
Yeah, well. This is extremely likely a form of journal spam. I get this type of emails at least weekly. You should do nothing until this "prestigious professor" gives you a phone call, which is unlikely to occur.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: It sounds like a lot of details around this invitation are still up in the air, which would certainly push me away from accepting if the invitation were to me -- especially if the prof takes weeks to reply to emails.
If you'd like to say no, a simple "I'm flattered, but I don't have the time to do this right now" should be a benign sort of refusal.
If you really are interested, but you still feel funny about it, I suggest contacting other contributors to his series to ask about what their experiences were like.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/31
| 1,057
| 4,269
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a first year physics master student from EU currently doing a research internship at an Ivy league school in the US. It is also to fulfil the requirement of my home university to get an internship for 4-6 months.
Right now I'm wondering the possibility to find a funded research opportunity here in the US for a period of, say, one full year. (I do not want to continue with my current professor as I'm not that interested in what they do). And I'll no longer continue my second year of master and will apply for PhD next.
The reasons for this are
1. I really don't like to go to classes. To me, self-study is much more constructive than taking courses.
2. I found doing research is much more worthwhile and right now I have been doing pretty well with little guidance from my supervisor.
3. Language barrier. My home university is in Paris and I don't know any French. My undergraduate is in the UK. Although it is taught in English, the communication with peer students and life in general makes me feel so restricted and uncomfortable.
Before seeking out to look for opportunities, my concern is how likely I can find a PI that is willing to fund me for one year doing research with them? Also given that I'm an international student, is this possible at all?
---
In regards to some answers here,
1. is it not true that thousands of international students come to the US on a J1 visa for a short period of time, from one month to over half a year, to do funded research? (and I'm one of them, although the caveat here is that I'm holding the identity of a student...)
2. Technically, shouldn't a good research that you do be equivalent or even more valuable than a master thesis, in terms of PhD application?<issue_comment>username_1: Since the prof seems to have confidence in you, I'd suggest you say "yes" and give it your best shot. You don't indicate that it would interfere with more important things. If you don't get something adequate for your values or his you can withdraw later (not submit).
If you want to say "no" then saying that you don't feel qualified to do sufficiently good work. That wouldn't be insulting.
But a flat "no", while not actually insulting would leave him disappointed, both in his project and in you. Decide if you can live with that and if your relationship is otherwise strong enough to withstand it. There is a chance of course that he won't let it go easily, but will apply some pressure.
And, of course, having a publication in a "renowned" series is a plus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This summary sounds strange to me.
Given the limited information you provide, I would
advise you to write back saying (politely) something like "sorry, there isn't enough time before your deadline for me to do this job (properly)".
If you agree to the request and do a shoddy but adequate job your name will be on the shoddy work.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Just rethink: is it hesitation or procrastination? I think it's worth the effort to publish in a renowned series. It will be rewarding in the long term.
It's quite easy to underestimate our skills. You can see value in your work.
But a polite 'no' due to restricted timeframes, existing work commitments, or clashing timelines would not harm.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> A prestigious professor emailed me and requested that I submit work for publication with the renowned series that he edits.
>
>
>
Yeah, well. This is extremely likely a form of journal spam. I get this type of emails at least weekly. You should do nothing until this "prestigious professor" gives you a phone call, which is unlikely to occur.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: It sounds like a lot of details around this invitation are still up in the air, which would certainly push me away from accepting if the invitation were to me -- especially if the prof takes weeks to reply to emails.
If you'd like to say no, a simple "I'm flattered, but I don't have the time to do this right now" should be a benign sort of refusal.
If you really are interested, but you still feel funny about it, I suggest contacting other contributors to his series to ask about what their experiences were like.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/31
| 951
| 4,066
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently got one of my papers accepted at an international semiconductor conference. I am the solo author (no mentor, no coauthor) and am not affiliated with any school or company currently (I will start my PhD this fall). Understandably, I have no funding to attend or even register for the conference.
I really want to attend the conference as I am very proud of my work. In addition, I really want to experience first-hand if solo papers are worth it. Should I ask the conference chair to waive the registration fee? Is it worthwhile?<issue_comment>username_1: You can always ask. What is the worst that can happen if you politely explain your situation and your lack of funding? They say no. It is unlikely that such a request would lead to them blacklisting you from future conferences.
So go ahead and ask but be nice and not entitled about it and be prepared for a no. Maybe they offer to switch to a poster presentation instead.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: You can always ask.
If it is a large conference with other funding sources or even an endowment, they might look at this request favorably. You would be the one in a million person to have work good enough to be accepted at a prestigious conference and might deserve an exception.
If it is a small non-predatory conference, you will have some explaining to do. By submitting a paper, you agreed to play by the rules. This means paying a registration fee, showing up, and presenting your paper. A smaller IEEE conference for instance has to break at least even (after paying a fee to IEEE to guarantee the expenses of the conference). A venue needs to be rented, coffee and tea provided, publication costs met, etc. You are now telling them that you are not keeping up your part, but if they are nice and do not complain by waiving the registration fee, you will present your paper. This is just like a kid who does not have the money for the circus, but still wants to see the elephant. I am sorry if I am a bit harsh on you, but conference organization is a hard business usually done by volunteers. Not playing by the rules creates real headaches. Now, there is a good chance that this is not a real conference (because papers by people like you are usually not publishable) in which case it does not matter.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Ask without any air of entitlement.
But have a contingency plan too. You have to suss out:
* University department where you plan to do your PhD. I assume you discussed this paper with them at interview. Were they positive enough to think it likely they'd say yes ? If so . . .
* Borrow from bank/credit union telling them the bald truth and undertaking to repay them according to a realistic plan of repayments from your student grant
* Folks . . .
* Hock some stuff you don't need
* Sponsorship from local semiconductor company ?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As others pointed out, it is OK to ask. But they draw a bleak portrait. Many conferences reserve at least a few seats for special cases where the registration fee could be waived. Generally, these are reserved for extreme cases, like disability or being affected by war. However, not having a financial source could be acceptable depending on the circumstances.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **Besides asking only for a discount, you could offer to help out the conference organizers in some way.**
I once visited a IEEE conference in Italy for free in exchange for helping out at the conference. I worked at the registration desk, handed out conference bags. During the conference was babysitting the conference laptop, pointer and beamer in some rooms during some sessions, and was free to visit other sessions about 50% of the time. Before and after there was some carrying of stuff (poster-walls, plants flags, beamers). It was definitely worth it for me, i probably got to know more people at that conference than any other conference i visited. But i still had to pay for the travel and sleeping expenses myself.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/07/31
| 629
| 2,644
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am sorry here but I am very anxious about my future. The conditions are as follows:
1. There is only one year left before I get my PhD in physics major. I need to finish my dissertation in 6 months.
2. Although I have published some papers that enable me to apply for the degree, I am not a competitive candidate for a post-doctoral position.
3. I am not very interested in the research direction I was studying, nor was I in the mood to continue the subject.
4. I am still impassioned by the idea of researching but have no idea of new directions.
I'm now wondering if it would be a good idea to change direction by pursuing a second PhD, since I don't think that I can find a post-doctoral position in the new direction.
Therefore, I hope to get your advice to help me through this difficult time in life. Thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: I'm sorry you're facing such difficulties. It's crucial to have open discussions about your feelings with your friends or colleagues and support networks, as they may provide valuable advice or solutions. Taking time to reconsider what draws you to physics and research might help you identify new paths you'd be more passionate about.
Pivoting to related fields could be beneficial. With your physics background, computational roles, data analysis, or machine learning could be suitable. If you're thinking about a second PhD, weigh the benefits and drawbacks carefully. Consider non-academic careers too, as many sectors value the skills gained from a physics PhD.
Lastly, don't neglect your mental well-being. It's perfectly fine to seek support when feeling overwhelmed. Remember, it's your journey and it's okay to change direction if it leads to a more fulfilling path.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Doing a 2nd PhD just to change field? If you really want to continue in academia (always worth thinking about), I'd recommend doing a post-doc in your actual field of interest. Your PhD can be used as a strength, to differentiate yourself from other postdoc candidates. Try to think of research directions that merge your current and your desired future research path, see if any labs do that, you can even contact them since you're ~ 6 months from your defense to see if they would have any openings for you.
It seems that you have doubts about your ability to secure a post-doc position. But you have already published papers and have apparently overcome a lot of obstacles during your PhD. You know programming. You also seem to know what you want. All of this makes you a great candidate for many postdocs positions!
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/07/31
| 515
| 2,144
|
<issue_start>username_0: I realize there are many ways to structure an introduction. This research paper's introduction has 3 sections: Background and Significance, Relevant Literature, and a third section where I actually propose the method to be explored later in the paper. What is the proper name for that last section of the introduction? Please note, there will be a Methods section next but I still need to introduce an overview of the method in the introduction.<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps "Contributions": at least this term, as a paragraph title, is common in my area for what you seem to be referring to.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Another option I have seen would be for that section to simply carry the name of your method, or a short description of it.
For instance:
***Section 3: The Direct-Section-Name Method.***
***Section 3: A Methodology for Naming Sections Containing the Main Contribution.***
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you use structured titles and well labeled references there is no room for confusing the reader.
**Section 1: Introduction**
Blahing a blah...
**1.4 Proposed method**
Introductory summary of the method you propose.
**Section X: Methods**
**X.1 Method #1**
Description of Method #1...
Then you can use references like "...as mentioned in 1.4...", "...because of limitations in Method #1, following conditions must be met, see X.1..."
If the core purpose of the article is the Method proposal, then the Method should be described appropriately in all following sections:
* Abstract - Very brief summary of why you have developped it and what it returns. (Motivate the plausible readers to read introduction and conclusions)
* Introduction - Not that brief summary of why and what from you have developped it, and briefly how it works. (Assure possible readers they want to read the Conclusions)
* Method proposal - Describe in detail how the method works, what are the inputs and what it returns.
* Discussion - Dicsuss all the upsids and downsides of the method.
* Conclusion - describe briefly how it works and sum up the dicsussion.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/01
| 779
| 3,388
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently reviewing Paper A for prestigious conference. Earlier this year, Paper B was published in very prestigious conference.
Paper B was a breakthrough in our sub-sub-field. It proved an “impossibility result” (i.e., it is impossible to come up with an algorithm with certain properties). This proof **very heavily** relied on numerical minimization (not symbolic). Since this was a low-dimensional minimization, I guess the reviewers did not object to using the black-box minimizer as is. The math community generally disagrees on whether using numerical minimization is an acceptable method of proving bounds, but that’s a discussion for another time.
Paper A is basically saying the work in Paper B is unsound (in a polite way) because it relies on numerical methods, and they provide a new approach with a sixty-page analytical proof that the same impossibility result holds (and now claim they are the first to do so because Paper B is unsound).
**I** personally looked at Paper B and I am honestly okay with the proof method there. I understand numerical methods are not “rigorous” per se, but the function optimized is so smooth, well behaved, simple, convex, etc. that I am willing to bet any decent optimizer can and will find the correct minimum. I coded the minimization in less than five minutes in Python and found the same minimum as the authors.
I am not sure how to rate the paper. While technically, A is the first to analytically prove the result, the result was already shown in B. I am also not motivated to verify over forty pages of straightforward algebra/differentiation, etc.
What would you do in this case? Just let the program committee decide?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't understand why you say "that's a discussion for another time". The whole point of paper A seems to be to prove the result in a way that is uncontroversially valid. So there is no way to review it without considering the question of whether the methods of paper B actually constitute a proof.
And in doing so you should be thinking about the viewpoint of the conference, not just your own viewpoint. Would a significant proportion of people who attend this conference be likely to value having a fully rigorous proof? If so then paper A seems to be suitable for this conference. If not, then maybe a math journal would be a better fit.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Providing an analytical proof over a numerical one is providing value. Whether this is sufficient for inclusion in conference A, depends on the inclusion criteria. Presumably, the contribution of B to your field was more than numerically minimizing a function (that seems rather trivial). Presumably a significant part of their contribution was constructing/finding the function to be minimized. If the contribution of A consists only of finding the minimum of the same function analytically, that seems like a mimimal advance (but an advance nonetheless).
>
> I also find little motivation to verify over 40 pages of straighforward algebra/differentiation, etc to verify the analytical solution when I personally don’t mind the numerical solution.
>
>
>
Whatever you end up recommending as to the suitability for inclusion, you are still going to have to do this. As a reviewer, you are expected to give your opinion on the correctness of the result.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/08/01
| 1,737
| 6,664
|
<issue_start>username_0: *This question is a duplicate of [this one I asked on graphicdesign.stackexchange.com](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/q/161751/181608), where commenters suggested to ask it here instead.*
I am facing the following typography/formatting/spelling/punctuation problem:
In a scientific article I am writing, there naturally occur instances, where there are math symbols and their meaning scattered in prose text, e.g. "The input voltage *u* is given, as well as the inductivity *L* and the moment of inertia *M*, where [\n] *i* refers to the current through the motor." ("[\n]" symbolizes a potential newline character inserted by my teypesetting system.)
On some ocassions, my typesetting system sometimes inserts a line break before the math symbol, putting the symbol at the start of a new line.
Note, that I am not talking about the start of a sentence, but just the start of a line.
My supervisor tells me, this is bad practice, and that **lines must not start with a mathematical symbol** (1).
I know how to avoid this in my typesetting system (LaTeX), but I have never heard that rule before, so I am curious about learning more about it.
Questions
=========
1. Can you guide me to a reference work to confirm or abnegate (1)?
2. If not a reference work, can you give an article where this is being written about?
*If this is language-dependent: I'd like to know in particular about German, British English and American English.*
Research
========
I am not well-versed in typography literature, and my online search has not brought any meaningful insights for me.
In an answer attempt at graphicsdesign.stackexchange.com, the [AMSMath reference guide](https://www.ams.org/arc/styleguide/AMSstyleguide.pdf) Part 1, Chapter 1, 12.5 Wording (page 81) has been quoted:
>
> Try to avoid reference numbers, variables, equation numbers, and mathematical expressions as the first word in a sentence.
>
>
>
While this is just a suggestion, it is not strictly an answer to my question about symbols after line breaks, but might hint at the nonexistence of the rule in question.<issue_comment>username_1: Rules, such as they are, in typography exist only by convention and by the acceptance or rejection by someone (e.g., a journal editor) of work that does, or does not conform to the rule. The so-called Oxford comma, or serial comma provides a good example; some journals and publishers follow the Oxford comma rule (i.e., convention), others do not.
More useful, I think, is to ask *why* it is frequently recommended that one avoid having symbols at start of a sentence, or start of a line. If, instead of searching the web for the narrow topic of "symbols at the beginning or and of a line", you instead search for different approaches that have been taken to choosing the position for a line-break, you will find a considerable amount of thoughtful material.
I searched using Google, with the words:
>
> typography choice of position for line breaks
>
>
>
[This article](https://www.w3.org/International/articles/typography/linebreak) from the [World Wide Web Consortium](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web_Consortium) not only provides useful advice, it also provides useful insights and a good point from which to explore the issue further. It does not directly address the question of symbols at the beginning or end of lines, but I think you will see that the question about symbol positioning fits within a much larger framework of thought about how to make text easy to read.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As you note, the AMS is entirely agnostic about *lines* starting with symbols, and gives little advice about linebreaking around symbols, in general (on page 103 of the [AMS Style Guide](https://www.ams.org/publications/authors/AMS-StyleGuide-online.pdf), the editor is advised to "Avoid breaking math in text between fences,"—this is expanded upon on page 115; indeed, section 13.16, starting on page 114, gives a lot of advice on breaking equations). That being said, the AMS Style Guide gives many, many examples of mathematics being broken across lines (both in inline and in displayed mathematics), hence it seems that the AMS has no problem with mathematics (and, therefore, symbols) starting a line.
The AMS Style Guide extensively cites Ellen Swanson's [Mathematics into Type](https://www.ams.org/arc/styleguide/mit-2.pdf), which gives much the same advice. The table on page 47 is, perhaps, particularly relevant. Again, there are guidelines for breaking inline mathematical expressions and equations across lines, which necessitates starting some lines with symbols.
Generally speaking, the goal should be to avoid breaking lines in the middle of a "word" (which, as username_1 notes, is a [complicated issue](https://www.w3.org/International/articles/typography/linebreak). If a symbol is the first character of a word, then a line might start with a symbol (e.g. it is better to break "the bag weighs 47 pounds" before, rather than after, "47", since "47 pounds" is, more or less, a single syntactic unit, i.e. a number with units). On the other hand, a lot of people find single-letter variables at the start of a line to be "ugly" (I would include myself in that group—in many cases, these kinds of breaks also break up semantic units in an ugly way). Thus, to a person who finds single-letter variables at the start of a line ugly, the text
>
> The input voltage *u* is given,
> as well as the inductivity *L*
> and the moment of inertia *M*,
> where *i* refers to the current
> through the motor."
>
>
>
is preferable to
>
> The input voltage *u* is given,
> as well as the inductivity
> *L* and the moment of inertia
> *M*, where *i* refers to the current
> through the motor."
>
>
>
Note that, in either case, if you are using LaTeX, you can use `~` as a nonbreaking space, i.e. `inertia~$M$,` will prevent a linebreak between "inertial" and "*M*". And, to be clear, this last bit is entirely a matter of taste and personal preference—I can find no style guide which seems to have much of an opinion, one way or the other.
All of the above having been said, this seems like something to not get overly precious about. At the end of the day, most of these "rules" are just guidelines, which only really matter if an editor or supervisor is insisting on one version or another. I see no problem with just using basic TeX / LaTeX, and letting the typesetting engine decide what to do. If anyone complains, just say "Hey, if it's good enough for Knuth and Lamport, it's good enough for me." ;)
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/01
| 1,158
| 3,331
|
<issue_start>username_0: Okay, this is an edge case my mental citation engine couldn't quite handle. I'm entering all my physical books in a database, to do more principled library management (at long last), and I ran into a book, Rothbard's *For a New Liberty*, whose colophon is merely:
"This work is licensed under a creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License,
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/>
Mises Institute, 518 West Magnolia Avenue, Auburn, Alabama 3682.
IBSN: 978-1-61016-731-4"
That's all. Verbatim. I've been entering the most recent copyright/license date on the colophon as the book's year; this is how I've cited books in the past too. What do I do with this one? The verso of the last page lists a manufacturing date of 22 June 2023 (evidently a make-to-order publishing operation). Do I use that? I'm concerned about semantic consistency with the rest of my data, and now wondering exactly what a "year" entry in bibliographies and library catalogs is supposed to mean.<issue_comment>username_1: If you visit <https://isbnsearch.org> and enter the ISBN number in the search box you will get details. The book was listed as published in 2020.
I think that the copyright distributors (like Bowker) know when a copyright was registered.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Actually I see a [Google search](https://www.google.ie/search?q=Rothbard%27s%20For%20a%20New%20Liberty&source=hp&ei=yh3JZMLVDMevhbIP_LmauAc&iflsig=AD69kcEAAAAAZMkr2pQkBO9RXCq8ifTjTPTTAm3uRQUk&ved=0ahUKEwjC4rrW3LuAAxXHV0EAHfycBncQ4dUDCAg&uact=5&oq=Rothbard%27s%20For%20a%20New%20Liberty&gs_lp=Egdnd3Mtd2l6<KEY>ZCdz<KEY>&sclient=gws-wiz) saying it was originally published in 1973.
The year seems plausible for such a text . . .
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This will depend absolutely on your bibliography style. For instance, the American Psychological Association, which has *very* detailed guidance and [an entire publication manual](https://apastyle.apa.org/products/publication-manual-7th-edition) wants you [to do this if the date is missing](https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/missing-information):
>
> Provide the author, write “n.d.” for “no date,” and then provide the title and source.
>
>
>
I assume that other style guides offer similar guidance.
If you are not required to follow a particular style guide (lucky you), choose a reasonable option. For instance, even if you don't need to follow the APA style, its recommendations are a good starting point. Of course, whatever you do, be consistent.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If no online sources credibly indicate a publication date, or if you find conflicting indications of the publication year - you could **contact the publisher** (in your example: The Mises Institute) and ask them.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/01
| 601
| 2,571
|
<issue_start>username_0: When is a diploma thesis in mathematics (bachelor or master thesis) actually considered good enough for a supervisor to propose publishing it in a journal? In some universities (e.g., ETH), this appears to be a prerequisite to obtain an excellent grade. What does one have to do to achieve this? Is proving a new theorem or anything equivalent necessary?
Most math theses at the bachelor or master level contain results that are already known. Therefore, there might be no point in publishing them in an academic journal I think.<issue_comment>username_1: Some theses, especially at the undergraduate level, are expository on existing theory rather than new contributions. There are some venues that would publish such things but they need to be at a high standard.
It is difficult for students at both the undergraduate and masters level to do research resulting in true advances, partly, at least, due to the constrained timelines for such things. It is even difficult for most students to gain sufficient insight into a small area of a field to be able to begin such explorations. Some achieve it, with the help of a good advisor and a lot of work. And some advisors are better at suggesting appropriate problems than others are.
But for research in math, as in other fields to be publishable it has to be both novel and correct. "Novel" means that it makes a valuable contribution to the literature. This is judged by reviewers and editors, however, and is known only after review. Your advisor can likely judge if what you produce is something ready for submission.
But a literal answer to your headline question is that it is "publishable" when the editor says it is publishable.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Essentially seconding @username_1's answer: it's not easy, and not typical, for undergrad (or Master's) theses (at least in the U.S., where I've observed) to be publishable in serious journals.
Why? Well, for most even-high-end students, they've still not had enough time to really catch up to the state-of-the-art, to begin with. Further, surely it's not reasonable for absolute novices to somehow depend upon succeeding at things that much more senior people had *failed* to do (and would have wanted). Yes, an expert advisor can help in subtle choices of projects... and in doing the non-obvious things that might make them work ... but, still, this can't be cranked out as though on an assembly line.
(... let's not talk about increased commodification by "higher" administration...)
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/02
| 592
| 2,548
|
<issue_start>username_0: My field of study is not a popular one (animal behavior in ecology) and my specific interest is "unexplored" (specific female behaviors and sexual conflict). Moreover, I am an international student.
So finding an open position with a scholarship is hard. Instead of waiting for an opening, I want to reach out to potential supervisors directly. I plan to show them my previous study and provide a simple CV and personal statement summarizing my research interests and some thoughts.
I wonder if that's OK?<issue_comment>username_1: Some theses, especially at the undergraduate level, are expository on existing theory rather than new contributions. There are some venues that would publish such things but they need to be at a high standard.
It is difficult for students at both the undergraduate and masters level to do research resulting in true advances, partly, at least, due to the constrained timelines for such things. It is even difficult for most students to gain sufficient insight into a small area of a field to be able to begin such explorations. Some achieve it, with the help of a good advisor and a lot of work. And some advisors are better at suggesting appropriate problems than others are.
But for research in math, as in other fields to be publishable it has to be both novel and correct. "Novel" means that it makes a valuable contribution to the literature. This is judged by reviewers and editors, however, and is known only after review. Your advisor can likely judge if what you produce is something ready for submission.
But a literal answer to your headline question is that it is "publishable" when the editor says it is publishable.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Essentially seconding @username_1's answer: it's not easy, and not typical, for undergrad (or Master's) theses (at least in the U.S., where I've observed) to be publishable in serious journals.
Why? Well, for most even-high-end students, they've still not had enough time to really catch up to the state-of-the-art, to begin with. Further, surely it's not reasonable for absolute novices to somehow depend upon succeeding at things that much more senior people had *failed* to do (and would have wanted). Yes, an expert advisor can help in subtle choices of projects... and in doing the non-obvious things that might make them work ... but, still, this can't be cranked out as though on an assembly line.
(... let's not talk about increased commodification by "higher" administration...)
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/02
| 378
| 1,631
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Ph.D. student in mathematics and soon will start writing a thesis on my published papers. I think Overleaf (online cloud) would be more flexible to write the thesis instead my TeXstudio editor. Our university library checks the thesis through Urkund plagiarism software. I have no worry on that part because my papers are already published and properly checked by the library.
Before my question, I just want to mention that if one replaces an article in arXiv with a revised version, then Urkund or any other plagiarism software also counts the previous version towards the similarity score, but in that case our university doesn't count the earlier version since the author is the same.
Since Overleaf is an online cloud editor, every LaTeX file will be stored digitally.
In this case, does any plagiarism software track the saved file from Overleaf?<issue_comment>username_1: Overleaf doesn’t make any documents public. ArXiv hosts preprints, whereas Overleaf is an online LaTeX editor where the files owned by a user are secure and private, equivalent to how nobody from outside can access your emails in Gmail.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *I'm Tom and I work for Overleaf as a Support Manager.*
Overleaf does not make any data you have on Overleaf public, unless you explicitly choose so by enabling link-sharing and sharing the link on the internet. So unless you do that (or expose your project e.g. by sharing it with untrusted people), the project cannot be scanned by a 3rd party.
So in short: You are safe preparing your projects on Overleaf :)
Upvotes: 6
|
2023/08/02
| 747
| 3,006
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have about 500 citations on Google Scholar on 10-15 of my research papers. My partner and I started talking about name change. Basically, we’re thinking of use each other’s last names as our middle names (AB and CD become ADB and CBD). How will it effect my citations and publication record?
