Is it acceptable to use personal equipment for research? I'm a new graduate student in a computational lab, and the workstations provided by the lab I'm in right now are...slightly subpar. Long story short, a lot of it is nearing a decade old, and there doesn't seem to be a push to replace it with new hardware anytime soon. Since our lab tends to work with pretty demanding programs, this creates a major issue.

Over at Workplace SE, the standard advice seems to be to point out the economics of the situation (devs = expensive, time lost = money lost), but I'm not convinced that the same reasoning holds in academia. In addition, from talking to labmates and various administrative staff, it seems that the lab won't have the funding to replace all (or even most) of the machines anytime soon.

Which brings me to a potential solution: I have a decently powerful computer sitting at home. Would it be a good idea for me to spend some of my own money to upgrade it and bring it in to the lab? My advisor is okay with this plan, but I don't know if there's other things I should worry about (e.g. unclear line between personal/lab equipment, or people coming to rely on the machine).

This is somewhat related to this question, but it seemed to be asking specifically about money and a grant application, while I'm more concerned about potential consequences of bringing personal property to the lab and using it for an extended period of time.

Another PhD student in my floor asked how to fix a slow system. Here is my supervisor's reply:

  If you need to have a fast desktop, the best is to convince your boss to spend 3 days of your salary to buy a top of the line Linux machine (or a week of salary to buy a Mac).

Anything else is stupid on their part. Note that your cost is not only salary, but is also taxes, work insurance, university fees (where applicable), rent of the office...

Addition: Also, they got a grant to pay you, they need you to publish. The longer time you spend waiting for code to run, the less you will publish, and the less competitive they will be for future grants.

*Note: he was being moderately flippant, don't take the two days and top of the line too literally, but the point still stands.

The problem with bringing your own equipment is that:

It is yours, and  if you wanted to do something else with it, you wouldn't.
If it breaks, and a lab is a moderately risky environment, it is your loss and no one else will pay for it. Also, you may not  get support from the IT department to fix it.
It sets a precedent for other students to do the same. The stipend you get as a PhD student is quite meagre, and buying a computer out of it is a significant investment.
In some institutions research data  is considered confidential, and they forbid for it to live in non-institution owned devices.

This said, I often bring my laptop to work when I need the extra mobility, or my own workstation (a top of the line Linux machine) is overworked, but I don't rely on it.


How to Fight Imposter Syndrome as a student by myself? I am facing maybe imposter syndrome that kills me everyday which leads to an intermittent sleep and a chronic headache. Unfortunately, the country I am in right now there is non-Anglophone speaking psychoanalysts, the university as well doesn't give any kind of support: there was a senior student suffering from chronic depression and didn't get the help and considering relocating. I seriously feel a constant headache and thoughts I don't deserve any thing, even I feel so stupid in programming although some people tell me you are working on a new topic. I don't know how to heal myself on my own. Hope to hear what I can do to overcome the imposter syndrome.

Even with proper psychological treatment at your university, imposter syndrome (IS) is tough to deal with. I agree with @erwan: recognizing you experience IS is the first step.

I suffer from IS, and can only make recommendations based on my experience and what has worked for myself and those close to me. I highly recommend joining or fostering a community of those who experience IS (this can be online or in person, and can comprise students, faculty and staff!). Organizing groups to talk about IS, or even chatting with a fellow grad student over coffee about IS will likely yield revelations. There are probably some students in your department, or lab, who think that you really have your shit together, when you think you don't!

If you're on Twitter, I have found it a great place for IS. Following people (post docs and faculty) who publicly post about how they are handling their IS (and mental health issues) has been great for me--when I see someone who I consider successful posting about how they don't feel they are good enough for X, or how they don't think they can complete Y makes me think, 'if they are suffering from IS then surely I can excuse myself!'.

Is there a cure for IS--imo, no. What would you have to do, or what goal would you have to achieve to consider yourself successful? Is this an attainable goal (by yourself or others)? When you think about a peer or mentor who you consider successful, how do you measure that and why do you use those measures? Is it fair to compare yourself to others?

Briefly,

Join or create a local community to discuss issues with IS in academia (this group could meet regularly, or not!).
Remember that you're not alone in dealing with IS -- follow people who talk publicly about IS/issues in academia on social media.
Don't define yourself by only your academic achievements--you're more than that.
IS doesn't have a cure, rather, you'll have to employ coping mechanisms to ameliorate or prevent the symptoms.
Find a way to measure and celebrate your successes.