Would it be alright if I continue publishing under my original name without the middle name? I would prefer that. What have another academics done in the past?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that, for publishing purposes, you stick to your original name by which you are already known. The name you use in social and legal situations and the one for professional use need not be the same.
There are work-arounds, but they require work both for you and for people wanting to know who wrote a particular bit of work.
Associate a name with your professional "persona" and stick to it, I recommend.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can publish under any name you like, including using a pseudonym. The only time that people really get upset is if you try to impersonate someone else.
More usefully, most of the citation databases, including Scopus, allow an author to link variant spellings and variant names (including radical and not-so-radical changes) all to be linked together. All one needs to do is notify the database creator that you are the person who has published under each of the variants. The point I'm making here, of course, is that while you can continue to publish under the same name as you have to date, you can also (reasonably) safely change your publication name without losing the citation statistics that are linked to your existing name.
By including an [ORCID iD](https://orcid.org/) in all your publications, you can achieve a similar linking of names, but that would not, of itself, join your citations.
You might also like to have a look at [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/192305/can-i-use-my-first-and-middle-names-on-research-publications-instead-of-my-first/192306#192306), and [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/191001/changing-my-legal-name-for-research).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Would it be alright if I continue publishing under my original name without the middle name?
>
>
>
Yes. There is absolutely no expectation that someone with a middle name includes it (even as an initial) in publications.
It is of course entirely possible to use something quite different from your legal name, for instance continuing to publish under a previous surname, albeit with a chance of some minor administrative inconvenience at some point.
But what you are asking about is not just possible, but normal. No-one will even think twice if, for example, someone who publishes as "<NAME>" actually has full legal name <NAME>, whereas if the legal name were <NAME> they might feel the need to check that it is the same person.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/03
| 543
| 2,063
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a homework assignment, I wrote the wrong author and date with the title of the article in reference. Would it be counted as academic misconduct?<issue_comment>username_1: I would say **"No, it is not an academic misconduct"** if it was an accident, and you try your best to correct the mistake as soon as possible.
For example, you should notify your professor or TA about this mistake via emails (or call their OFFICE phone numbers if applicable) ASAP even before they start grading the assignment.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Would it be counted as academic misconduct?
>
>
>
No, it won't be counted as academic misconduct. You might drop marks though (get some points deducted).
A mistake or error is not dishonest or misconduct. However, plagiarism, cheating (comes in various forms), deceit, falsification count as misconduct/dishonesty and would be penalised.
For pointer, see [Northern Illinois university '*definition*' of academic dishonesty](https://www.niu.edu/academic-integrity/faculty/types/index.shtml):
>
> *Academic dishonesty refers to committing or contributing to dishonest acts by those engaged in teaching, learning, research, and related academic activities, and it applies not just to students, but to everyone in the academic environment (Cizek, 2003; Whitley, Jr. & Keith-Spiegel, 2002).*
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: #### No, not even close
Academic misconduct covers dishonest acts including delibrate plagiarism, cheating on an examination or other piece of work, or forms of research misconduct that involve dishonesty. In the context of a homework assignment for a course, the error you made would just be considred an ordinary student mistake, and it will be marked down accordingly (if your professor even notices it). Since your homework assignment is not published work, there is no necessity to correct the error, but you may wish to draw it to the attention of your professor in order to demonstrate that you can spot your own errors *ex post*.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/03
| 2,260
| 10,067
|
<issue_start>username_0: As an example, suppose I come up with a theory that removes the need for dark matter. [Dark matter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter) is a hypothetical substance with many different lines of evidence for its existence, but it hasn't been directly detected, so it's conceivable that it doesn't exist. However, there are several independent lines of evidence indicating it exists, and it's not easy to explain all of them within one new theory/model.
Which of the following is more appropriate?
1. The paper I write must simultaneously address *every* line of evidence. In other words, my new paper must explain *all* the observations. A single one is not enough.
2. The paper I write must explain one of the observations. Then it can end with "We leave the explanation of the other lines of evidence to future work", and that's enough for this paper (*New Theory Paper: Part #1*).
Option #1 seems like it requires a formidably large amount of work, taking at least several years to complete. There'd also be a high failure rate, so it would not be easy to even embark on such an endeavor. On the other hand, with option #2, it seems like a natural question the reviewer will ask is "What about the other lines of evidence?" and to conclusively answer that would require doing option #1. Furthermore, I would also expect option #2 to lead to *New Theory Paper: Part #2* which says "We tried to explain \_\_\_ with our theory, but we couldn't get it to work, therefore the theory is probably wrong", and I'm not aware of any papers of this kind.
If option #1 is more appropriate, are there any examples of such papers? If option #2 is more appropriate, what does one say when the reviewer asks "What about the other lines of evidence"? What about when one later discovers that the theory cannot explain a different line of evidence?<issue_comment>username_1: Let us continue on the example of dark matter. There has so far been no direct evidence of its existence, but it is an assumption that allows to explain certain indirect observations that cannot be explained otherwise. If you have a model without dark matter, it would be necessary that it can explain these observations (if not all, then certainly the main ones) and that there are no inconsistencies with generally accepted theories that have already been confirmed by observation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: A lot depends on the purpose and claims of the paper. If you claim to fully solve a problem, you'd better address the key lines of evidence and appropriate consistency criteria for a theory. (Note the restriction from *all* to *key*, as some observations are less certain or carry less weight than others.)
But there is no need to make this a forced dichotomy between addressing all or only one of the key lines of evidence; as an author you should strive to write good, accurate papers that address what you can. Certainly, full agreement with all key lines of evidence need not be demonstrated in the initial paper, rather it may be enough to sketch a promising path forward (which may require expertise you don't have). In general, promising ideas are worth exploring, and are thus worth publishing. On the other hand, if you propose a model of dark matter that can never explain the observed galaxy rotation curves, your model just does not stand much chance as an explanation for our universe. I can still imagine cases where it would be valuable as a toy model or to provide constraints on future models, but any such paper should spell out this restriction.
This is all research, so much is always in flux or unclear. It is thus much more common to write papers addressing some specific properties and to treat them as pieces in a much larger jigsaw puzzle than it is to claim to have arrived at a true resolution. Genuine scientific progress is typically messy and hard to capture in a single paper. There are always future questions to be addressed. This is especially the case if your paper (like many of the most important theoretical physics papers) makes novel predictions.
Consider <NAME>'s famous *A Model of Leptons* paper, [Phys. Rev. Lett. **19**, 1264 (1967)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.1264). This short letter brought together many ideas, and unified the electromagnetic and weak interactions. Weinberg did not declare this *the* theory of electroweak interactions, he just called it a model. And he flagged that the question of whether the model was renormalizable would need further investigation. That question was addressed affirmatively in 1971 by <NAME>. Following experimental confirmation of weak neutral currents and the development of quantum chromodynamics, the remarkably successful standard model of particle physics was formed.
>
> Option #1 seems like it requires a formidably large amount of work, taking at least several years to complete. There'd also be a high failure rate, so it would not be easy to even embark on such an endeavor.
>
>
>
Well, yes, nature provides many constraints on what kind of physical theories are useful for describing our universe. This is a feature, not a bug. However, we also don't want to stay trapped in local but not global minima in "theory space", so appropriately disclosed speculative excursions in various directions can be useful. Hence, as I outlined above, papers rarely go to the extreme of your option #1. However, it is a common criticism that the current funding climate and publish-or-perish culture systematically discourage the type of long-term and risk-taking efforts that are needed for truly groundbreaking work. Instead, more and more papers are produced, most incremental or of dubious value. After all, that's what the system rewards.
>
> On the other hand, with option #2, it seems like a natural question the reviewer will ask is "What about the other lines of evidence?" and to conclusively answer that would require doing option #1.
>
>
>
It is a reasonable question to ask, but reasonable reviewers and editors also understand that some aspects will be left for future work. Again, if you can demonstrate your approach is promising also regarding aspects not addressed head-on in your paper your work is likely to be taken more seriously. If there are strong reasons to think your approach will never work in these regards, it might not be worth publishing.
>
> Furthermore, I would also expect option #2 to lead to New Theory Paper: Part #2 which says "We tried to explain \_\_\_ with our theory, but we couldn't get it to work, therefore the theory is probably wrong", and I'm not aware of any papers of this kind.
>
>
>
I don't have an example of a paper like that off the top of my head. Of course, there is a bias against publishing purely negative results, with the possible exception of comment papers by other authors. Many other things can occur too: perhaps an observational paper comes out noting disagreement with the theory, or perhaps a new paper is written by the original author(s), highlighting some issue *and* proposing a tweak to resolve it or an entirely different model. But sometimes a dead end is a dead end and there are no more papers. The citation record can be a helpful heuristic for figuring out the usefulness of specific papers.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: A published academic paper merely needs to add *some novel contribution that is of value to the profession*, and conducted in a scholarly way. When putting forward a new theory, it is possible to present a theory that is not fully worked out, so long as the contribution is sufficient to be of genuine value. A paper that presents a partially-worked theory that does not address all lines of evidence might still be of sufficient value to warrant publication. If there are lines of evidence that count against the theory then it would be expected that you would disclose these and draw them to the reader's attention, even if you don't deal with them.
Rather than the two options you present, I would recommend you go with option #3: Set out your theory and disclose all relevant lines of evidence on the problem, then state which lines of evidence are consistent with your theory and which lines of evidence you are (presently) unable to explain or which potentially count as evidence against your theory. You should at least *mention* all the relevant lines of evidence (and give citation to the relevant literature) so that the reader is given full information on the problem, and so that the reviewers are aware that you have considered the full problem. You can restrict your analysis to only some parts of the evidence if you wish, but it might be worth giving some brief remarks on part of the evidence you don't analyse --- e.g., are these something you think could potentially be explained in future, or do they flat-out contradict your theory?
Your goal in this kind of paper would be to make your reader familiar with the full problem, and all relevant lines of evidence, and then present your partial theory and show analysis of some of these lines of evidence. Be open about the fact that the theory is still partial and does not yet include analysis of all these lines of evidence, and be open about any lines of evidence that you think might be problematic to the theory.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Here's an Option 3: state a *new or unexplained* observation that a new theory explains, but an existing theory doesn't. (If you could only write one paper, a new theory's consistency with existing evidence would almost certainly end up in an appendix or supplementary section.)
This most clearly states how your new theory would be different from the status quo, why it exists, and why it would be exciting and interesting for other people to pursue it.
After all, most people don't introduce relativity by saying "Einstein's groundbreaking realizations were that, at small speeds and low spacetime curvature, classical mechanics are correct."
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/03
| 759
| 3,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found a 2016 presentation by an author in my niche field and want to get permission to reuse and modify a few of his figures for my master's thesis. But, the presentation doesn't has any copyright notice.
I can't find a way to contact him. I tried:
* Contact information on any support or paper he participated in; there is nothing.
* The website of his academia doesn't allow contact from un-authenticated users.
* I can't find him through the contact list in the email system of my academia.
* His LinkedIn account has a lock to not send messages to him.
He is still in academia, participates in juries of theses, and advises students. I am running out of options. Do I need to forget about using his figures?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you need to avoid copyright infringement and you need positive permission from the copyright holder to go beyond "fair use" however it is defined (which varies).
You can't make assumptions. Even if the author has died, the copyright is still held by someone and you need to contact the holder. Assume that their refusal to reply is denial of permission.
You can, of course, rely on fair use (where available) for some things.
Active username_2s and often even those retired can be contacted indirectly through their departments. They can pass on a message with information about your request and how to contact you.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You don't specifically mention email (what is "my/his academia?"), but email is the default method for contacting username_2s whom you personally don't know. It is common to get requests out of the blue from prospective students, people who have read your work and have questions, journal editors who want you to review something, etc.
If he is a faculty member somewhere, then he very likely has a public-facing email address listed on his website (if he has one) or his department's website. In most cases, some Googling will turn it up quickly.
I'd recommend emailing him your question: keep it brief, polite, and to the point. In my opinion etiquette doesn't oblige him to respond, but he very well might.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If, for some strange and inexplicable reason, you cannot find an email address by which to contact him, there's always the old-fashioned approach: snail-mail.
Write a hard-copy letter to the person, and mail it using your local postal service. You'll need a physical postal address to do so, but it need not be an address specific to him. You should be able to send a letter "in care of" the department or the university in general, and be reasonably confident they'll redirect the letter to his personal mailbox. Though keep in mind a physical letter can be ignored just as easily as a email can.
That said, I find it highly unlikely that you'll be unable to find a publicly accessible email address for an username_2 in this day and age. If there's nothing posted on the university website or in previous articles by this person, you might be able to email the general contact point for the department or university and politely ask for the author's email address.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/08/04
| 1,255
| 5,052
|
<issue_start>username_0: I worked in a research institute a few years ago. Since then, circumstances of life led me to work now in a small consultancy.
A former collaborator reached out saying they're publishing a paper for which I'd be a co-author, and asked for my email and current affiliation. Co-authorship would be entirely based on past work I did at my previous employer (i.e. work I did at the research institute and not work I'll be doing now).
A first doubt comes from reading the [affiliation] tag's description here in the website:
>
> An affiliation is a contractual connection between an academic institution and a student or an employee.
>
>
>
The place I work at is not academic. Does this pre-empt this whole conversation?
If not: **in broad terms**, the field where I'm now in is the same. However the place where I'm at (and the sub-field in which we work) is not really functional to my desired career trajectory – for example, as I'm looking for a new position, I have to make a bit of a stretch when I describe my current role in my CV.
This means that I'm not sure I want to appear as affiliated to my current company on that paper – also considering that it would be my first peer-reviewed publication (I'm not looking to get into universities in the future but my career plan sees me in contexts that collaborate very closely with academia, so in theory it might not be the last one).
So the point is:
* Am I overthinking it (i.e. should I just use my current affiliation and nobody would even care)?
* If it makes sense, based on my situation, not to want to appear with my current company, what is the best way to tell this to the person who reached out to me? Would something like "I'd prefer to appear as unaffilated/independent, if the journal allows to" make sense? I'm really not familiar with this situation.
* Any other suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: On one hand, if you are a co-author because of the work you did in the past, then the affiliation is the old affiliation at the research institute. The affiliation refers mostly to where you performed the work.
This is [the APA standard, 7th edition](https://libguides.uta.edu/apa/title_page):
>
> the author affiliation identifies where the author worked or studied
> when the research was conducted … If an author’s affiliation has
> changed, give current affiliation in the author note.
>
>
>
If, on the other hand, you are asked to be a co-author and you will contribute with some new work, you need to put your actual affiliation.
The best way is to ask for a guest affiliation at your former department, because copyright and all the intellectual rights can be complex, if you put your current company as affiliation. The company may have some claim about the intellectual work which clashes with the publishing license.
To get a guest affiliation at the uni, you should probably ask your company HR responsible person if they agree (especially if you are a full-time employee).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You're overthinking this. An "affiliation" is a way to get in contact with you. It's *usually* your employer, but plenty of people do not have an employer (e.g., they are retired) or for a variety of reasons do not want their employer listed (e.g., they did the research on the weekends, independent of their employment). In other words, the description you quote from the journal's page is wrong and incomplete because it does not account for the breadth of possible authors: Not every author is affiliated with a university.
So, you can just provide your home address, or simply an email address. I've got a paper where one of my co-authors simply lists his email address and the town in Germany where he lives, and that's all that was necessary (see [the first author here](https://www.math.colostate.edu/%7Ebangerth/publications/2015-graph.pdf)).
In other words: Don't fret over the affiliation thing and enjoy being asked to be a co-author on a scientific publication!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know the standard in every field, but the approach I tend to see in chemistry, physics, and mathematics is:
1. Put the place at which you did the research as the 'main' affiliation.
2. Add a footnote with "Current affiliation", or "Current address" or something with your updated contact information.
I can't find any specific papers at a glance that do this, as it's not *especially* common, but some related posts on this site support the principle.
* [Should I always provide my current affilition and address when a paper got accepted?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/53828/)
* [Is it acceptable to change affiliation to new employer when submitting an updated manuscript when old employer provided limited research support?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34442/)
* [Changing affiliation on publication](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11151/)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: We use "independent researcher" for these authors.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/04
| 3,304
| 13,464
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few weeks back the prof asked me to invest in his business. That is a significant amount for us, I do not understand why he is proposing that. I wonder what should we do with this proposal. What can be the reason behind such a request in a polite way?
I do not want to hurt either side, could you advise me on how should I respond?<issue_comment>username_1: I am not a trusting person, and the idea of someone with as much authority and influence over your sister's life asking for large quantities of money (*extremely* large quantities of money in the context of a graduate student's life) makes me very very suspicious. This person has so much influence over your life that you should be concerned about the consequences of saying no. That alone seems to me to be a barrier to your evaluating the offer objectively, which in turn adds an element of formal ethics to this situation.
What's needed is some objectivity, which readers here can't really provide.
However, many universities have business incubators meant to help students and faculty transition academic research into commercial enterprises. If this business is being run through such a group (and to be clear, this should be a business incubator that is actually part of the university, not just one in the area) that would be a good sign and you could inquire of them how these sorts of things are handled, if faculty and grad students form business ventures together. (And eventually, how this specific business is being handled.)
If it is not being run through a university business incubator, I would consider that a bad sign, stick to the story of "We don't have that kind of money hanging around, sorry," (you don't owe them any more explanation than that) and potentially look for a new advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Just one more word of caution: **it may as well be that the professor has been scammed**.
There are many schemes when scammers make victims believe that they have a "profitable" business, and make victims pull others (relatives, friends, random acquaintances) into investing into this "business". And obviously there would be no "business" in fact.
The prof might be deep into such a scam, and scammers (indirectly) telling them that another $80000 will save all their investments and finally generate a huge profit. Which in fact will never happen.
Whenever I hear that somebody asks somebody else to invest into their business, and this request comes in an awkward or inappropriate context, I always think that this may be a scam.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: We don't know what is behind the advisor's request.
It could be benign, in that he is intending to give you an opportunity to participate in a spin-off from your work. But than the communication was not as clear as it should have been. The power differential between you two should have made him extremely careful to make sure that his intentions were absolutely clear, preferably with an independent person involved. So even if it benign, it is not professional, and that should make you worried when it comes to such sums of money.
It could be bad, an attempt to use his power to extract money from you, or at least a risky investment he would not otherwise get from you.
We don't know, and neither do you. You could collect information to see which is more likely. However, if you don't want to or cannot invest that sum then you just say no. It is good to do that in writing, e.g. an email, so you have some collaboration if things get nasty.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Just say no thank you. Do it politely. Do not offer any reason for saying no. Don't provide one if he asks. Just say no.
You or we can speculate endlessly about what this might mean and never find out.
Just say no thank you.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm willing to give the professor the benefit of the doubt that he is acting with good intentions. But you should feel comfortable declining this offer, since you don't have the money to risk. That's a pretty compelling reason. It doesn't mean you don't believe in his venture, so shouldn't result in hurt feelings.
If this venture is something highly related to your research, it is not uncommon for a grad student to become a founding shareholder in a spin-off. But in this case you would expect to get your founder's shares for "sweat equity" -- the idea that you will continue to work on the project for the benefit of the company at reduced/zero pay -- rather than by investing cash. Most founders don't have enough cash to start businesses, and have to raise from others. Initially "friends and family" who have money to spare, then angel investors, then venture capitalists.
If the venture isn't related to your research or you don't want to work on this startup, I'd stick with a firm no, based on your lack of available funds.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: A gross violation of good ethics. Most likely a terrible "investment" as well.
A word of caution. If your professor or someone associated with them finds your post here it is possible there could be negative repercussions for you or your sister.
>
> A few weeks back the prof asked us to invest in his business around ($80,000) for a 5 percent share.
>
>
>
Firstly it needs to be considered if this is attempt to seek a bribe. Is there any hint that this really more along the lines of *you "invest" in my "business" or I'll make sure you never finish your studies* ? This is the worst possible interpretation and you give no evidence of that, but it's something to consider.
There are a large number of ways a legitimate business can get finance at this level of funding. "Asking" people you have considerable influence over for it is grossly unethical and not one of them.
However to get such funding would require them to let people with expertise in business finance look at his business plan in detail. Students don't generally understand enough business or finance to do a proper objective examination of a business proposal like this, so it's quite clear (to me) that the person you are dealing with has either already failed to get finance through legitimate channels (because it's a bad deal, most likely) or is unwilling or unable to provide a realistic business plan to back up their claims.
In practical terms this person values their business at $1.6 *million* which makes the need to seek money from his students very odd. At this point ask yourself how many other people have been asked for this money ? Also ask yourself if this "business" has a much lower realistic valuation and $80,000 would represent much more than 5% of it's true value.
There are a lot of red flags here.
>
> That is a significant amount for us, I do not understand why he is proposing that. I wonder what should we do with this proposal. What can be the reason behind such a request in a polite way?
>
>
>
Decline any requests, now or in the future, with a firm but polite "no".
>
> I do not want to hurt either side, could you advise me on how should I respond?
>
>
>
This is somewhat dependent on where this is happening, as different rules and laws apply and different cultural norms apply as well.
I would regard this is extremely unethical (at best) and potentially fraud (at worst, e.g. if it was related to a [pyramid scheme](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme)).
I would suggest:
* Discretely check with other students (you trust) whether they have been approached in this way.
* Ask the professor for a detailed business plan and proposal by email.
* Politely but very firmly decline the "offer". You can stop here if you want.
* Consider approaching the institute's ethical committee or even (if you are so motivated) asking the police or a financial regulation body to investigate.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: The main possibility is that this offer/request comes not from your professor at all, but from a scammer. So you ask your professor directly "I received a message asking for an $80,000 investment, seemingly from you. I suspect it is some scammer impersonating you, so you might want to warn all your contacts". This is very useful if it is indeed a scam, and sends out a very strong message if this was indeed the professor.
The second possibility is that this is indeed your professor. That would be unethical on a massive scale. And what an earth would make him think that you or your sister have $80,000 to invest in his business? And how could he not see that this is a huge red flag? So make sure that you have 100% evidence of this "offer" in case he gets any bad ideas. However, the "scammer" is indeed the much more likely explanation.
Now if you are afraid to go this route, you tell them instead "This sounds good. Can you send me all the details about your business that I need to make an educated decision? Business plan, cost and sales forecasts, and so on. I'll show them to my friend XYZ who runs a business and doing quite well, and if he agrees, then I may consider investing. And my friend might consider investing as well".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: $80,000 is above the usual first-time investor's share in an angel fund, and almost as much as the typical non-US startup raises pre-seed (the US has higher valuations than the rest of the world).
People and funds who invest in startups do their due diligence before committing the money. It includes a brief legal check to assess the firm's legitimacy, an economics study done by an investment analyst, a risk assessment, a HR-like look at the founder team and their competences, and expert assessment from people with startup experience.
The complete due diligence process for pre-seed startups costs VC funds about $25,000 (in the US). At this early angel investment stage it still costs a couple thousand. **It costs because it takes specialized knowledge to invest in startups.**
If you don't have this knowledge, you'll at best be offering what is known as "cheap money" - money given without making sure to get equitable consideration. It's not wrong to do so; some banks are in this business, but they charge interest.
At worst, you or your sister would be essentially gifting the money to the professor, with some hope of maybe making it back. Investment is a business, and here's the business math:
Investing $80k for 5% implies a $1.6 million valuation at no discount, or $2 million at a 20% discount, which the first investor is due. Investors usually expect at least a 10x growth potential for startups, or 3x for low-risk enterprises. So you have to be sure their idea is worth at least $20 million if it's something novel. Even a sure thing like buying items on Alibaba in bulk and retailing them on Amazon would have to be worth $6 million (3x).
People who don't invest professionally, often have very wrong ideas about how it works. For instance, one might think $80k for 5% of a business that will be worth $2M in a year is a 20% win. Not so; businesses fail, so today it's worth much less, and the first investor gets a discount on top of that. If this sounds harsh, that's how VCs survive startup failures and live to invest another day. It took them decades and a few burst bubbles to figure out how to do it.
If the professor is honestly looking for investment, the best course of action is to acquaint them with fair investment practices and accelerators. If you want to invest, you can suggest the idea to any VC fund and see what they think.
If you're new to investing, don't start with this. Leave risky ideas from people without business experience to experienced investors.
---
*P.S. I'm a startup founder, a member of an angel investment fund, and I'm doing postgrad academic research on the economics of startups and startup studios. These synergize. Not quite a drive-by post.*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: He is asking you as he's weighed up your family's wealth from observing you over the years.
It was really unwise to have allowed a sister to become professionally involved with your own academic supervisor for a lot of reasons, personal as well as professional.
Ideally I'd like to see your junior sibling removed from this academic's influence as soon as possible - any excuse, any story would do for me.
I feel though that you are leaving out a good share of the history between this academic and you. He certainly has enough information on your family to gauge your access to a significant sum of money - far more than any recent graduate could possibly have, college loans or not. And the professor wouldn't even dare raise such a proposition unless he felt that a high level of human trust existed between you all. I am wondering was *la petite* introduced to him while you were doing your MS or did she approach the professor after hearing a lot of "good things" (well, 'liberal' supervision and humor can attract a young career woman) about him in conversations with you.
You have allowed things to cross the line that should separate the professional and personal. It now involves a younger family member. And a request for significant investment (not a loan, mind) from your family. This should never happen.
The only way to avoid hurt to your own family - and ultimately to this professor as we all know how these 'investments' end up - is to dissociate yourself and *la petite* from him immediately.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/05
| 903
| 3,618
|
<issue_start>username_0: How often (e.g. frequency) should one check the status of a submitted manuscript?
I understand that daily checking is a waste of time while never checking the status might also bear risks (e.g. when a manuscript is not assigned to reviewers for many months or when an editor is getting unresponsive). What frequency might be considered effective and reasonable?
This refers to academics who have multiple papers in review simultaneously, not just one or two.<issue_comment>username_1: Never. Once you submitted your manuscript, you have done everything humanly possible. Now it is time to do productive stuff like write your next article or just relax.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: At the initial stage, (before getting assigned to associate editor and sent out for review), probably a week or two.
* at the onset, when firmly with administration, daily or every other day
* when it move to editor, weekly or more
* when it gets to associate/senior editor, fortnight or more
When it's sent out for review, (apart from status check after 4-6 months depending on the field), ["*it is time to do productive stuff*"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/200308/162770) (@maarten-buis)
* doing more research
* conceptualising and writing the next paper
* writing up grant proposals (and reports)
* ... ...
Perhaps, it might be worthwhile getting acquainted with the typical workflow of a journal: [What does the typical workflow of a journal look like? How should I interpret a particular submission status?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55665/what-does-the-typical-workflow-of-a-journal-look-like-how-should-i-interpret-a)
This might be worth noting: [How to check how fast the review and publication process in a journal](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/91423/how-to-check-how-fast-the-review-and-publication-process-in-a-journal)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: First, of all, in the unlikely case that checking the status on a daily basis does not affect you, you can just do that. Depending on the system, this takes less than five seconds, so the total impact on your time efficiency is negligible.
In most cases, however, I recommend to check when the progress of the manuscript would affect your decisions. In particular check when the manuscript being stuck in a certain state would make you contact the journal. Now, these times strongly depend on the journal, so you’ll have to find these out yourself. For further reading on this, see: [Is my paper under review (or similar) for too long and if yes, how should I react?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/88355/7734)
For example, taking a journal where editorial decisions take a few days and reviews three weeks on average and the editorial process is presented in fine detail, I would check:
* After a week to ensure that the manuscript isn’t stuck in the initial check (the step that mostly filters out total bogus, bad files, etc.).
* Two weeks after after the initial check has been completed, to ensure that the manuscript has entered peer review.
* Every two weeks after that to react to situations such as reviewers refusing to review en masse, the manuscript being stuck with the editor again after reviewers refuse, etc.
At the end of the day, you have to compromise between how checking affects your productivity and how relevant a timely publication is to you. So, you can multiply all times by two and things still are fine.
To keep your mind off the situation, I recommend to set yourself an automated reminder, lest you succumb to checking every hour.
Upvotes: 4
|
2023/08/05
| 358
| 1,143
|
<issue_start>username_0: Physical Review journals used to indicate Editors' Suggestions with this sign:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PlOon.png)
In an [editorial announcement](https://journals.aps.org/pre/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevE.89.010001) they state that:
>
> The icon contains the printer’s mark that at one time appeared on the covers of all sections of the Physical Review.
>
>
>
I'm wondering: where did this sign come from? Does it have any meaning?<issue_comment>username_1: It looks just like, well, a printer's mark, in this case, a [fleuron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleuron_(typography)): ❦ . I don't think there is any particular meaning besides aesthetics.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A quick search found:
Printing single vine leaves originated [around 1505](https://www.folger.edu/blogs/collation/the-single-vine-leaf-aka-the-aldine-leaf/). It does not mean anything. Around 1530 they were extremely popular with printers. Printing a single vine leaf in 1530 was like printing a cat picture in 2010.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/05
| 242
| 893
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let assume that a submitted abstract accepted and then presented in a conference. In some conference they say that "selected papers will be published in proceeding". What they mean by term "***Selected***"? What steps are there after presentation of research work?<issue_comment>username_1: It looks just like, well, a printer's mark, in this case, a [fleuron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleuron_(typography)): ❦ . I don't think there is any particular meaning besides aesthetics.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A quick search found:
Printing single vine leaves originated [around 1505](https://www.folger.edu/blogs/collation/the-single-vine-leaf-aka-the-aldine-leaf/). It does not mean anything. Around 1530 they were extremely popular with printers. Printing a single vine leaf in 1530 was like printing a cat picture in 2010.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/06
| 952
| 3,999
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my master in physics and now want to pursue a PhD (or its equivalent), both in Germany. I did my master thesis (1 year) in the field of quantum computing at a research institute, where I continued working and now could do the PhD. This work is at the intersect of computer science and theoretical physics. I like the work and I feel like I get a lot of opportunities there. But I also feel like I lack the excitement about the work that it takes to do a PhD. I always get very excited when hearing about experimental physics. But I am not sure if I had that excitement when working there or if it is rather in the context of listing to other people only. And I feel like I risk a good job that I have for sure now. Also, I have almost no training in experimental matters. I touched maybe twice an oscilloscope. Although, I have read about a number of examples where it worked out despite a lack of experience.
On top of that, I don't want my current boss to know about my doubts about continue working in his group. I feel like it could affect our relationship very badly and maybe I want to continue working with him. He is very well connected in the community and I am afraid that if I contact someone he will hear about that.
So, there are basically two questions: 1) How do I find out if I really want to switch to experimental physics, while working a full-time job? 2) How do I do it without my boss noticing?<issue_comment>username_1: If your goal is "excitement," do not get a PhD. "Exciting" research results require a lot of background work that is not exciting. Maybe try a career in sales. Sales is an example of a field of work where projects reach rapid conclusions.
If you are considering switching from theoretical physics to tabletop experimental physics, ask yourself:
* Do I like working with my hands?
* Do I like broken stuff?
* Can I tolerate relying on other people? Even if they are weird people?
* Can I tolerate continuing to do my existing tasks like calculating and writing? (Yes, experimentalists have to do those too.)
I would not recommend getting a PhD in tabletop experimental physics unless the answer to all the questions is yes.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Here's an example of what it's like to work in experimental physics. If you pump atoms into a vacuum with a specific magnetic field & laser beams, you should end up with a [magneto-optical trap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magneto-optical_trap). So you set up your atom source, your vacuum chamber, your electromagnets, etc., yet when you look at your detector there are no atoms. Something's clearly wrong, but what? Some possibilities could be:
* Maybe the atom source has run out and there are no more atoms left.
* Maybe there's a leak in the vacuum chamber.
* Maybe the laser beams are of slightly incorrect frequency.
* Maybe the laser beams aren't aligned properly.
Maybe you check all these things and find that there are still no atoms detected. Time to start thinking about what other things could've gone wrong:
* Maybe the vacuum isn't vacuum enough (i.e., the pressure is too high). But the vacuum pump can't bring the pressure any lower. Does the department have a better vacuum pump?
* Maybe the lab temperature is too high and this is affecting the trap (does this actually affect the trap? Better check the theory and see if there is an impact).
* Maybe the detector is broken. (Buying a new detector could cost a significant amount of money, not to mention paperwork, so are you *sure* it is broken?)
In the last case you could easily end up with this related problem:
* Ok, so the detector is broken and we've ordered a new one, but it will take a couple of weeks to arrive. What do I do in the meantime?
These are the kinds of problems that you'll be solving in an experimental physics PhD. If you enjoy these - as oppose to enjoy reading about the results - then you can consider switching to experimental physics.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/06
| 1,809
| 7,272
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have 3 supervisors, two of whom have been very helpful and supportive throughout my PhD.
The third (technically my secondary) has been pretty unhelpful and absent over the years (doesn't come to meetings, provides little feedback on my writing outside of affirming with what the others have said, completely checks out of discussions regarding the methodological details of my work, largely unsupportive/uninterested in the project, etc).
In my acknowledgements I would like to include a personalised and heartfelt thank you to my 2 engaged supervisors, but it is difficult to do this without also having to include some disingenuous thank you to my crappy supervisor.
As I am nearly done with the thesis it would be silly to kick up a fuss about the quality of supervision now. Should I just include a generic thank you to all three supervisors as a collective?<issue_comment>username_1: I understand your situation because I had both an exceptional advisor and a very uninterested one (whom I'll call X). Of course I wanted to write a real thank you paragraph for the former, and as you I felt awkward when I needed to write one for X. I didn't really know what to thank him for! He attended some meetings where he contributed little to none to the discussion. I even tried to involve him asking him for advice on how to implement an algorithm, and he suggested me to google it.
I didn't want to exclude him completely from the acknowledgment section, so I just wrote something in the lines of "thank you to Dr. X for his valuable input". Writing more than a generic thank you for him would make me feel as if I was actually mocking X, and I didn't want to keep thinking about it since, after all, he already got what he wanted (adding my dissertation to his CV; he was extending it in order to get a grant). My actual thank you for him was adding his name to the cover.
My suggestion is to add a little, polite acknowledgement for your third advisor. I would advise against using a generic thank you for your two other advisors though. You are free to express your sincere positive feelings and gratitude on paper towards the ones that deserve it. As long as you are respectful with everybody, the fact that someone gets offended if his/her thank you paragraph is shorter than others is not your problem, so you should not worry about that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Add a sentence "Thank you to supervisor B for serving as my supervisor." A and C can get more detailed thank you sentences.
* Factually, this is correct.
* You needed the number of supervisors.
* It does neither mock B nor the helpful supervisors A and C.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the most professional response would be to thank them for the few things that they did (or should have done).
>
> "Thank you to supervisor X for their thoughtful feedback and
> consistent support throughout these years, which elevated the
> methodological approaches in this work."
>
>
>
Is it accurate? Likely not. But realize advisors' work are constantly spread thin, and assume best intentions. This way, you can still elaborate in depth about thanking your other advisors without excluding the lackluster advisor. I think any alternative where your frustration with the advisor is made rather obvious is a no go. Best to take the high-road and move on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been in the same situation and thought long and hard about this. In the end, I decided against a large distinction, primarily because I didn't want to be reminded of this situation whenever I open the thesis (or whenever someone else does). I still stand by the decision, and just expressed my thanks in a heartfelt email to the 'real' supervisors. Hope that helps!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I never got my masters, but I have been the 'go-to' guy for people with technical questions. I'd like to offer a slight defense of professor X.
Questions are like baseball pitches, if a question is not in my zone of expertise (for want of demonstrating that you did your own work first - too low or by dint of being too technical and outside my area - too high), I can't really connect with it, even when I'm quite willing to do so. If you're not a sports fan, you can swap in a Goldilocks metaphor without a great loss of content.
As for your question directly, as I got older I learned that if you're going to err, it's better to do so to the side of generosity. You can and should be more direct with people who contact you directly for advice. But TBH, I am not sure how much weight people place on individual student feedback (he said - University said), even at the grad student level. I think you're more likely to come off as a vinegar-drinker without really having any positive impact for your courage.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Just write the same thanks for everyone.
At this stage of your career you do not see some "invisible" stuff that is very important nonetheless.
Sometimes this third supervisor is actually the person who did all the paperwork necessary to keep the lab running and the group funded. Or the one responsible for administrative tasks that actually allowed your other two supervisors to work. Or the guy that prepares most projects for funding agencies to keep the projects running.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I would avoid saying anything negative as your work will stay on the internet for life, and you don't know when you will need help in the future.
They might read your work and learn that you were trying to be sarcastic and that might cause a problem for you. Just be mature when your answer, acknowledge everyone, and don't burn bridges as you do not know what is happening behind the scenes that made your third supervisor act the way he did.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: I feel tempted to suggest a thank you like the one President <NAME> offered to Dr Conor C<NAME> at the end of [the latter's controversial stint](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conor_Cruise_O%27Brien#Opposition_to_the_Vietnam_War) as Vice-Chancellor to University of Ghana: "Dr O'Brien, thank you for all you have done for Ghana - whatever it was."
But let's be a bit subtler.
Supervisors #1, #2 and #3 are formally mentioned in the Acknowledgements section in order of merit.
***Acknowledgements***
*Firstly I should like to thank Prof. <NAME>, Head of Department of Whatever, University of Wherever for providing me with research facilities for the duration of this program.*
*I should also like to thank my supervisors Prof. A, Prof. B and Prof. C for their support and contributions to this project.*
*Etc.*
While the real meat is served in the Dedication page:
***Dedication***
*To:*
*My parents, who have never failed in their loving support of me.*
*Professors A and B whose guidance of this program was unfailingly positive and kindly.*
*My fellow PhD students ...., ...., ....., etc for their comradeship, cooperation and humor.*
*My cat, Harry, for always letting me know what (dinner) and who (Harry, of course) was really important through all this time.*
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: Just thank all of them and move on with life.
Upvotes: -1
|
2023/08/07
| 455
| 1,823
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm surprised that this hasn't been asked before. What's the difference between Appendices and Supplements?
Also, btw, what is the most widely approved version of "Supplements"? Is it "Supplemental Materials" or "Supplementary Materials"? My field is machine learning & computer vision, if it's relevant.<issue_comment>username_1: In most (all?) machine learning & computer vision conferences:
* Appendices = more PDF pages.
* Supplements = additional non-PDF content, e.g. code and data.
"Supplementary Materials" is most commonly used in my experience. I've never read "Supplemental Materials".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The field is almost always relevant to questions like this, so I defer to the [answer by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/200364/17254) for your case. This is just to give a flavor of how things can much vary. In physics (journals), I would expect
* Appendices = additional material that is presented within the article itself (for example, inside the article PDF), but outside the main text.
* "Supplements" = ["information that is useful to a subset of readers but is not essential to comprehend the article’s main results"](https://journals.aps.org/prb/authors). The most typical form is a separate PDF with details or additional analysis, but it can also be in the form of code, data, multimedia files etc. or some combination. Many publishers have lists of supported file formats.
I've seen all combinations of "Supplemental/Supplementary Information/Material". What is standard varies by publication venue. If there is a print version of the journal, the appendices would be printed, but supplements would not. Sometimes this is reflected in them being called "Electronic Supplementary Material" or similar.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/08/07
| 806
| 3,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: * [Professor/Associate Professor/Assistant Professor/Senior Lecturer/Lecturer (Ref. AC2023/044/01)](http://web.archive.org/web/20230810094058/https://www.cuhk.edu.cn/en/recruitment/1463)
>
> Junior candidates should have (i) a Ph.D. degree (by the time of reporting for duty) in related fields; and (ii) high potential in teaching and research. Junior appointments will usually be made on a contract basis for up to three years initially, leading to longer-term appointments or tenure later subject to review.
>
>
>
Suppose, after three years the employer finds that the candidate didn't perform as expected, and hence the candidate fails to obtain a tenure.
What would be the implication for the candidate as far as his/her career in academia is concerned? How would his/her next potential employers see this?<issue_comment>username_1: The immediate consequence of not getting tenure is probably that the person's contract is not renewed and that person is now unemployed.
What that means for the future career depends on the circumstances. There are some universities that hire three or more persons on tenure track position for every tenured position available. In that case not making it is not great, but not horrible either. There are other universities where one tenure track position is filled for every tenured position and you'd have to do something pretty bad to not get that tenured position. Now not getting that postion is bad. And than there is everything in between.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: "Next potential employers" will likely consider your research and teaching credentials (rather than whether you were not tenured in your 3-year position).
For example: You do not get tenure at Harvard. You apply to places the next tier down. Many of them will be happy to get you (depending on your publications).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This answer applies to the US, perhaps elsewhere, but I have no explicit knowledge.
A three year conditional contract that doesn't result in tenure at the end is usually followed by another. Tenure will seldom be awarded after the first three year contract but if no progress is made there might not be a second try. After six years a decision is made. If the candidate fails to achieve tenure then, they will usually get a terminal one year contract in which they are expected to find employment elsewhere.
It is possible that someone fails to gain tenure simply because the conditions at the university have changed and they can not commit to a long term hire. Perhaps a couple of older faculty were expected to retire but did not. Letters from department chairs and deans explaining this will help mitigate the damage for the future and could even result in strong recommendations to other places. This is usually rare, but in difficult economic conditions (COVID) it happens.
Depending on the university that fails to grant tenure, the candidate might have a hard time getting employed, especially at one with a more or less equal reputation. But, the US has a lot of colleges and universities and failing to get tenure for research might not have a lot of effect for a teaching college, many of which are excellent.
Some places will offer support for candidates along the way, coaching them in the important aspects at that university.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/07
| 592
| 2,568
|
<issue_start>username_0: My department's chair was due to renew this year. There was a search where, through an anonymous survey, short-listed candidates represented tenured faculty members with the most support from colleagues. But the search failed as all short-listed candidates ended up declining the offer. A new search committee is being formed and should it fail again, the dean will have the authority to appoint a new chair (likely an external person).
Having joined the department as a teaching-stream faculty member for six years, I just received my tenure a year ago. I chaired curriculum committees in both the departmental and faculty levels, and I have taught almost all foundational, compulsory courses in our undergraduate program.
I am now debating whether I should volunteer myself to the search committee (or to the entire faculty to gain more support in the survey). There will be standard teaching release and monetary compensation. What would be the points for me to consider? (For examples, am I just too junior to attempt this role? Should I wait until I'm "fully prepared"?)<issue_comment>username_1: There are departments in which the chair position rotates on a schedule, with all tenured faculty taking their turn at the task. And it is a task. A thankless task in some places, but not all.
People turn down an offer because they see their current work as more important or they just see the chair as too much administrative work or ....
I'd suggest that letting people know you would be willing to take the job is fine, though the normal process will still be followed, I assume.
If the department is research focused, you might not be considered, I suppose, though you would be expected to support all important department objectives even if that isn't your main focus. But that is true of anyone, actually.
If the chair serves for a limited term in that capacity it would be more likely that you would be considered.
But yes, it is acceptable that you put your name in the hat.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: @username_1 is right to say sure, you can let it be known that you're willing.
That said, think about why you want (or are willing to undertake) the job. Is it a good professional move for you at this moment? Will the money and release from teaching compensate for the administrative work? Do you know and respect the office staff, who will be important to you? Do you get along with the dean? Are you doing this for you or because you care about the department and the students (could be all three)?
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/08/07
| 2,222
| 9,636
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc researcher (more than five years after PhD) with an average publishing record. I have been contacted by a journal asking me to become part of their editorial board. I am, however, unsure whether I should accept. In particular, the fact that the publisher’s journals are unknown (at least to me), and appear to be of very recent foundation, which may suggest that they could be disreputable or predatory. Also, I am not an established professor, so offering such a role appears somewhat premature. On the other hand, being a board member is a recognized career title (at least where I work). More broadly, I am asking how to evaluate such offers, as I may be contacted again in the future by other publishers.
Other things to consider:
1. I have searched the publisher's name through Beall's list (although this is less useful now, as it is no longer actively maintained) and other similar sources. Recently, I have received similar requests by publishers who are listed as predatory; of course, I ignored such requests.
2. I have contacted the only board member whose name I recognized (he is a professor at another university). He confirmed he was a member, but he admitted having accepted mostly as a form of courtesy, as he knew little about them.
3. Being of very recent foundation, they have a limited online footprint. Only a handful of papers are available on their website; I do not know the authors, and I find it hard to evaluate the quality of said papers, since they are not within my specific field of expertise (although the broader scope of the journal on the whole is compatible with my research).
I am worried that being associated with a predatory publisher may impact my credibility. How should I proceed? Note: I have read [this previous discussion](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44620/is-it-bad-to-join-the-editorial-board-of-a-journal-on-beall-s-list), but in this case I have no evidence that the publisher is untrustworthy. [This discussion](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/101763/an-invitation-to-join-the-editorial-board-of-a-newly-launched-journal) is also relevant, but it appears somewhat outdated. Some suggest contacting the editor in chief, but I do not know them personally.<issue_comment>username_1: Say no.
I get these "please join our editorial board" invitations all the time.
The (new) journal wants to be able to advertise a significant editorial board.
The journal may or may not be predatory. Doesn't matter.
I think your contact who accepted "as a courtesy" made a mistake.
The position will add nothing useful to your cv.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm going to differ from username_1 and say you should consider it. It's not a concern that you are invited even though you're not a professor, because there's no rule that says only professors can join editorial boards. There is a requirement that you be an expert on your field, and sufficiently senior postdocs will be an expert on their field (I'd even argue that fresh PhD graduates are experts on their field, it's just that "their field" is very narrow so the scope of papers they can handle is also very narrow). Furthermore, as you write, you have no evidence they are untrustworthy. All new journals start by forming an editorial board, which matches what you're seeing.
That said, you should evaluate the offer similarly to how you evaluate offers to collaborate (which is effectively what this is). Things you should figure out:
* Are they an open access publisher or hybrid (fully subscription publishers are practically non-existent at this point)? If they're publishing subscription content, the chances of them being predatory (in the traditional sense of the word) plummets, arguably to zero. However, the fact that you could read the papers on their website suggests they are open access.
* What do they expect from you? Are you only handling papers, or are they expecting something else (you to submit papers, represent the journal at conferences, attend editorial board meetings, set the journal's strategy and direction, lead some special issue, etc.)?
* How many papers do they expect you to handle? You need to know this to estimate how much time commitment is required. If you've never edited before, it can be hard to tell, but get a concrete articles/month number and you can consult a more senior academic to convert that into a time estimate. For new journals it can be *extremely* hard to provide this estimate (because new journals struggle to get submissions), but you still need an upper limit beyond which you simply cannot spend more time on the journal.
* How much support do they provide? On one extreme you have publishers which pretty much do everything and expect only a decision from you. On the other extreme you have publishers which expect you to do everything, and they only start getting involved once you decide to accept a paper. Needless to say the latter is much more time-consuming for you, but the peer review process will generally be less controversial because you have direct oversight and you can be expected to do a better job than the publisher.
* What benefits do they provide you? If you're one editorial board member among many, it's highly unlikely they will pay you a substantial honorarium, but they might offer other benefits (e.g. travel grants, waived APCs).
You also want to evaluate:
* Who are you talking to? Most probably it's another editorial board member, or an employee of the publisher. In both cases, you could have a serious conversation with them. You could ask them what kind of niche they see the journal occupying, what competitive advantages the journal will have, how they plan to compete with established journals, etc. These are all difficult questions that tell you how serious the journal/publisher is & how experienced the journal leadership will be.
* In the same vein, if you're talking to an employee of the publisher, you might be able to find out more about them from Google. Another thing would be to see how straight they are with their answers. If they're using vague language & it's unclear if they understand you, then communicating with them in the future could be frustrating.
The point of this is that starting a new high-quality journal is a very difficult thing. If the person you're talking to doesn't realize how much of a challenge it is, then they can't be very experienced with publishing, and there's a high chance the journal will fail. I would be more inclined to decline then. Also, you can email the editor-in-chief even if you don't know them (they will be receiving quite a few emails from people they don't know, asking about the submission process).
Once you have all the information, then you can answer the question: given what they are asking from you and what they offer in return, is it worth taking up the offer? This isn't that dissimilar from an offer to collaborate on some research project - they both take up some of your time and offer something in return. It's up to you to decide if the 'something in return' is worth the time you'll need to invest. If you're still unsure, you could try talking to your postdoc supervisor about it.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The response by @username_2 is measured and raises many good points. However, I think that your specific situation is much simpler: **if you don't know anything about the journal that offers you a place at the editorial board, don't ever consider the offer seriously**. This is why I believe this would be the case:
* The fact that you don't know the journal tells you immediately that this is either a journal quite far from where you normally read/publish, or a new journal.
* If this is an established journal outside of your normal reading/publishing circle, just ask yourself, how much would you trust a judgement of someone who entrusts editing responsibilities to a person completely outside of the same reading/publishing circle. It could just be someone very careless, but a more likely explanation would be that this is a publication by a predatory publisher who are in it to make money, not build reputations.
* If this was a new journal, the situation is a bit similar. Just imagine yourself deciding to create a new journal and trying to get a good team of editors. Would you send cold letters to anyone qualified, or would you try to get people you trust professionally? Even if you are trying to fill a very specific niche that cannot be covered by people you have immediately available, you'd probably attempt finding the right person via your network of contacts and not just send cold letters around.
I also have some good news. It does not matter very much what you do. Getting onto a board of a journal, even if comes from a shady publisher, is not going to damage your reputation. It does look a bit desperate to be on the board of one of these "vanity" journals, or to have such positions shown on your CV, but I often see established researchers on these boards and I've never heard anyone being seriuosly criticized for having these positions. There are two reasons for this:
* Vanity is a common human trait, and working in academia does not make you immune. This makes predatory publishing possible, but it also means that you would not be judged too harshly.
* I've seen people making a good job out of such positions, despite all the downsides of a new or a fake journal. Sometimes, people publish good research in all sorts of strange places, for all sorts of reasons, good and bad alike.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/07
| 2,529
| 10,785
|
<issue_start>username_0: Professor's personal web pages hosted by their institution are crucial sources of information in two ways:
1. to disseminate useful and practical but not publishable information (especially in systems programming)
2. to disseminate supplemental data, source code, and software. Google killed Google Code, and people are apprehensive about the long-term fate of GitHub since it was acquired by Microsoft. As such, a lot of people put source code in their university web pages. Now we have Zenodo and FigShare, but those are relatively new.
* E.g., I wanted to do an experiment involving an older system (published on ~10 years ago), and according to the author, it's source code has been deleted by their old institution when they left to teach at a different university. Reviewers will probably object that my evaluation is incomplete since it is lacking the older one, but there is no extant copy of that older system to compare to!