How to "work on the essay" as a non-native speaker We received a report on our paper (it's the 2nd version already). The referee writes:

  The proofs are correct. However, I'm not completely satisfied with the style in which the paper is written and the authors have to work more on the essay.

I'm not sure what we can do with that. We are not native speakers and we did our best to use as good English as we can. I'm not sure how we should respond to that, since currently it seems to be the only thing that prevents us from finishing the referee process. We implemented the minor corrections suggested by this referee and as well the remarks by the language editor.

Any ideas how to proceed in such a case, please?

The referee is obviously satisfied with the "scientific" part of the publication but points out the narrative itself. I don't think that your English language skills are the deciding in the factor in that matter. You could write the same paper in your native language, let it someone translate it as it is and still get the same comment. As the referee puts it, it's the style that has issues. You should try to formulate your paper in a way which not only lists the discovered facts one after the another, but attempts to guide the reader's thought process towards your idea and results. Make it more interesting and engaging. Your language should be eloquent, your narrative consistent, your thought flow constant; the paper itself serves as a way to reflect the scientist's mind and as such it does not consist only of definitions, lemmas, theorems, proofs, citations, figures, etc., because a significant part is the skill (or art) to mold them into an article that readers will enjoy reading.

If the problem is really only the lack of English skills, try to write it up in your native language and consult some professional to translate it.

If that is not the case, don't be discouraged, good writing is a skill and can be learned and trained. Unfortunately, I've encountered many students (and some experienced scientists) who struggle with this. I personally blame it on the lack of reading of non-scientific material, like novels, articles, philosophical works, etc. Of course, this doesn't mean that you should style your paper like an adventure novel, but, as I mentioned before, writing is a skill, and it is best honed by being in contact with other well written materials. This way, you'll broaden your vocabulary, improve the ability to express your thoughts through text and, if you focus on English materials, become more proficient in English.


How can I improve my attention and make fewer mistakes? Throughout my life, I have always had some issues with what I, my peers and my teachers referred to colloquially as "paying attention". By this I mean a very specific ability to not make mistakes. Some very good examples are:

A mathematically competent adult getting a calculus question wrong because of a simple arithmetic mistake, such as 5+3=15.
A well-prepared student getting a multiple choice question wrong because it was asking "which of the above are not true", but he mistakenly selected the ones that are true.
A skilled roboticist damaging an expensive circuit because he accidentally wired the components incorrectly.
Mixing up two terms which refer to different things, despite understanding very well the concept that either term refers to.
Typos and simple grammar errors.

Note that I do not mean attention in the sense of being able to concentrate on and pay attention to a topic. I am specifically talking about the ability to not make mistakes (where mistakes are simple errors, which you know are wrong but do not notice at the time - not errors you committed because you lacked understanding of a key concept or because you didn't know any better).

While this "attention" obviously influences ability to do well on tests, it also affects my day-to-day work in 2 key ways:

When performing an involved experiment, things such as mixing up samples, accidentally skipping a step of the procedure, forgetting to clearly label the samples and so on may ruin the whole experiment - either because the experiment no longer works when that simple mistake is made, or because the mistake has made the results uninterpretable.
When working with a tool that does not provide much automated error checking, I can end up producing data or programs that are incorrect due to some mistakes I made. It may take me a very long time to detect these bugs - and until I do, all conclusions I draw from my results are unreliable (and I am not aware of this!). Even after I discover the bug, the work done up to that point is still wasted.

So, my question: Is "attention" in this sense (ability to make few mistakes) a skill, or innate? Is there any way for me to improve this skill? Can it be trained, or is it an invariant quality of a person that they can only accept and accommodate?

Note that, for the "making mistakes when doing something complicated" problem, there exist the solutions of

"break it down into simpler chunks which you are less likely to make mistakes with"
"restructure your complicated activity such that mistakes are rendered obvious".

I'm not very interested in these sorts of solutions, because restructuring the task is not always possible, feasible and efficient. Some things simply cannot be made any less complicated than they are.

Also, while I welcome discussions of the physiology of this problem, it is very unlikely that my problem is ADD or a similar disorder. As the saying goes, to err is human - but some humans err more than others, and I am interested in understanding why (and more precisely, what strategies are available to make oneself err less).

I was unfortunate enough to grow up in an academic upbringing (almost from pre-school up until university) that is a) purely competitive and b) relies solely on multiple-choice exams.

We were drilled for years to try and avoid such small mistakes, since they prove to be extremely costly when millions of people take the same test.