I have three questions:
1. Is it normal to delete when the professor moves or retires? I can't find it stated anywhere in official university policy. What's the policy at your institution?
2. What was the point of hosting that in the first place if it is going to be deleted eventually? If the purpose was to disseminate information, the fact that it will disappear so quickly defeats the purpose of having it at all. In the long run, it just leads to the creation of dead links.
3. What are the main constraints the university is facing that cause them to stop hosting that data? If the issue is cost, how does hosting ~100KiB for even as large as 10,000 past and present faculty (total ~1GiB) become prohibitive for a university?<issue_comment>username_1: Given that it's 2023, and that both university administrations and many older faculty didn't catch on to "the internet" until the last 10-20 years or so, there is really no long-term precedent for how to deal with the question of faculty work posted on their university web pages. The main approach has been to try to not count this as being anything official, anyway. There still is the confusion about literal publishing (= on the internet) versus "publishing" in the once-sensible, but now-archaic, meaning of "passing peer-review for a 'journal'".
I myself see this as somewhat analogous to "the problem" of what to do with books/scrolls before the idea of "library" was established... :)
A disturbing (to me) difference is the idea of the ephemeralness of stuff on the internet. Indeed, lots of stuff is not really meant to be looked at more than once, if at all, and many things are of-the-moment. The concept of long-term or even permanently-useful things does not seem to be in harmony with "the internet", as we see it currently.
On another hand, given the lack of precedent, possibly there is a (near-?) future equilibrium that none of us has the imagination to see?
Since I've written lots of mathematical stuff, most of it aiming to be helpful to other people, I do have an impulse to try to keep it available "after I'm gone". At this point, I do not see a reliable means to do that. Some conventional books, ok. Do all of us have to allocate some of our estates to server fees for our life's work? "The state" has paid for libraries in the past (though "books" are apparently less popular in some quarters than they once were), so an author of a serious book did not have to allocate money to their book's continued existence.
Another plausible attitude is that it's just as well to lose "old stuff", since an accumulation of that old stuff imposes an ever-increasing burden on younger people. :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Personal webpages for professors have their roots in smart individuals fiddling with the Internet well before it became standard for universities and businesses to have their own massive webpages. Most were home-spun and might even have been written in plain HTML.
This is not a good archival system.
In the last 15 years, as universities have built out giant web pages and systems, someone's not likely going to get `www.podunk.edu/faculty/JSmith` anymore, as websites become more sophisticated.
I have never run across a webpage that has been deleted, but it is not surprising to me that some IT departments have begun to trim these random hangers-on webpages from 20 years ago and probably two or three massive system overhauls (could even have been an accident in 2018 that no one noticed erased Smith, emeritus professor's webpage last updated in 2009).
While yes, universities are repositories of knowledge, it may just not have occurred to whoever was in charge that any thing like that may be lost if they clean up those old webpages.
>
> What was the point of hosting that in the first place if it is going to be deleted eventually?
>
>
>
I don't think that just because something might be gone later, doesn't mean there's no reason to host it now? Nobody in 2004 was there to say "<NAME>, we are going to delete this webpage when you retire in 2020, so don't post it now."
>
> What are the main constraints the university is facing that cause them to stop hosting that data?
>
>
>
Obviously, these aren't huge storage demands.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Why would you not delete the webpages of people who are no longer in your employ?
* Hosting their webpages makes it seem like they still work at your institution, but they are no longer in your employ.
* By extension, you save the time of people looking for the professor, since they won't e.g. compose emails to the professor's @myinstitution.edu email address then find it bounced.
* You can't easily modify those webpages, because they're *personal* webpages.
* Even if the source code is worth hosting, it might not be licensed for you to distribute. The professor could (and arguably should) bring it with them to wherever they are now.
* *What was the point of hosting that in the first place if it is going to be deleted eventually?* In the long run we are all dead, C++/Python/whatever language the code is written in will become a historical relic, and the Sun will go nova, so what was the point of hosting anything in the first place?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: A university website is not an archive, and the people working at the IT department are not professional archivists. If you want to seriously think about preserving knowledge from people no longer there (or no longer interested in maintaining it), you need a different place to store it and different people to maintain it and make it accessible.
For example, in my field it is important to preserve data, and now there is an international network of national level data archives that professionally preserve and maintain accessibility of that data. This only happened after each university tried to do this on its own, with very mixed results. I remember a story of data stored on punch-cards in the university basement. Punch-cards are cardboard and mice will eat bits of cardboard. You can imagine the rest of the story.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: In my experience there are two common situations.
1. The university's provision for web-hosting is centrally managed, and tied to the user's university-wide access credentials. These are themselves tied to HR's employee database. Once someone leaves the university, this automatically triggers processes that lead to their computer accounts being deactivated. A consequence of this is that faculty websites disappear. Probably nobody ever consciously made the decision that this is what *should* happen - it just arises naturally from the way the web hosting is implemented.
2. Faculty websites are hosted on an *ad hoc* basis, using a server run by a department or similar. Typically such websites persist for longer. However, at some point the system dies and is replaced by something newer. It is left to individual users to port their website from the old system to the new system, and so websites that no longer have an active owner disappear by default. Again, this is largely driven by practicalities - the alternative would be paying someone to deal with it, and no single person in the organisation cares enough to find the money for that.
There are also a number of practical, legal and security concerns associated with hosting unmaintained content. Information may be out of date and misleading (e.g., course syllabi that are no longer correct) or legally questionable (e.g. due to changes in privacy laws). There is also the risk that such websites (ab)use components or services that have not been updated for a significant period, and are known attack vectors. All in all, from the university's corporate perspective there is little sense in retaining a site that nobody is willing to take responsibility for.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: To add to the excellent answers already posted:
One of the functions of professors' web pages is to give prospective students and faculty a glimpse into the areas of research and publishing that the particular university department is involved in. It would be deeply disappointing to join a university and realize that the majority of the interesting and pertinent research goals being discussed belong to faculty no longer associated with the university.
(Yes, one could get some idea by checking when each page was last updated, but that is a relatively tedious and manual process, and it may be difficult to tell the difference between a faculty member who rarely updates their pages and one who left last year after being denied tenure.)
In addition, orphaned pages can no longer be edited to, for example, remove links to retracted or superseded papers; in some cases stale information can be worse than no information, for example sharing source code with known and widely exploited security holes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: As yet unmentioned: copyright and distribution rights.
At most universities, the professor retains the copyright to material that they produce. The the university does not have the legal authority to continue distributing a professor's materials without their explicit consent. If the professor does not continue making it available, then the university cannot do so in their place.
For example, my employment contract grants my university a one-year, non-exclusive license to use all of the teaching materials I have used in a course taught at the university. This is the "hit by a bus" clause- if I were to be hit by a bus or otherwise suddenly removed from my teaching position, my department would have a one year window to continue teaching with my materials, but after that they need to figure something else out.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/08
| 976
| 3,977
|
<issue_start>username_0: 1. People start recognizing you as an important researcher in the community.
2. You don't get much credit for the paper, as the assumption will be that the senior researchers have done most of the heavy lifting, and that you were more of a scribe.
Which of these options is closer to the truth?<issue_comment>username_1: Joining a project with more senior people can be a benefit to your career. Assuming they are reputable there is little downside. You get to work with more experienced people, engage in research/technical conversations, get and share ideas.
If you publish with them, your papers are more likely to be read, based on their reputations. But, beyond that, you have an opportunity to greatly expand your circle of collaboration, potentially leading to other projects in the future. The experienced people already have a circle that you can be integrated into.
Eventually you want first and sole-author publications, but it isn't essential to start out that way, especially if people don't take notice or your work is lacking due to less experience and depth.
If they write grant proposals, get involved in that, just for the experience.
Some people are generous about authorship, letting you take the lead. One more paper is more important for you than for them. Yes, people may assume that the senior person had the ideas, but if they are good ideas then you get associated with them. The other assumption people will make is that this senior person sees something valuable in you. That vote of confidence can be helpful.
Treat your early career as a continuation of your learning experience and an opportunity to make and develop lots of contacts - especially with people who have a lot of ideas.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Hi my thoughts on your points
1. You may indeed be able to reach out to those on the paper with you, or connect with them at events/conferences and thereby meet even more people. This is probably the most valuable thing, you will need to make this happen though, just having your name on the paper isn't much use on its own.
2. This is not case. I would say most will understand that it is the senior researcher that is lending their prestige, vision, planning capabilities and authority to the work mostly done by others and described in the paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I have coauthored papers with undergraduates and also with a Nobel Prize winner. In my experience, the fame of my coauthors was unimportant and there were no consequences.
Some people will read your paper, cite it, write more positive reviews, or try to hire you because your coauthor is famous. Those people's opinions are not worth much and do not have much consequence.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: A study from 2019 looked at this very question.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>. et al. Early coauthorship with top scientists predicts success in academic careers. *Nat Commun* **10**, 5170 (2019). <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13130-4>
Here's their abstract:
>
> We examined the long-term impact of coauthorship with established,
> highly-cited scientists on the careers of junior researchers in four
> scientific disciplines. Here, using matched pair analysis, we find
> that junior researchers who coauthor work with top scientists enjoy a
> persistent competitive advantage throughout the rest of their careers,
> compared to peers with similar early career profiles but without top
> coauthors. Such early coauthorship predicts a higher probability of
> repeatedly coauthoring work with top-cited scientists, and,
> ultimately, a higher probability of becoming one. Junior researchers
> affiliated with less prestigious institutions show the most benefits
> from coauthorship with a top scientist. As a consequence, we argue
> that such institutions may hold vast amounts of untapped potential,
> which may be realised by improving access to top scientists.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/09
| 1,245
| 5,291
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a STEM field, my advisor is a theoretician, and my work is mostly experimental. My job is to implement an idea that exists purely in theory and see how it holds up in practice.
Recently, my advisor asked me to look into doing an experiment based on theory which he had published several years prior (but which was itself not substantiated by any experiments).
I initially had reservations, as I felt the paper he had published used a model which was simply not realistic enough to be useful in practice, and that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to run experiments to prove his theory. I did not voice these, as at the time, I was a very junior student who knew very little, so this was just my gut telling me that this probably wouldn't go well, but I might as well try and see what happens.
After spending a lot of time (roughly 8 months) implementing his ideas, and testing them first-hand, I came to the conclusion that his model does not work in reality for a multitude of reasons. He seems convinced that I am doing something wrong and has even harshly compared me to others, saying "if I gave this task to X, they would have easily done this experiment in a week". While I could have believed such a statement at the start of this project, I am now convinced, based on my own expertise, that he has no idea what he is talking about, as all the work he does is in theory-land, and he has never done experimental work before, and doesn't understand fundamental differences between theory and practice. But he is adamant and told me if I don't finish this project with good results to meet a certain deadline, then he would probably have to stop supporting me with funding.
Three big problems:
1. He has a big ego, and is convinced his theory holds in real life, even though he has no experimental experience.
2. It's just me and him on the project, so there is no unbiased third party that is also an expert on the topic whose advice we could use.
3. He is operating from a sunk cost fallacy: "I spent so much time and effort on this student so he better produce something rather than spend all this time to get a negative result. Might as well get rid of him, so give him an ultimatum".
Is it time that I finished working with this professor and his doomed projects ?
I see little recourse, given the circumstances, and am curious what course of action other intelligent people would take in such a situation.<issue_comment>username_1: I would change advisors. You two are clearly not compatible.
Leaving aside the particulars of the case, I think you need to find an advisor who is also an experimentalist.
Of course, you want to do this as diplomatically as possible, especially if your advisor has a lot of power in the department. You might want to talk to the department chair. But programs want graduate students to succeed. Even if not for emotional reasons, then for practical ones. Having students not graduate looks bad.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I hate to suggest it, since I doubt it will help you, but showing definitely that some approach fails can be as valuable to the research community as showing that something succeeds. It is the truth of it, as best we can determine, that matters.
I worry, though, if your advisor is implying that you have to verify their underlying assumptions, rather than truly researching the question even if it results in a refutation.
You don't seem to have a trusting relationship, otherwise I'd suggest you talk it over with them. You can judge the wisdom of that approach.
But, I have to agree with [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/200448/75368) that a new advisor might be your best route to success.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In the long run, academia will not honor your work if it somehow looks bad, even if this is not your fault. Your advisor should not be the only person in the room with an ego.
Don't just comply with what you think is an unreasonable demand. But be tactful. Both of the above comments contain good advice, I think.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A negative answer is also a useful answer itself. Why could you not just provide some 90% C.L. rejection of the theory or its certain rules as the output of your experiments?
Describing the theory itself, detailing experimental methods, providing statistical analysis and summary, and giving conclusions and future outlooks is already good research. Moreover, you can complete this task with ideas of experimental setups, how to verify results using other approaches, etc. It's hard to recommend what to do without domain information, but overall, work is done; you just need to validate results, discuss with your supervisor in a good manner, and publish a paper. Who knows, perhaps the experiment was incorrect and will be proven in the next 20 years, or perhaps you will be proven correct soon.
Negative results are also results; science is not only about positive results.
Some physics' domains publish exclusion regions with some C.L. because they didn't find anything, but what they found was something where the region is not possible to happen (exclusion region).
Good luck with your research.
Let us know how things evolved at the end.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/09
| 1,348
| 5,636
|
<issue_start>username_0: Multiple times, for multiple publishers, I have received an automated email, sent through editorial manager software, asking me to referee a paper. When I click on the link in the mail, I am first prompted to agree with the publisher's "Privacy Policy".
This policy, among other things, grants the publisher the right to use my personal data for marketing purposes, and to sell my personal data to third parties for their marketing purposes.
I do not see why I should consent to any such thing, as a condition of agreeing to do review work for free.
Is there any way I can meaningfully push back against this, without antagonizing the scientists on the editorial board? My disagreement is with the publisher, not with them.<issue_comment>username_1: As suggested in comments, just refuse to review for the journal. If you want to tell them why, it might (or not) have an effect on their policies.
Those scientists on the board will have more clout than you do in effecting change in policies. But they may need to be made aware of the issue and that others consider it important. Just. Say. No.
Those editors have no reason to be insulted as the policies aren't theirs. Simple phrasing of a declining email can make this clear.
But gathering personal information for sale is sadly now ubiquitous. At least they are honest enough to tell you about their policy.
Also note that reviewers provide a valuable service to the publisher (as well as the scientific community). They should treat you better than to sell your personal information.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are in the European Union, the publisher is breaking the law (regardless of where *they* are based). *Some* organisations break the law [as a calculated move](https://doi.org/10.1086/468061), but most that do do so "accidentally": owing to the ignorance, incompetence or arrogance of employees, or to procedural failings. This kind of situation can often be resolved with an email.
In this email, you may optionally CC your GDPR supervisory authority, and/or the supervisory authority of the publisher's EU headquarters (if they have one). The Italian DPA maintains [a list of DPAs](https://garanteprivacy.it/web/garante-privacy-en/useful-links). Many data protection authorities have policies you should follow before contacting the supervisory authority; for example, [the UK's ICO](https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/data-protection-complaints/what-to-expect/) requires 30 days' notice (and ongoing engagement) before escalating. Do keep these in mind.
---
**To:** Publisher's Legal Department
**CC:** Editors ; Own Country Supervisory Authority ; Publisher Country Supervisory Authority
**Subject:** Refereeing without additional data processing
Dear Publisher's Legal Department,
I have been invited to review a paper for Name of Journal. Before I can accept this invitation, your website requires me (per the Privacy Policy) to consent to "quotation from privacy policy". As per Articles 6 and 7 of the GDPR, this is *far* from being valid consent for the data processing: you are not permitted to use the data you've collected on EU residents for this purpose, and I'd appreciate if you didn't.
I would like to accept this invitation to referee for Name of Journal, but I object and do not consent to the use of my personal data for these additional purposes. Per GDPR §7.3 and §7.4, please allow me to accept the invitation to referee.
Yours faithfully,
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: My simple solution: Do not give the publisher any of your personal information.
The only personal information the journal needs to get a peer review from you is your name and professional email address. This information is likely already on your employer's website and in journal articles you have published.
If you hate browser cookies, you can ask the editor to email the article and then email them back the review.
I do not see any benefits to your privacy from sending complaints or from refusing to review.
Most of the annoying marketing relating to journal publishing uses names and email addresses which are collected by web crawlers. The annoying marketers do not buy your information from publishers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You are correct to not consent to the ever growing data collecting. We all should do more in declining to share our data.
If you already have contact to an editor, or can see the email address of an editor int the automatic mail you received, a short text akin to "i'd like to review the paper. However, your privacy policy is unnacceptable in the current form, i will never freely consent to my data being used for your marketing purposes. Please let your legal team know that if your policy changes to more acceptable and less intrusive & abusive terms, i'd be happy to review for you." should be sufficient to relay the issue to the journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Approach that worked for me when I encountered the same situation in 2019:
* I e-mailed the relevant associate editor setting out the problem and asking if they knew of a workaround.
* The AE passed the query on to the on-staff handler for that journal at the publishing house.
* The handler suggested the AE e-mail the manuscript to me and I return my review by e-mail, thus bypassing the web interface and never having to agree to its Ts&Cs. Therefore, that's what we did.
I'd imagine this is a very common problem, because lots of publishing houses outsource their online handling of reviews to the same organisation that authored the offending Ts&Cs.
Upvotes: 4
|
2023/08/09
| 1,911
| 7,629
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am intending to pursue a PhD program (pharmaceutics) in the US. I will have a student visa. I am trying to figure out the best approach to take so as to move with my family (wife and 2 children who are currently aged 4 years and 10 years respectively).
I will be funded entirely by stipends I may get while studying, so I am wondering:
* Is it possible for student stipends and on-campus/off-campus jobs
support the entire family expenses (basic things, accommodation and
school fees for the kids) while pursuing my PhD?
* What are the chances or ways to get my wife a job?
* Which state can I find affordable houses that can accommodate a
family of four?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, it is the big cities that are expensive here, especially housing, especially the Bay Area of California. A more rural university (in any state) might have cheaper housing, but possibly not if the university is large. In your field(s) this might be a problem due to the location of suitable universities. You will need to do some research on that.
Your spouse probably won't be able to work for pay, but you might be able to reduce living expenses a bit by sharing some things (child care) with other families.
Schooling for children is free here (public schools). In university towns it can be quite good. Private schools are expensive, sometimes very expensive.
There may still be a few universities that provide low cost married student housing (small 2BR apartments) for graduate students, but this seems to be disappearing, I think.
Grants for graduate study are rare in most fields, especially for international students. Most of the funding is for Teaching Assistants, but only in fields and places that have a large undergraduate major in that field, requiring lots of assistants. There are also Research Assistantships in some fields, but less common. This might be your best bet, given your field. A TA stipend is generally sufficient to live (cheaply) for someone with a family. Can your kids share a room? Harder if not.
Moving from a student visa to a permanent one might be an issue in the long term if that is your desire.
If you have some special qualifications that add value to the department you wish to join, special experience or skills, you might be able to negotiate a bit. But this is also rare, unless you can appeal to some professor (PI) who is well funded and needs your skills.
Good luck.
---
I'm not quite as pessimistic as <NAME>, though what he says is true. But academics will be more welcoming of immigrants than politicians. I expect that if you can make it work at all, you won't find many issues at the university or among the university community. Your spouse, for example, might be able to join a circle of student spouses that can be rewarding, though not financially. With shared child care, your spouse might even be able to become a student there.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no standard way in which graduate students are funded in the US. It ranges from students who pay for everything (food, rent, fees, tuition, office supplies, computers, travel to conferences and health insurance, etc.) to fully-funded positions that cover all of these. Yes, including meals, and I know because I had such a position while a graduate student. Departments offer more to attract better graduate students, so you can expect the better funded positions to be more competitive. Between those two extremes, everything goes. Most graduate students get a tuition remission and earn their rent money by working as Teaching Assistants, that is, teaching courses or labs.
It is entirely possible for a family of 4 to support itself while one of the parents goes to graduate school. I did exactly that. There are too many factors to discuss in a short answer here, but in short trying to find such a spot in a New York City or anywhere in California is impossible, while entirely possible in the south of the US and in Midwest states. Catholic universities have a tradition of supporting students with families with subsidized housing and other incentives.
Student visas only allow you to work on campus, but finding such jobs will entirely depend on the university. Some universities offer good jobs at at good pay (e.g. museum assistant, library work, research assistant, office work, etc.), while at other universities competition for any kind of on-campus job is fierce and the jobs not nice (e.g. night shift at study hall, event catering, etc.). It's entirely possible to hold more than one job, although, of course, the more jobs you have the less time you'll have to work on your research. But what people don't understand is that for many international students, the alternative is not extra jobs vs. not driving a nice car, but extra jobs vs. not getting a PhD at all. One needs to pay for food and rent, there's no way around that.
As the spouse of a student on a visa, your wife will not get a work permit. But off-the-books jobs in the US are plentiful, and in fact, the entire economy depends on a subclass of people working but receiving no benefits like social security, unemployment benefits, worker's comp, etc. I am a US-born natural citizen but grew up in another nation, so I identify more with immigrants than with my fellow US citizens, and in graduate school mostly socialized with immigrant students. Their spouses held a myriad of jobs, e.g. picking fruit, working in factories, bartending, construction, landscaping, that is, every job US citizens balk at doing because of the harsh conditions and low pay. Which jobs your spouse can get will depend mostly on the color of her skin and accent. If you are Irish or English, she should easily be able to jet a job as a bartender or high-end nanny. If you have brown skin and an accent, then it's construction, fruit picking, meat factory, cleaning, etc.
The trick to making ends meet as an immigrant family of a graduate student is to ask other immigrants. Most US citizens are oblivious to the lives of immigrants, except for what they watch on TV. But immigrants do find a way, and it's not impossible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it possible for student stipends and on-campus/off-campus jobs support the entire family expenses (basic things, accommodation and school fees for the kids) while pursuing my PhD?
>
>
>
It's a stretch.
* These stipends are usually sufficient for a single student to find a decent apartment (often shared) and buy meals and other necessities. Stretching this to cover a family of four will be tough.
* Your wife will probably not be allowed to work (legally) in the US.
* It is unlikely that you will be allowed to work off campus. You would have to apply for permission from ICE, and [their guidelines](https://www.ice.gov/sevis/employment) state that such applications will be approved only after you've been here for a year, and only if your economic situation has deteriorated from what it was during that first year, due to factors beyond your control.
>
> Which state can I find affordable houses that can accommodate a family of four?
>
>
>
You can look up cost-of-living calculators. But bear in mind that schools in less expensive areas usually offer lower stipends, whereas schools in more expensive areas may offer subsidized, on-campus housing. So it's not necessarily as simple as "which state is cheapest."
I recommend reaching out to some of the schools you're interested in and ask if there are any grad students in a similar situation to you that can tell you what worked for them.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/09
| 2,548
| 10,440
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a master's student in Germany. I am currently writing my thesis and am more or less done with it.
Last week, I wrote my Conclusions and Methodology, so the only things left are the Introduction and the Abstract. But I am not satisfied with my work at all. I do not think I serves any purpose and I do not even think it is worth anything. I am very stressed and anxious, and I am really thinking of not submitting at all. I want to do more work and more research but with only 3 weeks left b before the deadline (there is not much to do). I have pushed writing the Introduction for 3 days now. It is Wednesday and I was supposed to start writing it on Monday.
How do I get myself together and just get it done? 20 days left to the submission.<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible that your judgement of the value is flawed. After all, you probably know more about the topic than almost anyone else and so it seems to you, with your knowledge, to be less than it is.
I suggest that you talk to a couple of people. One is an advisor or other trusted faculty member. But the other is a counsellor, who can advise you on why your feelings at the moment might not match the reality of the situation. This is an issue similar to [Imposter Syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome) actually, though directed at the work rather than yourself.
A counsellor is good for stress reduction also, I suspect.
You may just need to turn the remains work into a scheduling problem, wading through the swamp of it to reach the other side.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You are just a master student starting your path in research. From the way your question is worded, your expectations of what your work was supposed to be are extremely high (and probably unattainable). I would suggest you to talk with your advisor (the other person besides you that knows what your work is about), ask him what he thinks about the work you did and about your performance in the program. But, besides everything, try to fix a date where you sit and write what is remaining! For example, promise yourself that this Friday, at 15:00 hours, you will sit down in front your monitor and start writing. Fixing times like that helped me overcome the [fear of a blank page](https://justpublishingadvice.com/the-blank-page-holds-no-fear-for-a-brave-writer/). Even if what you write is not good enough, the next day you will not be confronted by a blank page, instead you will have a draft that can be modified. If the thoughts of not being good enough keep lurking you, remember that everybody face that kind of negative feelings.
From <NAME>'s wikipedia page:
>
> Under the supervision of <NAME> she wrote her dissertation, ""On
> Complete Systems of Invariants for Ternary Biquadratic Forms", (...)
> Although it had been well received, Noether later described her thesis and a
> number of subsequent similar papers she produced as "crap".
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I gave this advice to one of my friends, who finished his thesis, and thought it helpful:
1. It's time to write, not read. Start writing what you can.
2. You also will have a list of references and/or bibiliography, work
on that.
3. You likely will have figures, so work on them also.
Also, make a ring on a piece of paper, like a circular pie chart. Estimate the percentage that you are done and start filling in the circle, this will help motivate you.
Finally, you already have an "emergency thesis" in your mind that you will fall back on. Commit that to paper, you can improve it if need be.
Be in communication with your advisor, or if this isn't possible, a mentor that you trust. An "intelligent sounding board" is always useful.
Best wishes!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I felt similar when writing my master's thesis. I even expressed feelings of having wasted a bunch of time writing something that was so narrow and specific that I couldn't imagine anyone could ever benefit from it. My advisor shared that this is often the way with research. She likened each project to a single grain of sand. In researching, you are illuminating one particular grain of knowledge. Taken with all the other offerings of the rest of your field, we get a clearer and clearer picture of how things really are.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You have 3 weeks before submission, only the intro left to write, and feel stuck? Now is a great time for **feedback**! Send your current manuscript to your supervisor, or another mentor, or a colleague, and ask them if they can give you some quick, honest feedback within the next few days. Just maybe write down a bullet-point type intro to help them understand the goal of your work and the most important notions.
While they read, take a break :)
You have lots of time left. I wrote my entire master's manuscript in about 2 weeks and it was fine. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Try to relax. What you feel is pretty normal.
Most students think they have produced nothing but crap when they are about to hand in their thesis. That's a consequence of the stress you have had in the recent months.
>
> I do not think I serves any purpose
>
>
>
It does. You will get your master's degree. *That's the only purpose of a master thesis.* Your supervisor will read it, grade it and put it onto a shelf in their office. And nobody will ever read it again. You do not have to hand in hundreds of pages of excellent scientific work. If you want that, continue with a doctorate.
>
> I am really thinking of not submitting at all
>
>
>
Do not be afraid of a bad grade or a failure. At our university, theses usually fail if they are either too short or not handed in at all. As long as your thesis meets the formal requirements (e.g. number of pages) and does not completely miss the point, you will get a decent grade.
If you do not submit it, you will fail, though. *And believe me, that's not worth it.*
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: It might sound stupid but here is something that just might work for you (everyone is different):
Go to a park (now the weather is also getting nicer again in Germany) with pen and paper, without laptop and start writing about your thesis like you would do for an introduction but also just notes or loosely connected thoughts you might have. The pace, environment is different than on a desk which could get you out of the routine that got you stuck at this point. Maybe you can even bring a friend with you and just talk about the thesis while making notes, a little back-and-forth to even further alter the setting that you are in.
Afterwards use your notes and form it into a proper introduction.
I do similar things when writing scientifically but also for songwriting: Just write something now, make it a proper text later. There is a chance that it might not work for you obviously but 20 days seems like plenty of time to write an abstract and introduction to fool around with some other method for one or two days.
Best of luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> I do not even feel like I have the tools to defend myself against his knowledge. That is what is giving me all the stress.
>
>
>
That would make perfect sense... if your thesis was in the discipline of [Defence Against the Dark Arts](https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Defence_Against_the_Dark_Arts).
If someone on your committee will act like it was a confrontation or a battle, that doesn't make them fit for that duty. So, I sincerely hope that nobody during examination will be openly antagonistic and trying to belittle your work. That's not the way to act, and none of that would be your fault. If they only noticed problems with your work during the examination, they have missed their chance at being useful. That's also why it's important that you make sure the committe is acquainted with the current draft of your work, and that you get as much feedback as you can *ahead of the examination*. Even the strongest critique - should there be any need for that at all - can be delivered in a professional and courteous manner. Academic environment is also about teaching - that means bringing up successors into the field.
Being prepared for examination doesn't mean cramming. Rather it means knowing what to expect from the examiners *by interacting with them previously*, enough so that you can be fairly confident that they are familiar with your work, approach, style of presentation, etc. and seem comfortable with it. **The examination should not have any surprises for you** - not because you've re-read all the subject notes from the entire degree's worth of material one week prior, but because you have a feel for what the edxaminers care about, which of their interests may intersect with your work, and so on. It's more about the human side of things that having your mind full of facts.
Unfortunately, on the Master's examination of one of my peers there was an openly hostile examiner who for no good reason whatsoever tried to find everything wrong with the student's work *only then* in spite of being familiar with it ahead of time, and not really raising any objections earlier. In my opinion that is unproductive - never mind terribly stressful for everyone, and probably cringe-inducing in other, more level-headed examiners in the same room. This is bad behavior - being aware of it should at least help you understand that none of your work can justify that.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: Instead of looking for inspiration or motivation to get you going so that you are riding on a wave of enthusiasm or enjoying the task, forget about all of that and only consider what will happen if you do not submit your work, forget motivation or how meaningful it all is or the meaning of life at this moment, just consider what will happen if you simply blow it off and do not submit your final work.
Also remember, perfection is the enemy of all things good.
If you cannot find the energy to do something because you do not see any real meaning in the reward you will get, or you simply cannot summon the interest and attention span to focus on the task, change your focus to the consequences of not doing it instead. You are not cherry-picking the perfect existence at your leisure you are avoiding certain disaster that comes from inaction.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/09
| 922
| 4,029
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am creating a software application for my bachelor thesis. I have found a book that guides me through the whole implementation process of my problem, as well as a source code and I am following the book. I am using Python instead of Java (which is the language used in the book). I am going to add some other functions too but more or less 90% of the application is based on the book. For sure I am going to reference it but it is for a thesis so I don't want to take my chances. Is it considered plagiarism if I follow these steps?
(I have tried other techniques as well but this seems like the most straightforward solution)<issue_comment>username_1: As long as you give proper attribution, you are not plagiarizing.
You *could* be violating copyright if you use code verbatim that is not licensed to you for the purpose you are using it, but it seems likely to me that the code in an educational book would have a pretty broad license.
However, you should definitely check with the person who is advising your thesis about *expectations for your thesis*. A bigger problem for you is that a thesis project is usually expected to have quite a bit of originality. Even if it's a collection of things that have already been done (a review/survey sort of paper), the expectation is likely that the *collection* part is novel/your own work: the part where you decide what to include. If you're working almost entirely from one source, you're not really doing much collecting to add value to your thesis. On the other hand, if these are just some necessary programming "pre steps" that get you towards the actual work you're doing, that may be totally fine. **Ask your advisor**. I'd also consider that if someone has written a book to show how to implement this thing, there's probably an existing Python package available open source that you could work from, instead, which would save you time and let you focus on the important parts.
It's not plagiarism to hand someone *an entire Stephen King novel* if you are clear and honest about saying "This entire book was written by <NAME>, and the only thing I've done is to obtain it from the library and hand it to you", but it won't earn you credit for completing a bachelor's thesis, either.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Iff you use it, comment your findings regarding WHY this book is better than the lots of other solutions you have read about.
Porting a software from language A to language B is not the achievement. It's the average programmers day job. The thing you maybe can score a little with is the comparison work, if done right.
Did you do proper research? Or is it just your hunch that this code from the book is better? And what means better? And did you prove that the code is correct? Is it efficient? What's the complexity? And is your solution working better not only in average case, but for *all* edge cases as well?
If you don't know what is meant by all that, use research about sorting algorithms as guidance. There are a ton of papers where people argue why some algorithm is better or worse than another, under which conditions.
Document that you thought about all that deeply. And don't hide the flaws. I'll bet you will find at least one, if you start looking deeper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: That's what citations and attributions exist for. You simply attribute the algorithm to the source you got it from and then continue to write about your own work, implementing said algorithm in a different coding language.
Also, rest easily knowing a bachelors thesis rarely goes beyond researching papers and the state of the art and bring it together for your certain little topic. Bachelor thesis is just your first step, proving you're capable of scientific and academic research, which for a big part is correctly attributing and citing. Also, chances are high that, besides yourself, your advisor and anybody to whom you share your thesis, nobody is ever going to read it anyway.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/08/09
| 1,048
| 4,390
|
<issue_start>username_0: While [this Mathematics SE answer](https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3829536/284619) might (or might not) be a straightforward exercise to a number theorist, to an experimental surface scientist it seems new, as-yet unpublished (in this field) and really helpful and enabling.
Queries in comments don't seem to indicate that the author has a keen interest in recognition for it (it's hard to ask direct personal questions of users in SE) but nonetheless I would like to cite it in a paper that might be destined for [Physical Review B](https://journals.aps.org/prb/) or [Review of Scientific Instruments](https://pubs.aip.org/aip/rsi) or similar in the scientific modeling/computing field, depending on how the paper finally fleshes out.
I'm curious how often SE answer posts are cited in scientific journal articles, and if there are (perhaps notable) precedents in the Physical sciences I could cite in an effort to put an editor (or reviewer) at ease who might otherwise balk at such a nonstandard reference format.
**Question:** Can I use a Stack Exchange answer post as references in journal articles in the physical sciences? Should I *a priori* include a mention of precedent along with the submission so that the editor doesn't balk?
---
**Q:** Why not just do as the post author suggests "Maybe their authors would know some good text for you to cite?" and avoid citing Stack Exchange
1. I'll be implementing this specific algorithm *exactly as written*, hints and caveats and all. (go have a look - it's quite complete and rigorous!) Other references will be less complete and applicable.
2. This is like a standard, named "private communication" except that it's public and less-named. **We do this in the academe** - we give credit where credit is due, we acknowledge the individuals who contribute even when not at the author level.
3. Personal reason: I'm a Stack Exchange enthusiast, and raising awareness that solid, useful, and yes citable material is available in mathematics and the sciences is good for the academe.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Can I use a Stack Exchange answer post as reference...
>
>
>
"Can" is not the right way to phrase this. You **must** credit sources for the intellectual content you use in a paper.
I think you should do some due diligence to make sure anything you use on Stack Exchange is actually original. It's not too hard to plagiarize here, and though there's rules against it, it isn't easy to enforce systematically. You really want to cite the original source and not a plagiarized copy (of course, this is relevant for things published in other places, too). You also need to be diligent that the content is *correct*: for math, hopefully you understand the content well enough to feel confident it is correct and verify any proofs the way you would if you were a peer reviewer. For other content, it may be more tricky and depend on how you intend to use the content and also whether the Stack Exchange post is *itself* drawing on cited sources.
Generally, I would say academics are more familiar with other sources, so if the same author has posted the same content in a preprint or paper, I'd prefer citing those. But, if not, you have to credit where you got the idea.
If you want to look for precedent in your research area, Google indexes the full text of papers, including references; if you search "stackexchange.com" you would discover papers that have cited something on Stack Exchange (likely also other uses, of course). Don't forget some content is on other domains like mathoverflow.net. But, if you've used content from any of these cites, you need to cite it, whether or not your colleagues have done so.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As the other answer mentions, as a matter of principle, you must cite your sources.
There is no need to mention to the editor that you cite Stack Exchange. They do not care.
As a matter of personal experience (not the same thing as a matter of principle or good practice), if you submit your manuscript to Physical Review, the editor and referees will not check your reference list (unless I am the referee). I usually observe that authors forget to cite important sources **even if they are written by the same authors**. The other referees do not notice, though it can be discovered with a brief Google Scholar search.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/09
| 1,319
| 4,501
|
<issue_start>username_0: The recent Politics SE question [Did China scientific incentives address the fact that the system can be gamed?](https://politics.stackexchange.com/q/80736/16047) includes the following:
>
>
> >
> > These guys have surveyed the financial incentives offered by the top 100 universities in China and mined that data for interesting trends. They say that cash-per-publication incentives are common and that **scientists who publish in the top Western journals can earn in excess of $100,000 per paper.** What’s more, there are already worrying signs that these financial rewards are skewing the process of science in China.
> >
> >
> > China has well over 1,000 universities. But in the 1990s it began a program called Project 211 to turn 100 of them into world-class institutions. “Eventually, 116 universities were admitted to Project 211, forming an elite group of universities occupying 70% of national research funding and supervising 80% of doctoral students,” say Wei and co.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> https://www.technologyreview.com/2017/07/12/150506/the-truth-about-chinas-cash-for-publication-policy/
>
>
>
**Question:** Is it really true that Chinese "scientists who publish in the top Western journals... earn in excess of $100,000 per paper" via cash-per-publication incentives?<issue_comment>username_1: There is likely more up-to-date information to be found, but the 2017 paper [<NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> *Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999-2016)*, Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69(5), 1-18 (2017)](https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0014) [[arXiv link](https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.01162)] states
>
> A landscape of the cash-per-publication reward policy in China emerged as all 168 cash reward
> policies were analyzed. Chinese universities offer cash rewards that range from 30 to 165,000
> USD for a single paper published in journals indexed by WoS, and the average reward amount
> has been increasing for the past 10 years. The results show us the overview of the cash-perpublication reward policies in terms of eligibility, amount, and their diversity and trends.
>
>
>
>
> 1. *Nature, Science*: Among most cash reward policies, publishing a paper in these two
> prestigious journals would receive special treatment. Chinese universities offer the
> highest cash reward to *Nature* or *Science* papers. The author(s) may receive a prize
> up to 165,000 USD; some universities even announced that the amount of cash
> rewarded for a *Nature* or *Science* paper was *negotiable*. Indeed, the average amount
> of cash award for a *Nature* or *Science* paper increased 67% from 26,212 USD in 2008
> to 43,783 USD in 2016.
>
>
>
This analysis was also mentioned in a [2017 Science News article](https://www.science.org/content/article/cash-bonuses-peer-reviewed-papers-go-global).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is just an anecdote, but I worked with Chinese researchers who said they got paid in the order of £1000s for a paper in a top journal. I never heard of a figure of £100,000 though. This was in 2019.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Personal cash rewards existed and other forms of rewards (e.g. funding preferences) still exist. But the number should be contexualized.
Rewards in excess of 30000 USD are not for any top "Western" journals, but almost always reserved to *the* two journals Nature and Science (possibly also Cell). Most rewards (and indeed the most controversial ones) are well under 5000 USD. Not negligible of course, but the amount of personal payment is less of an incentive than preferences in funding and administrative support from the university and the government and other forms of internal rewards (academic ranks, which are tied to salaries, and tenure etc.).
The bonus system is part of perverse incentives that encourage bad publication and citation practices in China, but the particular high rewards themselves for the three journals are not really part of it.
Many institutions who claim to offer a very high amount of rewards basically never intended to pay it out, because overwhelmingly most institutions in China (or in any country) do not publish in these three journals for a variety of reasons (lack of infrastructure and talent, or they are simply not positioned for shiny researches), especially as first or corresponding authors (which is usually a requirement for these rewards).
Upvotes: 4
|
2023/08/09
| 848
| 3,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've just asked [Can Chinese "scientists who publish in the top Western journals... earn in excess of $100,000 per paper" via cash-per-publication incentives?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/200467/69206) in which I reference the recent Politics SE question [Did China scientific incentives address the fact that the system can be gamed?](https://politics.stackexchange.com/q/80736/16047) which includes the following:
>
>
> >
> > These guys have surveyed the financial incentives offered by the top 100 universities in China and mined that data for interesting trends. They say that cash-per-publication incentives are common and that **scientists who publish in the top Western journals can earn in excess of $100,000 per paper.** What’s more, there are already worrying signs that these financial rewards are skewing the process of science in China.
> >
> >
> > China has well over 1,000 universities. But in the 1990s it began a program called Project 211 to turn 100 of them into world-class institutions. “Eventually, 116 universities were admitted to Project 211, forming an elite group of universities occupying 70% of national research funding and supervising 80% of doctoral students,” say Wei and co.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> https://www.technologyreview.com/2017/07/12/150506/the-truth-about-chinas-cash-for-publication-policy/
>
>
>
**Question:** How common are cash-per-publication incentives in different countries?
Are these pretty common or rare? Of course there are benefits; monetary and otherwise, an excellent publication track record can impact salary, tenure, side gigs (contracts, consulting) but here *I'm only asking about explicit "cash-per-publication incentives".*
Until there's some verification of that substantially large upper limit, I can't really ask "Is China exceptional in the size of its monetary incentives?" but I am curious about that.<issue_comment>username_1: Normally a researcher does not make any money directly from the publications. It is possible to make money indirectly, like building up a reputation that could make getting a research grant later easier, or a better scientific position in the future (or any). Publications are the requirement for retaining the status of the researcher, problems are expected if the researcher does not have them, or they are too old. China is doing a very unusual thing.
No the question is, how easy is to get this money, maybe this is reserved for a few exceptional cases. But if a publication in reputable, international journal is enough, then it is probably a good time to start learning Chinese (be sure you pick a simplified one).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In Denmark, part of the department's core funding is settled in proportion to its publication rate (per scientist) adjusted by journal scores (higher impact journals scoring more). The total sum handed out across all university departments in the country is constant however, so in effect there is competition among the departments. For me as a scientist in Denmark, personally, I couldn't care less. This is just yet another futile exercise of New Public Management.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/10
| 1,497
| 6,117
|
<issue_start>username_0: Basically what the question says: is it a good idea to sit down and openly talk with their PhD advisor about struggling with depression?
Sending support to anyone out there struggling ♡<issue_comment>username_1: I have been very open with my mental health struggle with my supervisor ever since the start of my PhD. The situation I was in at the start was not something that was letting me work properly as I should have, and I felt like I needed to explain it.
I have ADHD and have been very productive during my undergrad and master (in CS), often hyperfocusing on coding, and the drop in my work output made me feel even worse and I felt the need to justify myself.
I brought it up slowly, first explaining that I had trouble working sometimes. I mentioned related issue with it, such as my parent gambling addiction, and the toll it was taking on me as I was the only one supporting them. The fact that it was during Covid and lockdown didn't help, and I explained that staying at home all day was not helping.
Basically, I tried to not suddenly drop my entire life problem in the conversation, but over some meetings I explained some of the issue, and what were the consequences, at the time, on my work for example. It helped especially when I had very bad day and had to take a day off, not having to create a fake justification was very helpful. I tried to keep it related to the PhD, and not go too much into my personal life.
I never brought deeper issues, such as suicidal thoughts/attempts as: 1) I was not comfortable bringing it with anyone I was not very close. 2) I didn't think it would have helped the situation with my supervisor. 3) I feared it might actually change (in a bad way) our interactions.
I think I am lucky that my supervisor was very understanding during the whole time and offered me support if I needed ait.
Like everywhere, with everyone, it mostly comes down to the person you are talking to.
I slightly hinted at some issue I had, and the reaction my supervisor had made me trust I could explain in more details what the issues were. On the other side, I tried the same thing with my co-supervisor, and it became quickly apparent that for him, mental health issues were just something you had to motivate yourself to get over with.
Your university probably have a service here to support you in this type of situation/help with mental health, and they will be very understanding of any issue you have and should be there to listen to you. They may help you with how to discuss it with your advisor as well.
In my case, I also contacted the administrative services of the research institute to document my issues, which helped me apply for extensions for medical reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I can give you the perspective from the supervisor's side. It's a good thing to ask your fellow graduate students, but the drawback of that approach is that their experiences will have an n=1, so you'd have to listen to a lot of tales to triangulate an answer.
From my experience as a professor, supervisor and advisor to many students, I know that is that it is very common for graduate students to suffer from depression. For example, [this article in Nature](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41578-022-00444-x) cites that
>
> In a 2019 global survey of 6,320 PhD students, 36% of respondents reported seeking help for anxiety or depression caused by their studies
>
>
>
This is supported by my direct experience. When I was a graduate student at an R1 institution, almost every graduate student I knew was taking antidepressants.
In my experience as a professor, it is also very common for graduate students to share this with their advisors. I know, since I am known to be a good point of first contact for undergraduate and graduate students suffering from depression and other mental health issues, so I get to hear from a lot of students about their struggles. I am not a therapist, so the only "real" thing I can do is to refer them to the counseling center, but they come to me because they can expect a supporting ear and not judgement. So I can tell you that it is very, very common for students to both suffer from depression, and to talk to professors and advisors about it.
We still have a long way to go, but the days when admitting to depression made you look weak, or destined to a mental ward, those days are gone. Having said that, beware that if your advisor is an ass, they will be an ass about this too, so if your question is "should I speak with my advisor about my depression", the answer is "it depends on who your advisor is." But in general, you can expect that the majority of advisors will be sympathetic and supportive, because yours will surely not be the first case they hear about, and all of us went through grad school and know how stressful it is.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's nice to know that academia has a few supervisors like username_2.
Yet I feel that the majority - despite *wanting* to be positive toward the sufferer of depression - are not really equipped by nature, background, training or resources to be of much help with this.
I am sorry to tell you that in my own experience the personal/family/relational problems of graduate students are often issues that should **never** be discussed in any terms with professors in general, nor with fellow PhD students in general for the same reasons and also due to their self-focus during their program.
Only with those rare atypical individuals in academia can one open up like this. Yet even these can do little other than send you to the doctor or psychologist - something the guy next door can tell you.
My advice is to go to a health professional downtown (not the campus ones) and if he/she thinks you need some time off then they will write a note *in general health terms* to your HoD.
It's amazing how much harm people do when they are trying to avoid being seen as unsympathetic although that is exactly how they feel. So don't risk it unless the signs are very very good indeed.
Buona fortuna.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/10
| 909
| 3,836
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I'm in the middle of an e-mail based scientific discussion, I often find that I'm severely limited by the medium. E-mails don't manage formulas at all, the symbol palette and formatting is severely limited, and included pictures in the body may or may not go through. Such loss of formatting is especially true if the recipent uses some legacy university e-mail system, as it is often the case in academy.
Due to these reasons, I'm tempted to use LaTeX to write my thoughts/results I wish to share, and attach the PDF. However, I've never encountered anyone doing the same during my 5 years of scientific carreer. All my professional contacts seem to stick to basic txt format, even if formulas are involved. I get vague terms instead of symbols (*"charge density of xy"*), broken formattings, *"rho\_xy^2"*-s and *"intg(exp(i (phi+1/2) pi)) dphi"*-s, and not a single PDF.
Would it be awkward, unprofessional, or unproductive, if I put my whole letter in a nicely formatted LaTeX PDF file - even if the content is just 1-2 concise paragraph - and in the body of the email, I merely write the following:
>
> Dear Mr. Schroedinger,
>
>
> Thanks for your letter, which was useful to advance my thoughts on the topic *[or a similar appropriate short sentence]*. Please find my reply in the attached PDF.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Whiskers
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I would be pleased to receive a fully detailed pdf from my correspondents rather than a bunch of short messages with weird pseudo-coded equations. Unfortunately, writing proper LaTeX takes time and academics are always way too busy to do things properly. Sometimes (but not always) in collaborative work it is better to receive some response early than a perfect reply later. That's why people usually fall back on simplest decisions, then those decisions form a habit, and it becomes harder to get out of it.
If you manage to keep your correspondence in proper LaTeX typesetting, with fully elaborated thoughts, supported by properly looking equations and graphics, this is great. If you manage to do the above and keep your responses timely, it's simply perfect and your colleagues should be happy and proud to collaborate with you. Yes, it would be slightly unusual, but in a good sense, because what's usual is not always very good.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Everyone gets too damn many emails these days. The only way to deal with this flood is to be quick in reading and answering them, and things you do in writing your emails that make that difficult or impossible will quickly get you on the "ah, great, this guy again" list of your recipients.
If you really need to work out a mathematical argument in detail, then yes, PDF is probably the way to go. If all you want to do is illustrate an idea, do it in inline math like everyone else -- it's so much faster to deal with these emails than having to open and read an attachment.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There's nothing wrong with including an attachment that cannot be otherwise expressed in the text of the email. I regularly attach images of plots or PowerPoint slides with graphical representations of data that simply can't be adequately described using text.
The question comes down to whether the thing you want to attach can be adequately described in the email text or not. I might not attach a PDF for the sake of a single formula that's only slightly cumbersome in email text, but if you're using lots of formulas that become unintelligible in text form, you are justified in including the attachment. In most cases, I'd probably prefer easy-to-parse information that's slightly more difficult to access as an attachment, rather than difficult-to-parse but easy-to-access information in the email itself.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/10
| 2,340
| 9,492
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started a Marie Curie fellowship, and the salary is lower than I expected (I did not realize employer costs were included in the advertised amounts).
Since moving to the (southern) USA I am experiencing huge costs in living, and the [country correction coefficient](https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/wp-call/2021-2022/wp-2-msca-actions_horizon-2021-2022_en.pdf) does not account for it. Each month, after taking costs into account, my pay is negative.
I am struggling to see how this is financially feasible. I am literally going into debt. It is so low that even a "top-up" salary would not cover it.
Did anyone else encounter this problem and what did you do? Would it look bad to leave a Marie Curie fellowship?<issue_comment>username_1: Research admin here from an R1 institution in a major metro area here in the US. I have not personally administered a Marie Curie fellowship, but in looking at two agreements we currently have, one with a university in Denmark, another with one in Italy, I can tell you that the agreements are completely different. The amounts sent over are completely different. One actually sent us a budget dedicated for IDC, another said here's a small amount "for everything", and they would pay the fellow directly.
Given that it's not even remotely the same model in my dept, I would say you have to go to your research administrator and ask them to look at the contract. In my school, we guarantee all students and postdocs a specific minimum rate. If you are below that, we bring you up to the minimum.
If you are suggesting the taxes are such that you will still be negative, based on how the IRS or other governments handle taxes, that is a bit trickier. Technically, I am not allowed to consider taxes when administering payroll. To do so would lead to great inequality and a huge amount of paperwork besides. This is why we always talk about payroll in terms of gross salaries, never net.
However, it may be that the difference between the agreements I am reading is because of how things like tax law work, and one university knows this and another doesn't. One agreement may be more to the benefit of the student than another, and no one has considered such implications at this other university.