My only advice to you is to make a habit of checking your work, with a clear set of mind. I know it's not always possible (usually due to lack of time) but it's a very important skill to keep in mind that such mistakes do happen from time to time, and having some time at the end of a test/experiment entirely dedicated to checking your work is "money".

To my knowledge there is no fail-safe way to avoid such mistakes. Humans aren't really designed (from an evolutionary point of view) to stay focused for extended periods of time, especially when implicit calculations occur. Which brings me to a "corollary" advice; make a habit of writing out all your thoughts/calculations explicitly. The benefit with that is that it allows you to immediately spot irregularities in your work when you go back and check your work later prior to the point-of-no-return (i.e. you hand in your exam, or turn on the electricity switch or whatever).


Keeping track of one's academic record and achievements Possible Duplicate:
  What tools make it easy to maintain (or avoid!) the N versions of your CV?

When writing a CV (applying for an academic position, workshop or a scholarship), it's important to include one's list of publications, conference talks and posters, awards, etc.

Moreover, the list need to be tailored to the respective scope (and with the appropriate fine-graining).

The question is, is there a specific workflow (or software) to keep tracks of one's academic records, so that later it's easy to cherry-pick the relevant stuff?

Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic Research (also DBLP for computer science) collect a decent amount of one's publications (in particular Google Scholar).
If you are writing your CV in Latex/LyX, I would suggest finding/creating BIBTEX entries  for your papers then import the .bib file into your CV.


What are the advantages and disadvantages to completing a Masters program before applying to a Ph. D program? I've been considering applying to graduate school of some form or another in Mathematics. During my undergraduate years, I did decently on my undergraduate coursework (mostly A-s, some As, a B) but not stellar, and it wasn't until I started taking graduate courses as a senior that I started buckling down and getting solid As or higher. I also had no research experience at this time.

I eventually want to apply to a Ph. D program in pure mathematics. Since I didn't really click until later in undergraduate years, so I was considering applying to 2-year masters programs in mathematics, and then based on my performance there, decide whether I'm fit to work towards a Ph. D.

  My question is, what are the advantages and disadvantages to completing a master's program before applying to a separate Ph. D program?

I know masters degrees are sometimes considered terminal degrees. Would doing well in masters coursework be advantageous in applying to Ph. D programs later on as opposed to immediately after undergrad years? Does strong performance as a masters student make one a more attractive candidate, or do programs have less interest in applicants who already have a masters? Is it wiser to apply for a Ph. D directly? I'm sorry if this question is considered too much of a soft question. Thank you.

I can only speak for my (computer science) department.  Students who apply to our PhD program with MS degrees are held to a higher standard than applicants who apply as undergraduates.  What we look for in PhD applicants is strong evidence of research potential.  Most undergraduates don't have an opportunity to undertake a real research project, but MS students do have that opportunity, by definition.  It's much harder for MS applicants without publishable results to be admitted than an undergraduate in the same situation, all else being equal.  Grades are much less important (unless they suck, which yours don't).

On the other hand, the fact that your already decent grades improved when you started taking graduate classes is a huge point in your favor.  Be sure to get recommendation letters from your instructors in those courses, and hit them up for research opportunities.  I recommend applying to both MS and PhD programs; some departments will even let you apply for both simultaneously.

There's a similar effect in NSF's evaluations of graduate fellowship applications.  NSF splits the applicant pool into three piles based on the number of years of graduate education: still an undergrad, less than 12 months, and more than 12 months.  Expectations are higher for applicants in later piles.  In particular, publications are a de facto requirement for students in the more-than-one-year pile, even if their one year of graduate education was in a non-research masters program.


10 minute presentation for a PhD interview I got invited for an interview for a PhD and they asked me to prepare a short presentation of ten minutes about an aspect of a previous research and what skills it gave me to tackle this phd project.
So I get the idea but my problem is about the "aspect". What do they mean by an aspect ? Can it be just the methods used for my research or should it be really something more specific ? All the methods I used seem important to me...

Thank you for any help or tips !

They want to see one element of your research accomplishments rather than a full explanation of everything you've ever done. If you have extensive, varied research experience (or, perhaps, if you just like to ponder the details of each project) then this can seem daunting. It's unlikely that you can present every detail of every method and its applications in ten minutes, though, so you'll need to choose one project or result and keep the details to a minimum.

The skills needed to complete a PhD aren't limited to those learned in the course of doing the research, but also planning projects, adapting methods to your own purposes, interpreting your findings, presenting them, and even general skills like working on a team or knowing when a project has become too complicated. Even the presentation itself is a demonstration of your communication skills. Choose an element of your previous experience with the best examples of these skills and how you've developed them.