Overall, the problem with giving advice on <NAME> is that it is so highly individual. You can read the published guidance from the organization, but the implementation ranges too much for us to advise based on that. Contact the research administrator assigned to your fellowship to get specific advice. You may also need to contact an accountant to understand your tax situation. It's possible you have a tax treaty that will help this, and so you are paying taxes you will get back later. Understanding how your taxes should be structured is important, and your institution cannot do this for you -- you are responsible for that. If you can't tell who your research administrator is, start by going to the department manager. They will know who to contact.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Third party funding like a Marie-Curie grant come in two basic forms (with lots of variation in the details).
1. You receive a grant, that is supposed to cover costs for your lab and the people employed in the lab, including you. It is very common that universities take a major cut (on the order of 50%) from these grants for the administrative cost and providing you with space and such.
2. You receive your personal salary, possibly a little extra for travel expense or for relocation. This should be paid out directly to you and the university does not get a cut. The university agrees to pay for your office and similar costs in exchange for getting you as an employee without having to pay your salary.
I don't know the details of what kind of grant your MC fellowship is but it seems at least possible that you were granted something more like type 2 but the university thinks it is type 1. Unfortunately it is also possible that everything is as it should be and the salaries haven't been adjusted for inflation in recent years. It depends on the details of your fellowship.
**Edit:** You added the source for the Marie-Curie grants in your questions. If I understand the document correctly, as a postdoc you should get 5080 Euros gross salary plus 600 Euros mobility allowance plus possibly a family allowance (page 86). This does include salary deductions that are usually payed by the employer like some social security deductions. This is modified by the country factor which for the US is 102.3% (page 110). This is supposed to be for your salary, the university is not supposed to deduct anything from that for its own costs. If they do figure out why and try to stop it. For a postdoc this is a very good salary pretty much anywhere in the world. If you do get that, it should cover your living expenses. If it doesn't you need to focus your career away from academia towards maximizing your salary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Go to your academic supervisor and demand full clarity on this matter - something that should have been outlined to you long before now.
It's high time this situation was brought to the attention of the EU Commission bureaucrats.
Best to do this via a direct communication - since a personal meeting is impossible at present - with your MEP at his local EU constituency office.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> my pay is negative
>
>
>
Well this is pretty simple : time to move on.
It's just insanity to keep doing this and the solution is as simple as that : you cannot sustain less than zero pay. You don't even try.
Simply write (email) the department head and all other parties involved in the agreement and state plainly that either they increase the money you take home to a realistic level or you will have no choice but to leave. State the actual figures. State you need an urgent positive response and give a deadline - and a deadline you plan to stick to.
And plan to leave. Assume they will not sort something out quickly or even on a realistic timescale. Bureaucracies are notorious for preferring to argue over dealing with a problem that doesn't directly affect them and you have multiple agencies involved.
Start looking for a new position now.
>
> Would it look bad to leave a Marie Curie fellowship?
>
>
>
Who cares what it looks like ? You're going into *debt* because of this !
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm a <NAME> fellow in the UK. I'm so sorry you have to go through this; MSCA is one of the highest paid postdoc in the EU, if not the world. That said, the Uni *likes* to take social security contribution from the grant (i.e. salary). I'll share my experience in the UK. The basic salary was rated at 6k per month. I was getting 3k per month. Some of the deductions were not shown in the pay slip. I asked them for an explanation. Here is an extract from the payroll contact: "Total amount in the agreement 6,026.12 less employer pension 979.74 less employer NI 468.17 = basic salary 4,578.21". Apart from *employer's contribution*, they deducted employee contribution from my salary as well. This was pension, tax and employee NI. So the take home was reduced to 3k at the end. I asked them why they were deducting employer's contribution, they sent an extract of the employment agreement. It's included in the contract, which obviously I did not read. This is true irrespective of the host institution. There was a really long discussion about this on a Facebook group.
I'm really sorry to hear this. One thing you can do is to contact NCPs. (They are very responsive; also mention your grant ID. They must respond to your queries.). If your host is Italy, Germany etc, find that country's NCP email on MSCA page and ask them if there is a way to fix this. Something thats not clear to me is: There are no social security contribution in the US (insurance + tax. This is what I remember paying in US), if it's still getting deducted at your parent institution (host) - thats completely useless. You can ask them to stop deducting the social contribution when you are away. Does that makes sense ? For example: you are hired by a University in Spain, who pays your salary. They are deducting your social contributions from your salary. Then you move to the US for your secondment, which is 1 year. What's the point of deducting social security in Spain, when you are in the US ? That should give you a surplus money.
You can also ask for reimbursement. You should get your travel reimbursed, visa costs are also reimbursed. I think you can get the *rent* you paid during your secondment reimbursed (thats quite a lot). (I tried to look this up, I remember reading it somewhere but I couldn't find it now, sorry - it must be in some guidelines). You can also ask your NCP if thats possible. Travel money is separate from your salary as per MSCA grant. The university can't touch it. Like you said, you could top up your salary. (I'm sorry it's still not enough for you.)
You could also stop your pension contribution for a year. I don't pay pension contribution in the UK. They used to deduct employer's and employee's pension contribution out of my salary, which I did not like. You can also send an email to MSCA alumni association. Someone must have dealt with similar problem before. They are usually very helpful. I hope this helps.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/11
| 824
| 3,459
|
<issue_start>username_0: Finding a good job after PhD seems to require devoting a few months to preparation and interviews. Are PhD advisors typically understanding of this? Or do they expect the PhD student to continue doing research as much as before? I’m specifically interested to know about the norm in engineering fields (CS, Mechanical Engineering, etc).<issue_comment>username_1: Part of the PhD learning process is project and time management (at least in the UK where it's emphasised).
>
> Are PhD advisors typically understanding of this?
>
>
>
In my experience, that depends on the supervisor. Some guide their students through the process. Some use their networks/circle of influence to assist/jumpstart their students.
Some bring their students on board collaboration engagements to boost their students research skills and outputs.
In brief, some supervisors support. Some in their supporting, does it in different ways.
All the best with the job hunting.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Mostly, it depends on how your advisor views you. Does s/he have positive opinion about you? If so, s/he will be supportive of you taking a couple of weeks time away to prepare for job interview. S/he might even suggest you some good prospective employers, although, if you are looking for industry job and your advisor is in theoretical research, then s/he might not be resourceful in this regard.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Mostly PIs want to use you till the last day of your work and want to get as much as possible from you before you leave. So I would suggest don't expect your boss to help. If he offers you it's good otherwise don't trust.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is one of the benefits you get as an academic, and which is not customary in any other type of employment scenario. I worked for 6 years outside of academia after my BS. At that other job, even thinking of applying to another job would have been grounds for firing. In academia, I've seen postdocs and graduate students who take 2-6 months (!) of time in which they do nothing but look for another job, in full view of their employers (=advisors). But academia is also special in that your own graduate students and postdocs later become collaborators, so as a PI, you are much better off if your students and postdocs land good positions and become co-PI, co-authors, and in general, collaborators with whom you keep the paper machine fed. Most PIs understand this, and help their students. My own PhD advisor read and edited some of my application materials, sat through practice sessions of my interview talks, and suggested places where to apply. And it was the norm (I am a biologist, but my second postdoc was at the CS dept at an R1 engineering school, and I also worked at MIT, and this also seemed to be the norm at those schools as well)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I think it depends partly on where you do your PhD. At least in my case (I am doing my PhD at a university in Germany), my supervisor is very supportive and has also offered to contact some of his co-authors and/or forward me emails about vacant PostDoc positions. As far as I am correctly informed, the employment contract I signed with the university also states that I should actively apply for open positions already during the PhD phase, so that I do not slip into social security once the employment contract expires.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/11
| 810
| 3,212
|
<issue_start>username_0: I conducted some machine learning research and created a repo using my user account. My lab, however, does not have its own GitHub organization, and is instead registered under a user account. Hence I can transfer the repo ownership to the lab, but then it would not count as "mine" on GitHub. I would like to let the repo show on the lab account too, however, since it makes my work more well known and associates it with the lab.
I am choosing between three options:
1. Transfer ownership to the lab.
2. Create a clone of my original repo from the lab and adding links to each other for the two repos. This would, however, make the stars I receive more "spread out" :-(
3. Do nothing and keep the repo.
What is the "standard" in this situation? Thanks!
Update: Thanks for the advice! My final choice is to keep the ownership of the repo to myself and let the lab fork it.<issue_comment>username_1: An option that you have not mentioned would be to convert the lab user account to an organisation account. It obviously depends on the lab owner, but if you explain how and why it would be useful, you may convince them.
The procedure how to do so is described here: [github docs](https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-and-managing-your-personal-account-on-github/managing-your-personal-account/converting-a-user-into-an-organization)
Transferring ownership to the lab seems a logical step. You have done the work, but it is likely not your property.
* As suggested in the comment by @GoodDeeds, you can pin the repo to your own GitHub profile page.
+ You can also add it to the readme of your profile, which is very likely to be read.
* You can also fork the repository so you have a copy on your own profile (it will however have different "stars", if that's what you worry about, yes).
* If the code is your property, then you can also have the lab fork your repository so they have a copy themselves.
+ As suggested in comment by @AnderBiguri, if you manage to turn the lab account into an organisation, and have them pin your repository (I'm not familiar how to do it, you may need to fork it beforehand to do so)
>
> however, since it makes my work more well known and associates it with the lab
>
>
>
If you transfer the ownership, your contributions will still be attributed to you, just like when someone contribute to an open-source project.
There is no "standard". Some labs have student host their own codes. Some labs want everything to be stored on their organisations. For your specific case, you'll probably want to discuss this with your advisor and the supervisor of the github account.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What your lab is doing is against Github's terms of service: from <https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-of-service>
>
> We have a few simple rules for Personal Accounts on GitHub's Service:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> * Your login may only be used by one person — i.e., a single login may not be shared by multiple people.
>
>
>
I'll leave to you to decide if it's a better idea to report the lab to Github or discuss this with your superiors before.
Upvotes: -1
|
2023/08/11
| 1,927
| 8,420
|
<issue_start>username_0: In their response to a review, the authors insult the reviewer, question their professional knowledge and the comments made regarding the finalization of the publication.
The reviewer cannot refuse them on the basis that they are insulted and requires revision of the work based on the comments they made.
The reviewer does not agree to withdraw from reviewing the submitted publication, and the authors rudely refuse to correct the comments they made.
Does the editorial board of a journal have the ethical right to refuse publication for insulting the reviewer?
08.24.2023.
Dear colleagues!
I want to inform you how this particular situation was resolved. The authors withdrew the article a few days ago in protest against the reviewer's remarks.
Thank you very much to everyone who took part in the discussion! Your thoughts helped us a lot not to make a hasty rash decision.
Best regards,
<NAME>.<issue_comment>username_1: A journal has no obligation to publish anything, actually, so I don't see an ethical issue. If they refuse to publish something of value then there is an opportunity cost but nothing more. The authors are free to go elsewhere.
But the reason for rejection might be much more complex than you present. In particular, a refusal to address the comments of a reviewer can, in itself, be grounds for rejection whether the authors insult the reviewer or not.
Authors demanding that they are correct and the reviewer is an idiot isn't a proper argument in determining the value of a paper.
---
Edited to add:
I haven't said and don't believe that there are no ethical concerns with publishing. But some commenters seem to be conflating an obligation to treat people fairly with an obligation to publish any particular paper. These things are not the same. No, you can't discriminate. Yes, you must obey the law. But a paper is a paper, not a person.
Some papers are rejected for space considerations alone. Some because the journal has a different focus. And yes, some because the authors ignore advice and insist on their view. It may even be that a few are rejected because the authors act so badly that the editors just want them to go away. It might be different if a journal had a complete monopoly, but they don't.
Even Einstein was humble about Special Relativity and commented on it at the time, in spite of the fact that it countered the "received wisdom" of the leaders in the field at the time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As an editor, you have the power to ignore reviewers or/and authors. You can refer the authors to the many resources on the Internet on how to write a proper response. Request for the paper to be returned to the authors, and ask them to 'fix up' their responses. Similarly, you can do the same for reviews submitted by reviewers. In some cases, reviews can be edited to remove unprofessional remarks before being released to authors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: To dissect the ethics, it helps to first think about what ethical obligations journals have in general. The ones that I can come up with and that may be relevant to this situation are:
* **Avoid publishing unsound or misleading work.** – This is the main point of the peer-review process. To conduct this process, it is necessary that the authors address the comments of the peer reviewers, whether they follow the suggestions or disagree with arguments. Moreover, if authors do not do this, this suggests that they are not interested in delivering sound work, which in turn reduces trust in the manuscript as a whole.
* **Do not impose disproportionate constraints on the authors.** – Behaving in a civil manner and engaging with the arguments of the reviewers (even in disagreement) is certainly not expecting too much.
* **Treat all submissions equally and fairly.** – If the journal rejects all manuscripts of authors behaving in a similar manner, no problem here.
* **Avoid harm to their volunteers.** – Reviewers (and often editors) are volunteering for the journal so they should not suffer from insults. Insults to the reviewers can be avoided by the editors checking the responses, but they can also be deterred by a policy to reject any manuscript when the authors engage in such behaviour. (Mind that such a policy needs not be public in my opinion, since it can be expected by common sense.)
For whatever it’s worth, as a reviewer I have several times successfully recommended the rejection of manuscripts on account of the authors not engaging with my comments. While my educated guess in these situations was that the authors did not understand my comments (on account of not fully understanding what they were doing) and wanted to distract from that, the ethical rationale is similar to your case.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Where do ethics come into this at all?
First, any authors dumb enough to insult the reviewers are probably too dumb to write a good paper. Sure, you can *disagree* with a reviewer's comments. I've been on both ends of that, many times. But you disagree *politely.*
Second, presumably, the authors didn't make the changes the reviewer wanted. That's grounds for refusal. I have, as a reviewer, recommended rejecting a revised MS for failure to make my suggestions.
Third, what about ethical obligations to the reviewer? I do statistical reviews for two journals. For those journals, I do many reviews; I get paid, but many reviewers don't. The journal should also be protecting the reviewers, both from a practical POV (reviewers who are treated badly may leave) and even an ethical one. You shouldn't be insulted at your work place.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I think the editor has a ***duty*** to reject the paper for insulting a reviewer as they have intentionally or unintentionally gamed the peer review process by making it difficult for the reviewer to recommend rejection without apparent conflict of interest. Personally I think there should be a zero tolerance response to insulting a reviewer or any other attempt to subvert peer review.
Anybody that insults a reviewer is shooting themselves in the foot. The purpose of review is not just to accept or reject the paper, it is to improve the quality of the paper. The author is getting for free the services of an expert reviewer whos time and effort they could not afford to buy (at academics usual consultancy rates) [I borrowed that from a good paper on peer review, but I can't remember the details]. If the reviewer hasn't understood your paper, it is your fault for not writing it clearly enough and you should go back and rewrite it. If your paper still doesn't get past review, act on the feedback you have had so far and send it somewhere else. Insulting them probably means you will continue to write papers that are hard to understand and have little impact - not a good choice!
Note sometimes we will get reviews that are just wrong, where the reviewer is wrong even though you have spelled it out as clearly as can be (in my case I remember an example where the reviewer wouldn't accept an algorithm was O(n^3) rather than O(n^4) even when I wrote out the algorithm as three nested for loops with only scalar quantities in the inner loop). We are all only human, and the right approach is to remember that you are only human and it is only a matter of time before you submit an equally dumb review (if you haven't already). Thinking you are incapable of writing a dumb review is the best recipe for writing one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Any reviewer deserves respect as they spend their little free time reading and commenting on your manuscript. The scope of this process is to improve the publication and catch mistakes that the authors have overlooked. The authors have the right to respectfully disagree with a reviewer's comment, and explain their reasons in the rebuttal letter. If the controversy cannot be resolved, the editor comes into play and takes the final decision. When this happens, the editor usually consults several experts including the other anonymous reviewers. There is always a way to appeal if you firmly believe that you have been treated unfairly. Insulting is definitely not the approach you want to pursue as you have much better alternatives to argue in your favor (provided that you have any good argument based on scientific evidences).
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/11
| 711
| 3,133
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I submitted a review to a major journal in my field. They asked me during the submission process, "Do you want to get recognition for this review on Web of Science?"
How does this work? Specifically, how does anonymity work and what are the benefits of getting this recognition?<issue_comment>username_1: Typically, this works by the publisher submitting information to the reviewer recognition platform (ORCID provides another one) that can be displayed in your profile on the platform. What information is provided depends on the journal, so you may want to pay attention to what you agree to. In general, the default seems to be just the year of the review and the name of the journal, which would preserve anonymity unless they handle exceptionally few papers each year. It's unclear to me whether there is any real career benefit, but if your CV lists journals you've reviewed for, these services can provide an easy way to verify a subset of that information.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The system I am familiar with links reviews to ORCID and display it on ORCID and/or WoS/Clarivate (formerly Publons). You can choose the settings, but generally only the name of the journal and the number of reviews are displayed publicly (after the reviews have been completed), so confidentiality is kept.
As for benefits: for me, it counts for my performance review and hence for tenure. (I think I could also allocate a certain number of working hours to it.) If you are an early career researcher, you could ask your department of the value of keeping track of your reviewing activities via ORCID.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You can use it as evidence that you are active in reviewing for journals. This may lead to being invited to join the editorial board of a journal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a statistical reviewer, I get paid for my reviews. Making those reviews visible may lead to more work. For a volunteer reviewer, it could lead to more work as well, which might help the person get tenure, or a job at the journal, or whatever.
Anonymity only seems to have any benefit for a very negative review. You likely review things in your specialty. The authors may also be reviewers. One day, they might review something of yours. Even if they aren't consciously out to get you, there could be unconscious biases.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: The "recognition" is offered because the journal thinks you will do more volunteer peer reviews if they give you internet points. It's the same thing as how Stack Exchange thinks you will post more useful answers if they give you internet points.
The "recognition" is completely useless for performance reviews and promotion processes. Just tell your employer how many reviews you did for each journal. There is no need to involve Web of Science.
Web of Science offers this web platform because they want to have more control over academia's prestige system.
This answer does not apply to paid reviews (which are rare and described in <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/200562/13240>).
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/12
| 331
| 1,129
|
<issue_start>username_0: Usually, a Letter in PRL is limited to 3750 words. Yet frequently papers from large collaborations at CERN papers exceed this limit by a lot. One example is the recent record-setting paper with 5154 authors: <https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803>
But there are also examples in other fields, such as the first observation of gravitational waves: <https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102><issue_comment>username_1: PRL will make exceptions. These exceptions are few and far between but the gravitational wave paper is an example: it was clearly Nobel-level science and PRL wasn’t gonna reject the paper because it was too long.
(The ATLAS paper you link to is 2015 so hardly recent.)
None of my papers in PRL is over the word limit…. :(
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Editors can do whatever they want so long as they stay within budget.
For both the examples you gave, a majority of the text is not included in the word count as defined by Physical Review: <https://journals.aps.org/authors/length-guide>
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/13
| 1,239
| 5,641
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently working on a grant proposal that also asks for a literature review. Now, when it comes to literature reviews, I have always had a problem with selecting what is relevant enough to be included. Obviously, one can't/shouldn't include everything and needs to delineate certain limits. With this grant application, it is even more so the case because there is a clear word limit. So I am wondering how people go about this? To be a bit more concrete, I have the following conundrum:
I work on the history of the diplomacy of two particular countries in the 1960s. Now, as a historian, I have included works that have written historical studies about this period/topic. That is the main stay of my lit review. However, I have now come across a study from 1969 that is more of a policy paper that gives contemporary opinions/observations about the diplomatic relations between both countries. It is not a historical study, but it briefly and superficially does mention some of the specific phenomena I look at. Do I need to include something like this? It is definitely not part of the scholarly discourse I engage with or base my study on. In a sense, it could be more of a primary source I might cite, but because it was published in a semi-academic journal, I am somewhat torn. But if I were to include this source, I might have to include many more similar sources.
Anyways, this is just an example of the larger question how you delineate relevant from irrelevant literature and decide what to leave out. Whenever I see keywords (like in the example) or a few superficial pages relevant to my topic anywhere I am tempted to include it if only so that no reviewer can reject my grant proposal because I overlooked this or that book.<issue_comment>username_1: Let me assume that you have actually read the papers that might be included, so you are familiar with their context. Let me also assume that there are too many to include all of them.
I suggest that you prioritize the papers according to their relevance, perhaps using a spreadsheet. You don't need to have a precise ranking, but at least approximately similarly relevant papers are similarly ranked.
Then just cut off the list at the maximal length for the current project, perhaps saying that other paper were excluded for length. You might possibly even offer (footnote, perhaps) to provide a longer list if you are contacted.
But for the request in your final paragraph, you need to actually be familiar with the content of the papers and make the judgement yourself as to what is relevant. If you don't know that then you are missing something.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me adapt my answer to a different question ([Difference between literature review and introduction part of a research proposal](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/196465/difference-between-literature-review-and-introduction-part-of-a-research-proposa/196468)) since I think the core principles could be helpful here.
In general, the purpose of the literature review in a scholarly article is to situate your work in the context of other academic research. Its purpose is NOT primarily to summarize all related research (contrary to what some might say); its purpose is to show how your work complements and extends the literature. From this perspective, **the literature review for a grant application serves the same purpose**, even if there is less space to do the same thing. The literature review section should only summarize work that shows three main things:
* What scholars have done so far to resolve the research question that you are treating, or very closely related research questions.
* Clearly show that past research has not sufficiently resolved your specific research question.
* Frame the specific shortcomings or opportunities in the literature that your grant project aims to resolve or at least extend.
You should try to focus only on these points and leave out anything that does not clearly serve these points--you do not have much space to do anything more than this, and anything else distracts from the value of the grant proposal, rather than helping it.
For a grant application, it is particularly important that you not overlook any truly relevant work so that the grant reviewers do not think that you are unaware of the literature. However, because your space is limited, you will necessarily leave out much marginal work that a random reviewer might think should have been mentioned. So, it is probably a good idea to precede your literature review with a few sentences explicitly stating some well-known but only marginally related works and then briefly explaining why such work is outside the scope of your review.
One exception to ignoring marginal works is that it is indeed important to convince the grant reviewers of your authority in the subject. So, you should definitely at least briefly cite any of your own works that are remotely related to the topic. This does not directly serve the literature review purposes I list above, but it is very important for grant applications.
Based on the preceding suggestions, considering the example you gave, I would recommend that you go ahead and cite your own prior work--but do not waste much space on it if it is only marginally related. However, although it is difficult to tell from your brief description, it seems to me that the 1969 article that you mention is not directly related to your topic. If that is the case, I would completely ignore it. You should use your precious space to focus on the three points I list above.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/13
| 1,126
| 4,851
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, a previous student of mine consulted me the possibility of applying to other PhD programs while deferring a PhD offer. He was an undergrad at my institution; he got a PhD offer last year but decided to work an extra year before starting his PhD. We had a good relationship while he was working in my lab, so I hope to help him out by seeking some information on this.
SE (i.e., this platform) seems to have very mixed opinions on this. From the answers I've read, some say it's fine while others bring up ethical reasons against this behavior. However, almost all answers (some even from the same people who are against reapplying during deferral) support a current PhD student applying for another PhD program (at least nobody said this is unethical). This, to me, is very puzzling because in the 2nd case the student has already costed not only a seat but also actual funding from the program.
**If reapplying is allowed for current PhD students, why are people against it for current deferees?** To the best of my knowledge (including in my own program), students who choose to defer are rarely required to sign a binding contract. From my perspective, they are basically PhD students who are on leave.<issue_comment>username_1: Ethical dilemmas are so called because they force us to choose among competing values. In the case of your student, there's the value of keeping one's word (a value universally lauded) vs what is customary. For example, where I live there's a stretch of highway where most drivers exceed the speed limit, but I never see a line at the police station of people confessing to their crime. I also don't know of anybody who keeps track of all internet purchases and then sends the required state tax at the end of the year. I am sure that they all consider themselves law-abiding citizens, even though they all break the law (ie perform unethical acts) every day.
So yes, your student should keep their word and attend the university they were admitted to, but also yes, it is customary and normal for students to keep looking and to change their mind regarding attending the place they promised to. This is so common that graduate admissions offices have names for these situations, names like "yield" and "attrition". Yield is the number of admitted students who actually enroll in the program, and attrition is the number of students lost between accepting the admissions offer and actually showing up at the start of the semester (or the following semester). Your student needs to do his/her own value ranking and decided which one is more important. My opinion is that this falls in the "customary" type of ethical breach, and that the student, the one in the vulnerable position against the university, is the one who should be allowed the slack. They should keep looking. I say this even though I'm usually the one arguing against the "customary" type of ethical breach, and thus the only car doing 55mph on that stretch of highway. But there's too much at stake when choosing a graduate program, and the student is the one in the vulnerable position.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't see anything wrong with your asking this question - although it might have been better had the affected party written on his own behalf.
Of course seeking another PhD studentship, while already holding one in deferment, **is unethical.**
You know the test for ethicality: how would *you* like if someone did that to you ? In this case, how would the deferment candidate like it if, after working like a demon for a year, he arrived at his promised graduate school only to find that another student had been allocated his studentship ? I would think he'd be madder than hell about it - used as a makeweight by a graduate school only too happy to reject him for smarter, richer or better connected, etc, etc.