Meaning of et al. when referring to multiple papers with the same first author I am citing some papers with the same first author but different co-authors.
For example, [1] is a paper by X, Y and Z, and [2] is a paper by X, A and B. Would X et al. [1,2] be appropriate here? because essentially et al. in [1] refers to people other than those referred to by et al. in [2].

There is a similar question about Harvard references. But I am interested in cases where only the reference number is shown in text.

Update in my field in computer science, it's common to refer to the first author and use et al. When there are multiple ones. Usually the first author is regarded as the one who did the majority of the work.

I understand this "X and others" to mean one specific set of (unnamed) people, unless they are the same bunch I'd write them separately. Just like when I was citing two papers by Chen together, but they were different Chens.
Perhaps use "X, Y et al. [203] and X, Z et al. [205]"?


Publish experimental data I recently submitted a paper to a conference together with some colleagues. The paper was accepted with some helpful review comments. Specifically, one reviewer suggested to make the underlying data available to the public. In my case the data is comprised of a network derived from openstreetmap data.

My questions are the following:

Where can I persistently store the data (totaling ~60 MB)?
Can I get a DOI for the data itself?
What about copyright notices (attribution seems necessary)?

There are two types of data repositories: generic and subject specific. Check what repository may be used by your discipline, and see if it meets your requirements. re3data.org allows you to find an appropriate repository to access and deposit research data (https://www.re3data.org/). There is also a number of generic repositories: Dryad (as mentioned in a previous comment), Figshare, etc. Often they will assign DOIs for your content and will allow you to pick an appropriate license. I would advocate for CC-BY, CC0, or CC-BY-SA. Those are least restrictive and allow others to build on your work.


Is there a way to edit author name after publication for trans people (at least online)? I have seen questions about people changing their last names due to marriage but not for trans people. However, for them, it can be much more harmful (and wrong) to always carry their old names forever, although all other kinds of public records can be changed. Moreover, they should not be forced to out themselves every time.

I have asked Elsevier and said it is not possible. What would be some ways to minimize the damage (e.g. search engines, CV, ways to apply more pressure for change etc.)?

I'm not asking for the work to change but if the only author identifier is the name (which is supposed to be immutable but isn't), it doesn't make sense right?
It can only add confusion and be harmful, as I mentioned. By minimizing the damage, I mean either replace it or hide it wherever possible (e.g. something like a second edition).
I understand all the complications with hard copies, citations etc.

I know of one theorist who did the following:

She edited her preprints to use her correct name. In the new preprints she adds a header with the reference to the published version (in the APA style, which is common in her field and also only uses initials of first names).
Posted them to the relevant preprint service (PsyArXiv, in her case). PsyArXiv has fields for two DOIs: a "preprint DOI" and a "peer-reviewed publication DOI". The latter points to the older published version.
She now encourages other researchers to cite her using those preprints and their associated preprint-DOI.


Should I report this infraction on Masters applications? As an undergrad, I was accused of failing to paraphrase one sentence of a research paper correctly (though I cited the source I was getting the information from). The professor said he had no choice but to report me for violating academic integrity policy (and sent out an announcement to the class saying he had to do this to multiple people). I had a few points deducted from the paper because of that but nevertheless received an A in the class.
I never received any kind of communication from the Office of Academic Such and Such/Dean of Such and Such about this violation, and never had to attend a hearing or anything like that. School policy says that students are entitled to be contacted by these authorities if they are found to be in violation of the academic integrity policy. The only repercussions I ultimately faced were the point deduction.
Is this incident something I would need to report on a graduate school application when they ask about academic integrity? I am not even sure what my "disciplinary file" might contain, or whether I have one at all, since I was never contacted (and certainly never had a chance to "appeal" or "challenge" the claim, though I know due process is a foreign concept to many private universities).

No, you don't need to report it, and in the US it won't be reported either due to privacy laws. The school handled it and it is done.
Move on.
I worry about the professor, actually. If you cited the original it isn't plagiarism in fact. But if you quote it (rather than paraphrasing)with citation then it should be clearly "quoted" using some sort of writing convention, such as quote marks. Paraphrasing "incorrectly" doesn't make sense to me unless you somehow misunderstood and changed the meaning. That isn't academic misconduct of the same sort.
This shouldn't be a future issue in any case.


Do you know any country like Denmark returning an assessment for the job application? I applied for a faculty position at a Danish university. My application was unsuccessful but they sent me a detailed assessment of my application clarifying why I was not selected.

I was impressed. Then, checked several job avertiments in the Danish universities (not my field), and it was stated that they will return an assessment of the application.

I wonder if you know any other country/university doing the same or is it just the Danish way?

When I applied for positions at Swedish and Norvegian universities, I not only received an assessment of my own application, but also that of the other applicants. The latter were not anonymized, but the original application materials were not included.


How to narrow down a field of study when you enjoy and perform well in every subject? Might it be odd for a student to love and have excellent academic performance in all subjects—I am that student. I am really confused what to study in the university. My grades are similar (high) in all subjects, and I prefer both scientific and non-scientific subjects. It's like I want to get a degree in all fields. How can I decide what I should choose? What can I study? I have tried a lot of tests, even paid ones, but I get similar percentages for all choices.

Performing well in every subject is simply impossible past the high school level.  Conversely, I would argue that a strong high school student in a US-style system should be able to perform acceptably in every subject (excepting effects of disabilities), since studies in high school are typically designed to give the sort of general grounding that will be required in most professional careers (critical thinking, analysis of written ideas, clear exposition of your own thoughts, creative expression, foundational mathematical and scientific knowledge).

Beyond high school, one might still have the potential to be good at any particular thing.  It is just that this is the time when one begins to study specialities more deeply, and there are simply too many of them to be an expert in all of them.  This happens in a fractal manner at each level: in undergraduate, you can be excellent at whole major, but cannot study all the majors; in graduate school, you can be excellent at a sub-discipline, but cannot study all sub-disciplines; as you establish a career as an academic, it is important to identify a small scope of contributions within the disciplines you work where you can contribute uniquely well.

These realities also imply an answer to your dilemma.  You don't have to pick the "right" academic focus, you just have to pick one that you will enjoy.  And you can even afford to be wrong a couple of times, as long as you figure it out and shift to something that suits you better.  Moreover, it's possible to do this at every level (though it's harder to make large shifts the deeper you go), undergraduate, graduate, postdoctoral, and even beyond.

In short, you can think of academic areas like the Tim Minchin love song says: "If I didn't have you, someone else would do."


Mention a specific potential adviser and project in the PhD statement of purpose I am writing my statement of purpose for my Ph.D. and I want to work in a specific field with a specific professor in the department that I am going to apply for and I have a very good experience in this field. I sent an email for that professor asking if he/she is accepting Ph.D. students and he/she did not respond. I built my whole statement of purpose based on my previous achievements and future plan for that specific area. I also mentioned that I am willing to work with that professor. My statement of purpose tells that I am very passionate about this field and I am only willing to work with that professor (if there were more than one professor working on the same area, I would mention all of them). if that professor doesn't accept new Ph.D. students, will I risk my admission to that school?

Will the committee response be something like this:  "the applicant really knows what he/she is going to do and there is a specific future plan and he/she also got a good experience in this field, but he/she sounds very strict to his plan and doesn't show any flexibility...REJECTED"?

Stating specific professors you want to work with can be a good idea usually I feel. It shows that you have researched the school individually and are not just sending out blanket applications. It also allows for the admissions committee to see a developed idea of what you plan on studying. Whenever I review applications for graduate school, I always like to see that an applicant has given some thought to what they actually want to specifically study. Even if their listed topic is not what they end up studying, I can at least see that they are capable of determining a specific research direction.

All of this being said, it can be a bit risky as an applicant to base your entire application on a single professor and topic. You ask the following question:

  If that professor doesn't accept new Ph.D. students, will I risk my admission to that school?

The answer to that question is unequivocally "yes." An admissions committee is not likely to accept a student who is extremely rigid in their proposed plan of study if said plan of study will not be feasible. (E.g. saying "I will only work with Dr. McDonald because she is the expert in the field of rubber chickens. This is only topic I am interested in." when Dr. McDonald is not available to take on more students). Departments on the whole do not like students (or professors) who are inflexible in their research (and teaching) goals.

My advice would be to present your first choice professor as just that, your leading choice. I would then also present one or two other options as backup plans of sort.

  I am quite interested in doing research on polymer composition of imitation foliage with Dr. Thomas York. His latest paper on the subject is exactly the type of project for which I want to develop a greater ability. Fake plastic trees is a field that I foresee myself enjoying immensely and I believe Dr. York to be one of the principal leaders on the topic. I am also intrigued by the work of Dr. Linda Petrovic and Dr. Ron Bobb on kettle drums. I have taken several classes using kettle drums and would enjoy pursuing research on the sociological implications of taking kettle drums to funerals. Dr Petrovic's work on the topic introduced me to several questions I had never considered before.