You mention that some posts to this forum from students then already engaged in PhD studies were sometimes given the ethical okay to look round for other PhD studentships. (It might help if you cited a few such cases) All I can say to that is that there may have been other circumstances involved that overrode the normal etiquette, e.g. a bad supervisor and apathetic HoD, total collapse in the purpose of the research program when experiments showed it futile, health or personal issues, etc. I can't see how to otherwise justify "PhD hopping".
As for the legalities of the situation, you may well be right in saying there's nothing illegal.
But many non-illegal things are unethical.
A side-question sticking out here is why the PhD candidate chose the program he did yet then sought a deferment and having got it then started looking round for something else ... I hope you have the good sense not to engage this candidate in your own research group.
Upvotes: -1
|
2023/08/13
| 870
| 3,852
|
<issue_start>username_0: We will submit two manuscripts to two Springer journals, in which we propose two techniques to solve the same problem. We found the first technique a few months ago and the second one two weeks ago.
Is it a problem if I copy part of the first manuscript (e.g. literature review, definitions & notation sections) to the second manuscript?<issue_comment>username_1: If Springer is the publisher and ultimate copyright holder for both documents, then I assume that the copyright issue is (approximately) moot. Springer would need to decide that. But you still need to deal with the possible self-plagiarism issue. You can moot this issue by having one (or better, both) of the papers cite the other and make clear that the same lit review is applicable to both and is therefore "copied here".
But don't be silent on the issue in both papers.
In fact, you may need do nothing more in the new paper than indicate that the literature background for the current paper can be found in the other and that nothing has intervened in the (short) meantime. An editor will possibly have some things to say about this approach, of course.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A literature review needs to place a work in the context of other relevant works. Your second manuscript is *not* in the same context as the first, because the first now exists, and is highly relevant.
Therefore, your second manuscript will need to have at least some differences in its literature review, because it will need to discuss its relationship to the first. Even if the first is not yet published, it can be cited as a preprint (preferable) or "under review" (with a copy attached for the reviewers to look at).
Since your second manuscript takes a different approach than the first, there will also likely be some other differences in related work, based on the difference in approaches.
That said, the literature review has less expectation for novelty than most of the rest of a manuscript, and in most academic communities, it is acceptable for there to be a high degree of similarity between your review sections. If you are going to reuse significant text, however, it is good to acknowledge that fact by citing your first paper and saying something along the lines of, "The background for this approach is similar to that of [cite first paper], and thus this literature review has been adapted from that manuscript."
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Even if you *can* self-cite yourself to technically avoid self-plagiarism, I would personally recommend that you *do not* reuse text from the first lit review. At least in my old field (physics), this would look incredibly lazy to most readers. You should start from scratch, even if a lot of the lit review is similar.
You will likely find that there is *some* difference in how you want to present the context in the two papers. Even if not, reusing an introduction word-for-word can give the impression that you aren't really saying anything new in your second paper, or at least nothing that shouldn't have gone in the first paper. At least in physics, I think many people would interpret this behavior as unprofessional and cutting corners.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Have you considered the fact that logically you have one paper? It seems to me that you're ignoring the logical next step to compare and contrast the techniques, discussing when one might be better than another. It seems to me that that is the ideal package. But hey, that might just be paper three in the disjointed, salami-slicing information landscape we live in now. It might also not be possible with the journals in your field, but it would be nice to have everything together for finding purposes 30 years from now. Not that you wanted an archivist's perspective...
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/13
| 2,496
| 10,213
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know there are a lot of similar questions but most of them are related to stress/pressure from their supervisor. I am doing my PhD and I am in my third year out of four. Everything is going very (or even extremely) well. I have two first-author publications in prestigious journals and one of them even in one of the “big two”. I attend several conferences a year, the salary is great, my supervisors are very supportive and relaxed and I have all the freedom to do whatever I want whenever I want.
However, I feel often very stressed and pressured to produce new groundbreaking results or to just learn new things and work (even on the weekends). My supervisors never pressure me into producing new results etc., so it is mostly self-caused. The uncertainty that comes with an academic career is also adding to the situation. I don’t know what happens after my PhD, if I have to move countries (again), or when/if I would get a permanent position. I really like the place where I live right now and I don’t really want to move somewhere else. I never can really shut off, not even on vacation. If I would know that I get an (academic) position after my PhD, I wouldn’t feel like I permanently have to push myself to increase my chances.
Is this a common feeling? It doesn’t feel very healthy but I don’t know how to deal with it in a better way.<issue_comment>username_1: The solution is to talk to a mental health professional. What you describe is common enough that they will have likely solutions.
Yes, there is a lot of pressure, and more if you have very high ambitions, as seems the case. But, a lot of things help, such as time off, exercise (especially aerobic), and having other interests. We can't prescribe for you here, but a professional can. Your university may well have an office that offers such services. If not, your health plan might, depending on where you live. Go talk to someone who has the skill to evaluate and suggest.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I once heard that what makes academic life so stressful is the winner-takes-all tournament-like characteristic of the employment market. That is, just like in a tournament, if you are the 2nd-best competitor, you get the same thing as the 399th-ranked candidate: you get nothing (no job). Put in another way, if you manage to be 99% as good as the #1 candidate, you don't get 99% of the benefits, but 0%. Yes, once the #1 candidate is off the game, you can then apply to the next job, but no two job requirements are the same, and new candidates join the arena every day. So there's an extreme incentive to "just do one more thing", e.g. one more paper, one more presentation, one more grant application, one more project, one more committee, etc., or whatever might give you that extra 1% edge over the other top candidate. And that is a recipe for burnout and a mental health crisis. This all to say that among top candidates, the feeling is common. And as you suspect, it is not healthy. (I will leave aside the fact that the academic employment market does not actually behave like a tournament, it just *feels* like one.)
Now that I am at the other end of that, having finished the PhD, done the postdocs, gotten the job, tenure, full professorship, etc., it would be easy to say "don't worry about it, it will work out at the end", but the truth is that it was never guaranteed to work out at the end. I have lots of regrets for the years of overwork and constant pursuit of "that one more thing", but again, perhaps that is what brought me where I am. But one thing I can tell you is that you are not your job and that your worth is not the sum of your accomplishments. You can love academic work, but the university will not love you back. You can still love academic work without giving your life to the job. Surprisingly, and I learned this way too late in life, the more time I give to non-academic pursuits, the better I seem to perform as an academic, according to my own criteria of what it is to be a "better academic." Keep that in mind as you are tempted to keep the foot down on the gas pedal.
One more thing: I don't know your friends, but try to spend less time with those on the hamster wheel, and more time with people who live balanced lives. You might be surprised with how many academics actually live balanced, fulfilling lives worthy of admiration. You just won't find those people at the lab on Saturdays or on social media.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: First of all, we can only provide rational reasons to feel good, mental tricks, etc. These may not suffice and that’s when you may need a mental-health professional. Also, I will focus on aspects that are specific to academia.
That being said, here’s what kept me sane:
* Shatter the meritocratic illusion. While skills and accomplishments are to some extent necessary for academic success, they become less relevant above a certain threshold. Instead, academic careers depend a lot on factors outside your control, in particular luck. There are several reasons for this, but the main ones are that research and publication success is luck-dependent and that academic job markets are specialised and thus small and therefore strongly subject to fluctuations.
* Realise that the above means that you can fail through no fault of your own (but also that you can succeed without having given absolutely everything). Consider whether making a tremendous effort just to increase your chances by a tiny bit is really worth it to you.
* Have a Plan B and C. Invest a small portion of your time (e.g. one day a year) to investigate alternative career paths. Become aware of what graduates of your field are doing for a living; search relevant job portals for positions matching your qualifications (after PhD); etc. Unless your PhD is in underwater basket weaving, your options are probably quite good. While you may already be vaguely assuming this, having this substantiated can considerably reduce the pressure.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It is a very very common feeling. It's **not healthy** and PhDs must be watchful on its effects on their quality of life.
You are doing very well at a tempo that is not congenial to you.
Now that you have the makings of a thesis, I think you should start to review your work and assemble it - *perhaps* noting some additional interesting things that you might be able to do in the remaining time that would enhance your thesis further. I say perhaps as you don't want to get into another swirl of hectic work at a disagreeable cost to your emotional balance. Just some humanely manageable tasks and only if they add qualitatively to your final thesis.
Despite what you say about your pace being self-imposed, I get the feeling that your supervisers are delighted to have such a willing horse - and I am sure they know how to gee you up without you hardly noticing. **So it is vital that from here onwards you assert your own tempo with your supervisers.**
The slower pace (and your professed agreeable salary) should also help you start to have a better leisure time - away from the campus especially. Too many students lose the simple pastimes and joys they had before entering university as undergraduates and this trend is reinforced at postgraduate school. This is time gained at the loss of experience that might well save us even more time in our studies and research quandries.
So it's now time to close the circle and make your academic work fit into a natural and manageable life.
It is doesn't fit, it's time to look at other work paths that can.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I can only talk out of my own experience, after going through the hell of phd, several post-docs, constant anguish over ternure, etc...
The stress is not worth it.
Looking back, i wish i would have been more laid back on my pursuit of science. It really makes no difference if you spend one weekend more or less in the lab. The whole academic structure does not care about it, and having one more or one less paper is less important than you think.
As a matter of fact, i only managed to get my ternure position after i realize this fact, and started to let it go. You have to remember that your job, as an academic, is not only to generate "innovation" ( whatever this means), but more importantly to train the next generation. And you don't want them to be mindless working monkeys.
So, go ahead, have the beer on a friday night and forget that the lab exists on weekends. Being a phd candidate/post-doc/wathever is a job like any other else. It is just your function, and you are very much replaceable.
When it comes to carreer, i cannot stress this enough: place a deadline for yourself when it comes to professional goals. Like: if i dont achieve a ternure position by year X, i will go working in a bank. And stick to it. Also, make sure that, the closest you get to that deadline, the more of your research time is spent learning skills for jobs outside academia (e.g. programming in databases).
Most people do not manage to stay in academia, and most people shouldn't. It is just a job like any other, and should be treated as such.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Your feelings are very common among academics and they may hunt you down for a long time if you let them. I can speak for myself on it. Maybe it is the thing that made me get where I am now (got my tenure and all), but this feeling of having to perform and having to to just one more thing never stops, even on weekends, holidays and so on. It may get better, but for me it is like an addiction… it keeps coming back! Even after 12 years of finishing my PhD, it still applies to me. One time my therapist said, when will it be enough for you? All of that said, it makes me rethink a lot of things in my life and the life of my students. I keep trying to let it go, it has worked lately, but maybe it is just part of the game to continue to be productive in the Academic "industry". I should say though that just realizing this, is already progress! You can only change if you know what needs to be changed. Some people don’t even have a clue.
Upvotes: 3
|
2023/08/13
| 666
| 2,672
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my bachelor thesis and have to do a small literature review for it. Unfortunately, I don't know which tense I should use.
Do you write ?
1. Hager et. al (2020) show/indicate .....
2. Hager et. al (2020) showed/indicated....
3. Hager et. al (2020) have shown/indicated ....
I am quite confused about what tense to use.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there are any general standards. It depends on your field and, potentially, your adviser's preferences. I tend to prefer the active tense (since I think that any sentence that mentions a work kind of presents said work), but pick whatever you like **as long as you are consistent about it.**
(My field is maths/computer science; other domains might have common standards)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally speaking any are acceptable. If you focus on the authors then "did show" or "have shown" feels about right. But if you take the citation to mean the paper itself, then the present tense is fine since the paper still exists and does still show...
However, advisors can be a bit picky on some such things, so it would be good to ask whether they think it makes a difference.
In a few rare circumstances, future might even work if a paper hasn't yet appeared, as in one of your own. But, as [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/200605/75368) says, consistency is probably a good choice.
In almost all cases people will understand you no matter how you write it. But there are exceptions, such as when some things need to be put in historical context, perhaps with older results being replace by new research. That doesn't seem to be your concern here, though.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: My preference would be option 2, the simple past. There is IMO a good reason to prefer it. Quite often it is natural to say something like "Hager et al. showed [statement]. Subsequently, Smith et al. showed [stronger statement]." This (or anything else that indicates the papers were written at different past times) doesn't really work with either of the other options.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The already-given advice to ask your advisor is good general advice for academia. It doesn't always work; some advisors are less helpful than they should be. But if they will be grading your work, they can be the most reliable about how they want it to look.
Another piece of general writing advice is to look for already-published examples in your field. A lot of papers have a section that is a small literature review - how do they do it? This is nice because you can learn more than just what tense to use.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/14
| 1,925
| 8,015
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a fourth year neurodivergent doctoral candidate with an accepted Master's (both in Experimental Psychology) and have posted a decent amount on here. Hopefully, this post means that I can stop playing "whack a mole" with every concern of mine. I have reviewed my patterns of worries, concerns, etc. and now realize that it all stems from mistrust in the process itself. For example, I have a history of calling and/or emailing the office manager at my Ph.D program multiple times to verify information. Sometimes, I would do so on numerous occasions and she would point out if I called multiple times.
At this point, I have not done additional research project work independently at all between the MA and Ph.D levels respectively outside of my Master's thesis (from 2020) and follow up projects both my Master's thesis and Ph.D doctoral qualifier project that were shut down pre-emptively (see old posts for more details). I have adjunct teaching experience and will be a full-time instructor at a SLAC this coming academic year regardless though.
After some deep introspection, I truly realize that the academic process was not suited for me at all. Given that this coming year is my last year and I proposed my dissertation, I have every intent on finishing. However, even though the idea of additional projects would normally excite me, I get intrusive thoughts from so much as even reading a journal article related to my dissertation or other research projects I could do (e.g., I may think of or hear my abusive first Ph.D advisor).
I also have a major passion for advocacy, which was part of the reason that I even got a fellowship for this coming year as well. I have been told that I could publish my higher education advocacy interests in a journal, but watching how brutal and political the process gets is truly awful and painful to the point I have avoided it.
I feel some guilt because my current advisor is incredible and amazing. However, the visceral reactions I get each time I open an article, read, or write is just overwhelming. I truly wish that I just went to work in industry with my Master's even if I fought an uphill battle by only having research assistantship experience. I did not take a teaching assistantship my second year since I was misled into thinking it was full blown teaching a class, which I was not ready for at all. I did not realize that not pursuing an additional research assistantship would have looked bad at all. Therefore, I only finished my MA with what may as well have been the equivalent of an undergraduate honor's thesis experience (e.g., just research assistantship with the main thesis project and follow up project). At the Ph.D level, I did some of the Ph.D program's equivalents of Master's courses my first year before I was done with classes my second year in the program. I worked on my qualifiers project, but it was something where my advisor said I should work full work days on nothing but that one project despite how low maintenance it really was at the time. I know how to read Python code, but eventually dropped it since I found myself becoming increasingly frustrated with learning a ton of material that was not directly applicable to what I was doing (i.e., once I knew how to read code, it was easy to just have Chat GPT generate code and paste it into programs. There is also a tech representative who codes for others).
Does anyone have any advice for learning to trust the process again? Especially after the number of times I thought I was ok and/or trusted someone's advice stating they were happy with my progress only to find my professional progress in each of my programs was not ideal towards the end?
I am aware there was a post similar to mine on this stack exchange, but it does not quite encompass the nature of my specific request at all.<issue_comment>username_1: I am also neurodivergent (I have nonverbal learning disabilities). I didn't have the sorts of problems you are experiencing when I got my PhD (way back in 1999, in psychometrics) but I had problems of my own (like getting lost on campus!).
I salute you for persevering, But I think this sort of question might better be asked of a therapist than of this group.
Most universities have some sort of help available, either in a general sort of "mental health" facility or in services for students with disabilities. Have you investigated those?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: (Not really an answer, but comments do not allow me to write a large paragraph, so here I go)
First of all, I'm sorry to hear you are having such a hard time.
I can't help though but point out that, based on this and other questions from you, maybe you are idealizing industry. For the way you talk, it seems you think the work load in industry is lighter and more neurodivergent-friendly. I know a lot of people in academia tend to think of industry as an "easier and highest paid job", and I'm afraid you are having this fake mental concept too. Don't listen to people that talks about "the lazy software engineer at google that works 2 hours per day and gets paid 100K per year". You say
>
> once I knew how to read code, it was easy to just have Chat GPT generate code and paste it into programs.
>
>
>
For Pete's sake, why are you doing this? Being able to understand some Python codes is not enough to find a job out there. Asking ChatGPT to do your coding sessions/exercises is **the worst** you can do if you really want to learn to think in the right way, to be able to define the problems you face in real life and create a plan to tackle them. Also, if you rely on those chatbots to do your work, you don't really know if you would like the kind of life you will have if you ever find a job as a programmer/data scientist!
You ask
>
> Does anyone have any advice for learning to trust the process again?
> Especially after the number of times I thought I was ok and/or trusted
> someone's advice stating they were happy with my progress only to find
> out I was not?
>
>
>
You should start by trusting yourself. I don't want to lecture you (and I really understand some of your struggles, I myself face almost daily intrusive thoughts), but, as you may already know, shaping your opinions in life based on what others think (example: asking whether your advisor is happy with your work before even asking yourself first why *you* enjoy that work, why it is valuable for you, your present and future life) simply does not work. I support username_1's opinion and highly advice you to find mental health support. I also would like to invite you to enjoy your time left in your PhD program; if you are sure you have enough to graduate next year, take the following months as a light training time, learn new stuff that may be useful for you, and when you have a calmer mood, think about the next steeps. But please don't think that everything's peachy in industry. It may be a promising future career path, but not a solution to all your struggles.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like you've been through a lot in your
Ph.D. program, and, understandably, you need to be more trusting of the process. You've had some negative experiences, and it's hard to shake that feeling of doubt.
The first step to learning to trust the process again is acknowledging your feelings. It's OK to feel mistrustful. It's also OK to be angry, sad, or frustrated. Bottling up your emotions will only make it harder to move on.
Once you've acknowledged your feelings, you can start to challenge them. Ask yourself why you're feeling mistrustful. Is it based on real experiences, or is it just your anxiety talking? Once you understand the root of your mistrust, you can start to address it.
If your mistrust is based on real experiences, you must discuss them with someone. This could be a therapist, a trusted friend, or your advisor. Talking about your experiences can help you process them and move on.
Upvotes: -1
|
2023/08/14
| 354
| 1,580
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am asking this question because I am considering applying for PhD in Electrical and electronics engineering in US.<issue_comment>username_1: No, there is no automatic "funding". But what is normally available to most doctoral students in STEM fields is a Teaching Assistantship or possibly a Research Assistantship, in which you spend several hours per week assisting in either a course or a lab, respectively.
These are common but not automatic. An international student might need appropriate language skills to qualify.
Also note that these are common in most STEM fields because there is a need for assistance. For example, in a Math program the TAs assist in the huge undergraduate math program. In some lab fields there is a need for a lot of lab assistants to aid with research. I don't know specifically how this applies to engineering fields, however and it would depend on the university and its overall program.
Either a TA or an RA will cover both tuition and a modest stipend for living expenses. Without either, you normally need to pay tuition, which can be very high.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: PhD programs in STEM in the US are usually fully funded. Sometimes this funding comes from the university and you are expected to teach or TA a certain number of classes each year. Sometimes it comes from the faculty member you are doing research with. In either case, it is more like a job than a scholarship: You effectively earn your stipend and tuition waivers by doing work for the university or your professor.
Upvotes: 1
|
2023/08/14
| 1,168
| 4,568
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a Postdoc at the University of *A*. I did my PhD (in Computer Science, if it matters) at the University of *NotA*. All my Postdoc funding (salary, etc.) comes from my current PI's grant.
I work full-time with my PI (Dr *X*) on several projects. However, I also collaborate (provide guidance, write codes, papers, etc.) with my research team from *NotA*, primarily on weekends and beyond the working hours at *A*. These are some projects that I was already involved in during my PhD at *NotA*. Furthermore, I try my best to ensure that my external collaborations have no or minimal effect on my current postdoc research.
I have this "ethics" dilemma and confusion regarding my current collaboration setup.
1. Since *X* fully funds my salary, is working outside *X*'s lab ethically or morally correct?
2. If yes to (1), do I stop all collaboration with my team at *NotA*?
Distantly related posts: [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/72173/can-a-postdoc-conduct-collaborative-research-with-people-that-are-not-their-pi#:%7E:text=Yes%2C%20all%20the%20time.,from%20outside%20my%20PI%27s%20lab.&text=It%20is%20likely%20not%20legally,normal%20working%20hours%22%20and%20uncompensated.), [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46417/can-i-instigate-collaboration-outside-of-my-current-research-team-or-is-that-ba).<issue_comment>username_1: "collaborate" may range from "I review the presentation they prepared for next conference" to "I am responsible for the Fortran code that is at the foundation of their work".
In the first case, it is normal academic activity, no need to limit yourself to weekend nor to hide it from your supervisor, in the second case it is normal academic exploitation, no need to hide it from your supervisor unless you want to be **exploited** on one side and **fired** on the other.
Additionally, if it is the second case, if you are so important that the project cannot go forward without you ... please reconsider yourself, someone else can do your job equally good, but you are preventing them from being hired to do that job (and you are doing it for free, apart from the obvious mental and possibly health costs deriving from overworking).
If you feel you cannot be replaced ... please remember
>
> Give a Man a Fish, and You Feed Him for a Day. Teach a Man To Fish, and You Feed Him for a Lifetime
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a pretty normal situation that happens with many postdocs. What you should do is have an open discussion with your PI Dr. X about these collaborations (in the future, it's best to have that discussion already during interviews, or at least before signing a contract). Three common outcomes of this discussion:
1. **Dr. X does not want you to work on NotA's research, period.** I find this stance ethically quite questionable, but I know of multiple people who were in that position during their postdoc - so it seems to be a position that some PIs take, even if I find it a bit outlandish. In this case you can either stop or insist that you continue working with NotA outside of your work hours (but check your contract if there are any non-compete clauses in there). The latter has a good chance of antagonising your PI, so that's difficult to recommend.
2. **Dr. X is ok with you working with NotA as long as it does not impact your work at A too much.** That's more or less the same as what you do now, but with the added benefit of not keeping secrets from your PI. Most reasonable PIs would also be willing to give you some small feedback or help on these projects, even if they are not directly involved.
3. **Dr. X is ok with you working with NotA, but wants to be involved.** A quite common reaction to finding out that your postdoc still has some strong, active ties to another research group is to see this as an opportunity to establish collaboration with that group, essentially turning the "moonlighting" you currently do into yet another project that you work on with your PI (and your old PI). You don't have to worry anymore about doing it outside of work hours, and you get to spearhead a new collaboration of your lab. As long as everybody gets along, that's probably the preferred outcome that works best for everybody.
I would consider all of these outcomes preferable to working behind your PI's back, if for no other reason than that they are bound to find out (at least once papers get published). No ethical concerns arise once you have an open communication with your PI.
Upvotes: 4
|
2023/08/14
| 874
| 3,736
|
<issue_start>username_0: The Swedish "civilingenjör" is translated to "master of science in engineering"; in my case, it's "master of science in computer science and engineering." There isn't a plain "MEng" but the civilingenjör is both M.Sc. and M.Eng., distinct from the "master curriculum," which does not have the word engineering in the title. Do you agree that I can say without exaggeration that I completed a master of engineering when granted the "Master of Science in Computer Science and Engineering" Swedish "civilingenjör datateknik"?<issue_comment>username_1: "collaborate" may range from "I review the presentation they prepared for next conference" to "I am responsible for the Fortran code that is at the foundation of their work".
In the first case, it is normal academic activity, no need to limit yourself to weekend nor to hide it from your supervisor, in the second case it is normal academic exploitation, no need to hide it from your supervisor unless you want to be **exploited** on one side and **fired** on the other.
Additionally, if it is the second case, if you are so important that the project cannot go forward without you ... please reconsider yourself, someone else can do your job equally good, but you are preventing them from being hired to do that job (and you are doing it for free, apart from the obvious mental and possibly health costs deriving from overworking).
If you feel you cannot be replaced ... please remember
>
> Give a Man a Fish, and You Feed Him for a Day. Teach a Man To Fish, and You Feed Him for a Lifetime
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a pretty normal situation that happens with many postdocs. What you should do is have an open discussion with your PI Dr. X about these collaborations (in the future, it's best to have that discussion already during interviews, or at least before signing a contract). Three common outcomes of this discussion:
1. **Dr. X does not want you to work on NotA's research, period.** I find this stance ethically quite questionable, but I know of multiple people who were in that position during their postdoc - so it seems to be a position that some PIs take, even if I find it a bit outlandish. In this case you can either stop or insist that you continue working with NotA outside of your work hours (but check your contract if there are any non-compete clauses in there). The latter has a good chance of antagonising your PI, so that's difficult to recommend.
2. **Dr. X is ok with you working with NotA as long as it does not impact your work at A too much.** That's more or less the same as what you do now, but with the added benefit of not keeping secrets from your PI. Most reasonable PIs would also be willing to give you some small feedback or help on these projects, even if they are not directly involved.
3. **Dr. X is ok with you working with NotA, but wants to be involved.** A quite common reaction to finding out that your postdoc still has some strong, active ties to another research group is to see this as an opportunity to establish collaboration with that group, essentially turning the "moonlighting" you currently do into yet another project that you work on with your PI (and your old PI). You don't have to worry anymore about doing it outside of work hours, and you get to spearhead a new collaboration of your lab. As long as everybody gets along, that's probably the preferred outcome that works best for everybody.