You will ultimately need to decide whether it would be better to be admitted to the school of your choice and potentially not study your chosen topic, or to be rejected from the school of your choice and maybe study your chosen topic elsewhere.


How should I position myself in the US job market if I am an assistant professor with tenure? In my country, job rank is not aligned to tenure. You can be an Assistant Professor with tenure (i.e. a permanent contract at the university) or without tenure (on a temporary e.g. 5 year contract), or you could be an Associate Professor with or without tenure. I have tenure, but I am an Assistant Professor... which I understand is fairly rare in the US (if not non-existent)

If the time comes that I want to look for a position in the US, I assume based on the feedback from my previous question that I should focus my search on an Assistant Professor position rather than an Associate Professor level position.

If I were to apply for an academic position in the US, how should I explain this? Is it worthwhile to mention that I have tenure already? Do I need to ask for a shortened tenure clock or will it be decided by the university on their own?

They will not care about your position outside US. They will care about your publication list mostly. There are countries where people get a formally permanent university position just after PhD, but their are not called professors immediately. This fact does not, however, mean that their position is equivalent to the tenured professor in US.


Academic Amnesty-vs-Transferring: how does each affect graduate school admission? I entered college back in 1994 and was academically dismissed in 1999, and needless to say my transcript is atrocious. I only require a few semesters to graduate and I am planning to go back to get my bachelors and then masters. I was accepted for reenrollment by my old college and was offered an Academic Amnesty program where I can get a fresh start on my GPA. The transcript will still show all the classes previously taken, but the ones with D’s and F’s will not count towards graduation requirements, and my GPA will only be calculated using the newly taken classes after reenrollment. So technically I have a chance of achieving a 4.0 GPA. Down side is that there is no online class option, so I will have to do evening classes or leave work early two days a week for a few semesters.

Please correct me if I am misinformed, but I believe that transferring to another college will in essence do the same thing. Transferrable credits move over, new GPA calculation, etc. But the transcript with the terrible GPA will still exist at my old school. One major plus for this option is that I can transfer to a college offering online programs so I can pursue my degree with minimal affect to my job.

I would like to know how much emphasis graduate schools put on each scenario.

If I transfer to an online college and graduate with high GPA, would graduate schools also look at the transcript from my old school and average it?
Or would the GPA from the institution that I get the degree matter most?
If I have a solid GPA after the Academic Amnesty option, would grad school not care?
Is an online degree a significant negative?

Whatever you do, it's worth keeping in mind that those reading through grad school applications are people as well. They understand that whatever happened 20 years ago will not be who you are today. So, if you have good grades in your most recent courses, and if you have good GRE scores, then they will be quite likely to disregard your grades from the last century. Just point out in your application essay that you have had a few hard years back in the day but that, as can be seen from your most recent transcripts, you have changed and gotten yourself back on track. Honesty pays in this regard, and whatever your GPA will be does, in that case, not matter all that much any more.


How to work with an overly positive advisor? I'm in my second year of my PhD and my advisor is very, very positive. She never gives me negative feedback, even when I objectively have made a mistake.

For instance, two months ago, I noticed that I had made a mistake in my code that invalidated about 6 months of work. She wasn't even mad, saying things like "everyone makes mistakes" and "we can fix this." I was able to redo the analysis and still find interesting results, so it did more or less work out. But this is just one example of how positive she is.

Last year she encouraged me to apply to an university internal poster session and strongly suggested that it was highly probable that I would win one of the prizes offered. I did not win, nor do I feel like I was that close to winning. I was a first year student competing against fourth and fifth years.

Additionally, she is always happy with whatever I present to her. I'll admit, some weeks I do not produce much work, sometimes I'm slow to give her abstracts to review for conferences, etc, but she is always happy with whatever I give her.

She praises me excessively for every little thing, no matter how good or bad. She says "excellent work, great job, you're making fantastic progress." I get the same exact level of praise on the weeks I do a lot of work and weeks I do little work.

I'm used to working with PIs were much more blunt. Not necessarily negative, but told me how I was doing. If I didn't do much work, they would say "that's all you've done?" However, if I actually did a good job, I would get a "good job" or something.

It's very hard for me to manage my expectations with my advisor. I don't know if I am actually doing a good job or not. I don't know what my approximate actual chances are for awards and acceptances to conferences.