I would consider all of these outcomes preferable to working behind your PI's back, if for no other reason than that they are bound to find out (at least once papers get published). No ethical concerns arise once you have an open communication with your PI.
Upvotes: 4
|
2023/08/14
| 865
| 3,727
|
<issue_start>username_0: If you were to do a postdoc at the Broad Institute (of Harvard and MIT), can you say you're a postdoc at either Harvard or (/and?) MIT? More importantly, will you actually be affiliated with those universities and have access to resources such as libraries, research instruments, and career support?
For example, I've heard of people working at the Joslin Diabetes Institute say they work at HMS, so I'm not sure if this is how the Broad Institute works or if that is even an accurate example in the first place.<issue_comment>username_1: "collaborate" may range from "I review the presentation they prepared for next conference" to "I am responsible for the Fortran code that is at the foundation of their work".
In the first case, it is normal academic activity, no need to limit yourself to weekend nor to hide it from your supervisor, in the second case it is normal academic exploitation, no need to hide it from your supervisor unless you want to be **exploited** on one side and **fired** on the other.
Additionally, if it is the second case, if you are so important that the project cannot go forward without you ... please reconsider yourself, someone else can do your job equally good, but you are preventing them from being hired to do that job (and you are doing it for free, apart from the obvious mental and possibly health costs deriving from overworking).
If you feel you cannot be replaced ... please remember
>
> Give a Man a Fish, and You Feed Him for a Day. Teach a Man To Fish, and You Feed Him for a Lifetime
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a pretty normal situation that happens with many postdocs. What you should do is have an open discussion with your PI Dr. X about these collaborations (in the future, it's best to have that discussion already during interviews, or at least before signing a contract). Three common outcomes of this discussion:
1. **Dr. X does not want you to work on NotA's research, period.** I find this stance ethically quite questionable, but I know of multiple people who were in that position during their postdoc - so it seems to be a position that some PIs take, even if I find it a bit outlandish. In this case you can either stop or insist that you continue working with NotA outside of your work hours (but check your contract if there are any non-compete clauses in there). The latter has a good chance of antagonising your PI, so that's difficult to recommend.
2. **Dr. X is ok with you working with NotA as long as it does not impact your work at A too much.** That's more or less the same as what you do now, but with the added benefit of not keeping secrets from your PI. Most reasonable PIs would also be willing to give you some small feedback or help on these projects, even if they are not directly involved.
3. **Dr. X is ok with you working with NotA, but wants to be involved.** A quite common reaction to finding out that your postdoc still has some strong, active ties to another research group is to see this as an opportunity to establish collaboration with that group, essentially turning the "moonlighting" you currently do into yet another project that you work on with your PI (and your old PI). You don't have to worry anymore about doing it outside of work hours, and you get to spearhead a new collaboration of your lab. As long as everybody gets along, that's probably the preferred outcome that works best for everybody.
I would consider all of these outcomes preferable to working behind your PI's back, if for no other reason than that they are bound to find out (at least once papers get published). No ethical concerns arise once you have an open communication with your PI.
Upvotes: 4
|
2023/08/14
| 1,056
| 4,424
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I submitted a paper to a journal, attracted by its quick decision-making process. After submission, I realized it's ranked as a Q2 in its field. While I had made sure that the journal was indexed in SCI/SCIE, I didn't verify its quartile ranking initially.
Given the emphasis some institutions and colleagues place on publishing in high-impact or top-tier journals, I'm now contemplating the potential implications for my academic track record:
Will such a publication be viewed differently by hiring or tenure committees, grant reviewers, or other stakeholders in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: The advice I got was not to publish in any journal that I don't regularly cite articles from. I don't think it really matters what the stats say - you presumably know the field you are in: if it's a journal that often publishes papers you find good, then it's going to be fine. (You could also withdraw the paper if it hasn't been accepted yet.)
Another wise piece of advice I was given was that it's not worth publishing things just to be published. At least in my humanities field, it's better to take the time to keep working on something until it's ready for the best possible journal rather than hurry it out. People know how long good research takes, so they won't judge you any worse for having fewer papers if all your papers are amazing - don't get tempted by quick turnaround promises to place your papers in lower tier journals but place your work in the best venues possible. That said, some top tier journals can be very efficient (it all depends on the field and the editors).
It's also surely going to depend on what other papers you have out - if you only publish in second-tier journals, that's going to give off a certain impression. If this is the only one out of a handful of papers that are in top-tier journals, noone will care. It also matters more at the beginning of your career.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This will vary depending on what the person finds valuable. For example, I only look for one or two top quality journal (conference) articles in which the person is the first author. This indicates to me that the researcher can perform at a high level. If a researcher can only publish in Q2 journals, then he/she has more to learn or located in a poor environment.
We all (hopefully) understand the 'pressure' to publish, and that there is a learning process and time before one can produce high quality work. This means if you are starting, a Q2 journal won't really hurt, assuming this trend doesn't continue.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There's nothing wrong about a publication in a Q2 journal, and in itself it won't harm your track record at all. However of course Q1 journals are better, so if your work would've been acceptable at a higher level (of course we can't have any idea whether that would've been the case), it's a missed opportunity.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In my opinion Scimago journal ranking classification into Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 can not be a parameter always, for judging good journals. In my field, mathematics, i can list several prestigious journals which belongs SCI/SCIE indexing through Web of science collection, but unfortunately they belong to Q3 or even Q4 category. I believe during COVID pandemic, several journal didn't perform well or were not regular due to several issues. As a result citation and other things didn't go well, which is why they came to Q3, Q4 from Q1 or Q2. I published one article in a Q2 journal which became now Q3 journal. Ofcourse, there are other reasons. The upshot is that, Q3 or Q4 journal doesn't always mean low category journal. They still can be good journal. For example, [American Math. Monthly](https://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=24656&tip=sid&clean=0#google_vignette) belongs to Q3 category but it is a prestigious journal. There are many more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Most of the time you are judged for the quality of the article or result, less of the journal or conference it got published. Unfortunately, researchers publish so much that instead of reading the papers, people have to rely on meta data like the prestige of the journal it was published in.
For publishing ask yourself, if a journal published articles relevant for your work and if your article would be interesting to its audience.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/14
| 1,261
| 5,543
|
<issue_start>username_0: Here is my situation:
I am a Ph.D. student in theoretical CS.
Since the start of my Ph.D. I have been sending my advisor the descriptions of my results verbally, he would usually ask me a bunch of clarification questions and I would answer back. Usually after some repetition of the questions-answers process (which usually lasts for about a month), he would declare that my result is correct. At that point, I would always ask him if he could write it up and he would agree.
Lately, it seems he is producing more papers so he stopped collaborating with me. He said that the time it takes him to formalize my results is almost equal to the time it takes him to write up his own papers.
My results are usually about the same level (they're shown usually in A-rated conferences) as my advisor's own.
What can I do about it?<issue_comment>username_1: As a PhD student, you are training to be a researcher in your field.
A very important (but difficult) part of being a researcher is communicating your results.
It sounds like, so far, you've done conceptual work in your field, but your advisor has helped with the communication part. Perhaps your advisor has helped "too much", but whatever the reasons, it seems like you have a false idea that this is how things work indefinitely: you describe your results, and your advisor writes the paper.
It's not reasonable for this to continue indefinitely. At some point, you need to learn to do the entire process. It seems like your advisor thinks it is past time for you to learn that step.
I think this is a very reasonable move by your advisor, and you should try to do these steps on your own. If you have trouble with specific parts, it's okay to ask for advice, but you should not expect your advisor to continue doing half of your work for you.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's extremely, extremely important to be able to communicate your ideas and write them up in a clear fashion. Once you have worked something out, you have to be able to explain it to other people (that includes verbally and in written language).
I think your supervisor is saying that he already has helped you a lot with writing up your ideas and clarifying them to the point where he was basically doing it for you. I'm not blaming you for this as it can be quite confusing when you are a PhD student as there are no standardization amongst what PhD supervisors do for their students to the point where you might think that something that they are doing is normal practice when it really isn't.
But think about it: imagine a nightmare viva scenario where you have results which you present at your PhD viva but then are unable to answer any basic questions about any of it. It becomes clear that the supervisor did it for you and the examiners have to fail you (I know of one time when this has happened).
Your supervisor is saying that you need to do this yourself although he might be able to offer some comments here and there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A PhD is a bit like an apprenticeship. An apprentice cabinet maker starts out by sweeping the floor, making cups of tea, rough cutting timber to approximate size etc. While this happens, the master craftsperson shows the apprentice how to use tools properly, and about the properties of wood, and aspects of practical aesthetic design. After a while, the apprentice starts making furniture with the assistance and supervision of the master. A while later, it is more or less just supervision. At the end of the apprenticeship, the apprentice makes pieces that demonstrate they have gained the required skills to work independently and become journeypersons.
In academia it is much the same. We start working with the supervisor with their research (or a training task where the supervisor already knows what the likely problems and solutions are) so they can pass on their skills. Then we progress to having a problem of our own to work on with their help and supervision. Then towards the end of the project we should be more or less working independently, showing we have developed the skills required to do so, with the supervisor only providing minimal guidance. The thesis is basically your apprentice piece and you are ready for a post-doc, research assistant or even independent faculty post.
So if it is a skill that you need to be able to research independently, it is a skill that your supervisor should not be doing for you at the end of the project. A good supervisor will taper the amount of help they give you in order for you to develop as a researcher (and not drop you in at the deep end). It sounds like you have a good supervisor!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Another thing to consider -- not necessarily happening in your case, but it is quite a common complaint by junior researchers -- is the idea that you are opening yourself up to not getting enough credit for your contributions to your discipline.
In the more benign cases, the question is should a supervisor be added to the list of authors of a paper, even if the contribution is small? In other cases, the question is should the supervisor be listed first as the primary author? This issue has been discussed many times and there's no point in going over it all here.
In more extreme cases, the supervisors takes *all* the credit and the researcher (the ideas person) does not even any authorship. It doesn't seem like that is happeneing to you but it is something to be wary of...
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/14
| 409
| 1,669
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have assembled a large collection of URLs pertaining to scientific papers from social media (e.g. "https://www.jni-journal.com/article/S0165-5728(21)00282-4/fulltext)".
I would now like to perform a bibliometric/scientometric analysis of these articles by looking them up on Web of Science, Scopus, or similar. However, most of these scientometric databases use the article's DOI as the entry point for querying. My question is therefore: how can I "convert" a URL into its corresponding DOI programmatically, and without having to scrape the DOI from the publisher's website? Essentially, I am looking for the type of link resolution that Crossref offers, but in the opposite direction (from URL to DOI rather than the other way around).
Any suggestions on how to approach this would be most welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: Most likely, you cannot use one approach across all websites.
However, most publishers use the same formula for their URLs, so you might be able to do each publisher by itself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that you know the answer: There is a database (at doi.org) that provides the translation DOI -> URL. You want the opposite direction, but unless (i) you have access to the database itself, or (ii) the organization that runs doi.org provides an API for the reverse lookup URL -> DOI, you are out of luck: You simply cannot get the reverse lookup that uses the normative data. The best you can do is scrape websites, but because they only provide you with a publisher's view of the data (rather than the normative mapping from doi.org), you may get incomplet or incorrekt data.
Upvotes: 0
|
2023/08/14
| 1,264
| 5,416
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a rejection of my paper. It was a simple case report of 750 words of a very rare disease.
After almost two months of no-answer, I wrote a polite mail to the editorial board asking how much time it would take to receive an answer from the reviewer. They answered that I was going to receive an email within days.
Another month passed without any answer and I wrote another gentle mail asking how much time it would take, and after four days, I received an answer from the reviewer stating that my work added nothing new to the knowledge in my field, which is acceptable nonetheless arguable since it was a rare case with just another similar case in literature, but worst of all the reviewer said that a "significant amount of text was from other publications".
I interpret this statement as a plagiarism accusation. Am I wrong? Should I answer the editor in chief and ask him for the cross-reference documentation or should I let it go and maybe submit to another journal?<issue_comment>username_1: It does sound like an accusation of plagiarism, but I would ask for clarification (it could be that the reviewer is being very literal - if you quoted a lot of text from others), if you were planning on submitting another version to another journal so it doesn't get rejected again (or worse be accused of plagiarism after it is published in another journal). You want to get to the bottom of what made the reviewer think it was plagiarism (if indeed that is what they thought).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not necessarily a plagiarism accusation - a possible interpretation is that the manuscript contains a significant amount of material that is already published elsewhere, and hence is not novel. This seems to match your description of the paper.
Assuming you didn't plagiarize, then asking for the iThenticate report (I assume this is what you meant) is kind of pointless. If the journal were rejecting your paper due to alleged plagiarism, the manuscript should not have reached a reviewer in the first place. In other words, the fact that the paper reached a reviewer implies that the reject reason is not plagiarism.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Being a physician and clinical researcher myself, I can just encourage you to keep submitting the case report if it covers a "rare disease". There are numerous diseases / syndromes out there which are covered by less than n = 100 case reports. Every single one of them (given a decent quality) matters to compile knowledge that later goes into treatment recommendations. Cite the case report under discussion and clearly state to what extent your case was different. Consider a head-to-head comparison as a supplementary table. Try another journal and do not give up. You do not have to "add to the literature" with a case report in a classical sense. "Another case report on a rare disease" alone might be of high interest itself.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: The devil is in the details. Your report is 750 words, which is roughly 1.5 A4 pages.
Let's say you took the 25 words literature description of the pathology: it will make 3% of your report suscetible of plagiarism suspect to automated plagiarims detection tools, and also to peers familiar with the work you are citing (not useful for the discussion, but please remember it is possible the reviewer *is* one of the author of the "just another similar case in literature", exactly because of that).
You can re-formulate that part in a couple of ways, as follows:
1. The pathology has been described in (REF, year) as
>
> a well defined and separated literal quotation of the 25 words in a separate box
>
>
>
2. For the pathology description we forward the reader to its first description given in REF (year);
In the first case, you have a block describing the pathology, in the second case you save 20 words that can be better used in other parts of the report.
Although the editor is not accusing you of plagiarism, they clearly are not confident on the novelty or on the opportunity of publishing your work. Take the bite, improve your work and submit it for publishing somewhere else.
You may feel your work has been misinterpreted, we know only your side of the story and it may be that the reviewer wrongly missed you properly referencing previous work.
The reviewer may be wrong, the editor is supposed to spend some time on the paper under review, but the editor is now facing the situation where you submitted your best possible work and the reviewers found some big flaws in this work.
Since the editor is strongly rejecting your paper there is not much room for discussion: the wording "significant amount of text was from other publications" leaves no room for discussion.
Stick to the facts you are facing, not to the interpretation of their motives, the editor has nothing to gain to prove you have bad intentions (plagiarism!) or to prove you are simply naive/sloppy (no novelty, work is a repetition of referenced works), they are simply annoyed and they judge your work not worthwhile of theirs and other people time.
Do not worry for the long-term consequence to your reputation (not even for the short-term), the editor that rejected your work is unlikely to remember your name or to put you in a sort of black-list (unless you start arguing, escalating the situation).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2023/08/15
| 646
| 2,622
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a rebuttal to a paper that was recently published. Since I refer to the authors very frequently, I've abbreviated their names to WW for their last names Williams and Wang (I made up these names, they aren't the real names). Is this appropriate for a scientific journal? Should I write *W and W* or *W&W* instead of *WW*?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends entirely on the journal's style - each journal should have a 'style sheet'/'style guide' that says exactly how they expect everything to be formatted and cited. You should check the journal's website for this.
(IMHO, unless you're really short on space, I always think it's nicer not to abbreviate... but there are different opinions on this both on a personal level and on a field level.)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I hope they are not <NAME> Coleman, or that you are not writting a rebuttal on Holocaust themes on the paper of Schutz and Saponer ...
Jokes apart, I would say that if you have so much to rebutt on one single paper, either you are spreading out the discussion of some sentence/ideas on too many sentences/part of your rebuttal, or that you should investigate previous work of Williams and Wang to understand why they say something.
Be concise, rebuttal works are often desk rejected because too long, then refused by editors, and finally required to be way shorter than you would possibly, so saving some hundred of characters from the names is not what will help you ...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Another way to deal with this is through the use of a) Pronouns (they, them, their) and b) Terms such as "the authors" or "the article" and so on.
But the ultimate answer, of course, is what @username_1 said: "It's up to the journal". And if their style sheet doesn't cover this, then I wouldn't worry too much. The journal isn't going to make their decision about publishing your rebuttal based on whether you abbreviate their names. They'll just tell you to revise. This would be a very easy revision.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: At least in economics, it is fairly common that a paper which extensively discusses another paper will abbreviate the authors' names in such a manner. It would not be unusual to see a paper cited formally at the first mention along with an abbreviation for subsequent mentions, for example, "<NAME> Wang (2022, henceforth WW) ...".
It would be difficult to say if this style will be accepted in a different field (or even a different publication), but it is evidently accepted in at least some places.
Upvotes: 2
|
2023/08/15
| 839
| 3,650
|
<issue_start>username_0: My Ph.D. supervisor assigned me a literature review paper to complete on a topic that I choose. I know very well the field and I did the necessary research, downloading every publication that I found on the topic. Nonetheless, I am feeling a bit lost since I don't know if there are guidelines for conducting a review paper.
Should I have a target journal for the submission before completing the review or should I choose one after the completion of the paper? I ask since maybe every journal may have different rules on review papers.
Are there rules that I can follow so I can fulfill the review's goals and not veer off into irrelevant details?
Thanks to everyone who may help me see light at the end of this tunnel.<issue_comment>username_1: If you have a (potential) journal in mind. Read some of their review articles and try to abstract from that what works there. Perhaps do the same for a different journal in the field. Ask yourself why certain elements were included.
The details depend on the field, of course, but you probably want to cover major results, trends, typical methodology (and exceptions). The outlines of the various papers might be enough to get you started.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, is a good idea to know some examples from related reviews and articles publish in specific journals. Some journals have a guide to admitting proposals. Without knowing what is the specific topic that you are working is a little difficult to do precise guidance, nevertheless [here](https://State-of-the-art%20literature%20review%20methodology:%20A%20six-step%20approach%20for%20knowledge%20synthesis) you have an open-access article related to a methodology to make a literature review.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think you are trying to get the work effectively done for you by asking a pile of questions on it.
Look, a review paper can be requested by a supervisor for many reasons, e.g.
* To make the student develop an overview of a new topic
* To provide a base paper on which the supervisor him/herself may write a better review paper for presentation to a regional or national conference
* To provide a base paper for a published review of the topic in question
* To test the PhD student's capacity for information extraction, absorbtion, synthesis and written communication
* To do some or all of the aforementioned purposes
For your own working convenience I'd advise you to pretend you are drafting this review for presentation to a group of Y1 PhD students so the others can understand in outline the topic, its challenges and current lines of research into it.
So write it in simple English, small words, minimal jargon, short sentences and a natural flow - beginning, middle, end.
Before you begin your draft, look at other review papers (preferably on this topic but otherwise on closely related topics) and think about how the better ones are (1) structured and (2) presented, i.e. the writing and the diagrams.
Just go ahead and give it a lash. The only bad review paper is the one that's not attempted.
Your supervisor will critique your finished paper but you should still give it a good effort.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If possible, try to check whether you local university library offers courses / classes for that. In addition, there are some good Youtube tutorials out there for beginners. Take hand written notes of every article you read, summarizing key points and publication details. This will help you to detect patterns (e.g. outcomes) that are worth reporting / considering. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2023/08/15
| 2,595
| 8,416
|
<issue_start>username_0: **QUESTION:**
Is there formal data demonstrating that academic pressures (e.g. "publish or perish") has been increasing over time? Did anybody draw a rough calendar of which laws and rules changed at which time, resulting in the rise of such academic pressure?
**CONTEXT:**
In some universities of my (current) country of residence (Chile), various bibliometrics-based restrictions (as opposed to checking the content of a research or research proposal) are exerted on academics and students to insure they publish (e.g. an academic needs to have published 7 journal articles in "Web of Science" journals in the last 5 years in order to be allowed to direct a PhD student; a PhD student must have published two such journal articles before being allowed to defend; a Master student must have submitted two such journal articles before being allowed to defend), in addition to various incentives (e.g. bonus salary money from various entities for each article published into such a journal). Such coercive measures and incentives have increased over time (e.g. the threshold to be allowed to guide PhD students used to be 5 articles in the last 5 years, the monetary amounts paid for each publication is regularly increased, etc.).
World-wide, the "publish and perish" pressure of academia has been cited as a cause for various cases of scientific fraud, and it is my understanding that it is seen as having increased over time, but I could not find any formal claim to that.
For a [study of malpractices encouraged by "publish or perish" policies](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/192375/are-there-studies-of-malpractices-in-academia-resulting-from-publish-or-perish), I would like to document formally whether academic policies have increased the pressure to publish on academics, and whether such change of policies can be correlated with observable changes in academic behaviors (e.g. as was done in the article [Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis](https://%20https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221212) for Italian publications regarding one Italian regulation).<issue_comment>username_1: Because academia is so broad, "pressure" can mean just about anything, and exact reasons people leave academia are not necessarily a matter of record (how does one know if a person who accepted a job outside academia would have preferred a job in academia?? How so you know for certain whether a faculty member left a department because they were denied tenure??), I have some doubt that you'll find a comprehensive reference. You *might* some ongoing surveys that might prove useful. For example, NSF used to track the careers of a subset of PhD recipients, and the data is at <https://ncses.nsf.gov/surveys/earned-doctorates/2021#survey-info>. With some work, you can probably find papers that cite that dataset.
Your answer might lie in simple math, though. Assuming one can find an average number of academics who train PhD students, and then estimate how many offspring they sire who are looking for academic jobs, then assuming it's more that one, that means that "demand" for academic slots is growing exponentially. Then, you can just track growth of the number of available academic slots. If the growth rate of trainees is greater than the growth rate of slots, "pressure" is going up.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> *Is there formal data demonstrating that academic pressures (e.g. "publish or perish") has been increasing over time?*
>
>
>
Possibly not. However, national research bodies (NSF, UKRI, NRF, CONICYT ...) would have data that can be innovatively mined/analysed to extract deeper nuances beyond the '*intended purpose*'.
A challenge is also that '*indicators*' are varied and not easy to pinpoint, although they are largely known: one of the question you listed has some of them - [Are there studies of malpractices in Academia resulting from "publish or perish" policies?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/192375/are-there-studies-of-malpractices-in-academia-resulting-from-publish-or-perish).
I know of places where the '*collussion*' is prevalent openly (overtly) and in another place where it's covert.
One challenge that academic faced is getting the '*requisite*' ethics clearance to undertake research in this area, especially longitudinal studies. Where given, the research gets overly '*narrow*' or meta-data. We sure need metrics research and critical realism-based causal mechanisms research beyond the cause-and-effect research.
---
The following research might give further pointers. *PS: There's one I'm trying to remember; I'll update when I do*.
<NAME>. (1998). Pressure points: A survey into the causes and consequences of occupational stress in UK academic and related staff (pp. 1-40). London: Association of University Teachers.
<NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2011). Publish or perish: Academic life as management faculty live it. *Career development international*, 16(5), 422-445.
<NAME>., & <NAME>. (2003). 'Running Up the Down Escalator': Stressors and strains in UK academics. *Quality in Higher education*, 9(1), 21-38.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., ... & <NAME>. (2022). Occupational stress in University academics in Australia and New Zealand. *Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management*, 44(1), 57-71.
<NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2022). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perceived publication pressure among academic researchers in Canada. *PloS one*, 17(6), e0269743.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2023). Ethical orientation and research misconduct among business researchers under the condition of autonomy and competition. *Journal of business ethics*, 183(2), 619-636.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2022). Do individual and institutional predictors of misconduct vary by country? Results of a matched-control analysis of problematic image duplications. *PloS one*, 17(3), e0255334.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2022). Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands. *PloS one*, 17(2), e0263023.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2022). Fraud and deceit in medical research: insights and current perspectives. *Voices in Bioethics*, 8.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In his videos (e.g. [Why is academia so toxic? 6 insider bombshells](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0), [PhD Student Advice | 5 insider secrets no one tells you about](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii11dmIsuJo), etc.) Chemistry Doctor [Andy Stapleton](https://www.youtube.com/@DrAndyStapleton) lists various issues in Academia and mentions for some of them how they evolve over time (especially in [universities always want more](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=585s)). It is not formal enough to use as a reference for an academic study, but it might be a beginning.
Among the problems he mentions, I would highlight
1. [Competitiveness](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii11dmIsuJo&t=82s)
2. [h-index](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii11dmIsuJo&t=280s)
3. [Peer review papers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii11dmIsuJo&t=331s)
4. [Funding](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii11dmIsuJo&t=459s)
5. [Not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii11dmIsuJo&t=604s)
6. [limited amounts of money](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=37s)
7. [being first matters](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=150s)
8. [metrics and comparison](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=260s)
9. [the system creates toxic people](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=397s)
10. [universities always want more](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=585s)
11. [luck plays a huge role](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl164GrHcM0&t=743s)
I (or others) might add more links from his other videos ([such as 6 Dirty Tactics Found In Academia & Universities | Watch out!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytax5-2cYSk))
Upvotes: 0
|