I'm afraid to ask her to be more blunt, because I'm afraid she would completely switch and criticize me too much.

How can I manage my expectations and work better with my perpetually positive professor?

I sympathize with this because I had an overly positive advisor for approximately 3.5 years, until I was getting ready to go on the job market and then suddenly he had tons of problems with my work. Others have told you to go elsewhere for criticism. This is probably a good idea, but you should also be able to have a good, balanced discussion with your main advisor who knows your work best.

Two things might be helpful:

1) Ask her what criticisms a reviewer might have of your approach to X

2) Ask her what needs to be done to improve Y

The first may help because she may be able to get in a different mindset about criticism if she is asked to think about the paper like a reviewer (a reviewer's "job" is to be critical, but she may feel that an advisor's "job" is to be encouraging). The second may help because it invites her to frame problems in an encouraging, positive way (which seems to be her comfort zone).


How to present a model which is based on the result not yet discussed? I am facing the following problem while writing a paper. I have a model which contains a function whose explicit form I derived empirically from the data presented in the paper itself.

However, I would like to present the model during the introduction and thus before the result. However, to justify the shape of that function, I have no other way than to anticipate the result (saying something like: “Since in the result of the experiment we found X, we empirically assumed X in the model“). I am not completely happy with this, because I would like to present the result directly in the result session, not earlier.

A solution would be to move the explanation of the model after the results. I do not like this either because I want to fit the real data with the model itself, and I don’t think it is wise to start fitting something without explaining it first.

So, what it your advice in this matter? What would you do?

Also, any papers with example of something similar are welcome.

You have data S, and a model M={H, f(H), g(H)}, where H are the set of assumptions of the model, and {f(H), g(H)} are components of the model that of course depend on the assumptions in some way.

Using the data, you estimate a functional form for f(H), for lack of mathjax denote it empf(S,H)

Then you apply your model to the data and obtain a measure of fit, expressed here in abstract as a distance measure between model and data

{M,S}->d(M,S)*   or **{[H, empf(S,H), g(H)], S}->d([H, empf(S,H), g(H)],S)

One (not all) components of your model had a chance to "fit with the data"  prior to applying the whole model, and so it has increased the chances of your model as a whole to fit the data.

So the "distance" is not purely between model and data -it is a distance between a model that has already come "closer to the data", through empf(S,H), and the data.

In a rather known dialect, "you trained (partly) your model, using the same data set on which you are going to test it". I would not consider this as scientifically acceptable.

The way out of course, is to estimate f by using a different data set, a data set that should, according to your theory, be able also to be represented by the same model. And this also guides you as to how you could go about writing your paper.


How to ask for a recommendation letter from a professor after long time? I had worked under a supervisor in 2015 and that year I asked a recommendation letter from him for a Ph.D. He wrote it very well. On 2016, I again asked him for one and he sent me again. Both of the times my application was unsuccessful. This year I had applied for a very prestigious scholarship again and I have been shortlisted. While applying they asked for the name of the referee and they said they will send a request to submit a reference letter to the referee if the applicant is shortlisted. So the scholarship committee already sent the professor a request mail. I did not expect that I will be shortlisted so I did not inform my referees earlier. Now I am confused how to write him an email and ask him if he can write one for me again? The professor is really good and helpful. We did not have any contact these years which made me feel awkward to write him.

Shouldn't be a big deal.  He will likely just send the same one he has on file.  Send him an email and politely ask for the help.

Dear Professor Y,

Thanks for your kind letters twice before. I am now a second year Ph.D. student at Fantasy University, working on a thesis in widget design.  It is going well--my training from you and the rest of the ESU staff is being put to use.

I have another request, this time for the SooperDuper Fellowship, which will support me financially at FU.  Actually I have already been shortlisted, so chances are good.

Could you please send copy of your earlier letter to support me with SooperDuper?  Submission details:

how/where to send
due date

Once again, thanks for your kind help.  Would love to stay in contact.

Sincerely,

Dukhia


While my elsevier in press article shows up on the journal website, it has not appeared in Google Scholar after a week While my Elsevier in-press article shows up on the journal website, it has not yet appeared in Google scholar after a week. Is this normal and part of the process? If not, what's wrong with it?

Google Scholar updates on its own unpredictable schedule, based on whatever sort of web-crawling and internal processing schedules Google happens to be running with it.  Sometimes I find that it updates almost immediately, other times not for more than a month.

In short: don't worry about it.  If it's on the website of a reputable publisher, then it will show up sooner or later, and usually within just a couple weeks of publishing.


Publishing phd work after joining another institute for job I recently submitted my phd thesis and immediately joined as a faculty member in another institute. My final phd viva will be in around 3 months time. Now, I need to publish some of my thesis work which I haven't published yet. Do I need to give my affiliation from both my institutes? Can I give both??  I will be the corresponding author.

I had the same thing recently and was advised to include both if you have used any resources (including time) while working at the new institute on the paper. I chatted with my advisor at the new institute and we agreed that as any work I had done on my PhD paper was done in my spare time, not during time my new institute was paying me for, I didn't need to include them as an affiliation.

But if you're taking significant chunks of the working day to work on this paper (including during review response) and the institute is paying you for that time, I would include them, as they have then been funding the time you're spending to work on it. Also in my case, I totally switched fields to one my new institute doesn't do any work in so they didn't really want their name on my old work.


What should I do if my parents are forcing me to study a career I don't want? I want to study biotechnology and become an engineer. I'm a straight A's student and as the eldest daughter I'm quite disciplined. However, my parents don't want me to study that career and are forcing me to study instead finances. Reasons are that I have the "obligation" to continue the family's business, and that studying biotechnology on a nearby city would be too expensive even thought it's a public university.

I have already talked with my mom and just expressed her my feelings and wishes but she told me I was being ungrateful and selfish, and that I wouldn't last long on the cruel outside world so I should probably stick with a career that already has for me a planned success.

The thing is that no matter how good it sounds to stay I just feel miserable about it. I wish to become a scientist, to create new things and help others with my knowledge, to make history, and, forgive me if this sounds cocky, I know I have the potential to do so much more than just stay on an office.

I told her that I was considering just leaving and live on my own if the economical burden was a problem but she then started to scold me for having such a naive and foolish thought. That she knows best for me and that I shouldn't do something so stupid out of whim. That between all my sisters I was the best "shot" they had to push this family up to riches.
I'm considering now moving out as soon as I finish high school but the thought of me being wrong just crawls on me every night, what should I do?

You are presumably an adult, you should not do something so important to your life as studying only for your parents wishes. Guilt-tripping children is very bad parenting, you should not feel ashamed to do your own thing.

However, before you start doing your own thing, think about what the consequences could be. Can you afford studying without your parents help?  Can you afford being at war with your family? Is there some sort of compromise you can find with your parents? Those questions only you can answer, and you (unfortunately) have to consider them. But never feel ashamed for studying what you want to.


Ethics of "Double Dipping": Helping 2 professors with research during the summer Some Context:
Over the past year, I have built relationships with 2 of the professors at my university. In this case, I was referred to Professor X by Professor Y. The professors work in two related fields (physics) and are friends.

I worked with Professor X on some of my research a few months ago and it went well. Professor X is allowing me to help him with his lab research over the summer and I am honored to do so. Of course, it would not be an every day thing and we will be working out a schedule.

Consequently, I spoke with Professor Y about a summer spot before starting my research with Professor X. Nothing was formalized here and I haven't spoken to Professor Y since beginning my research. However, I am very interested in helping Professor Y in her lab this summer.

My Question: Would it be seen as poor taste to ask Professor Y about helping in her lab this summer? In my email I would explain that I would also be working with her colleague.

I don't want to jeapordize my position or my relationship with either one of them, so, would it be considered "double-dipping" to help with both of them? If it is, would this have any adverse effects?

One option would be to ask Professor X if he would be alright with this. I am not sure about this option because again I don't want to put our relationship on weird terms.

This is undergraduate level, in the UK.

This shouldn't be a problem. The professors aren't your employers who demand 100% of your time - they might not even be paying you - so they are not likely to expect you to commit to their lab and their lab only (it'd also be unreasonable if they expect this). Meanwhile by working in two labs you're maximizing your exposure, which can only be a good thing for you.

The only serious consequence I can see from this arrangement would be that you might not be able to commit enough time to actually achieve something substantial. If you aren't going to get any real research done in both labs, you might as well commit to one lab only.


Peer review for the lay person I anticipate a lot of scepticism about my question, but I've written a short paper which identifies and corrects what I believe to be a flaw in the way an age old Newtonian problem is taught in physics. I'm not a student nor an academic, so can't use the services of an established University. So how do lay people like me get a technical paper taken seriously and reviewed by my peers ?.

The fact that you're not in academia is not proibitive for publication, but it sure makes things more difficult. If you think your paper is well written in the sense that it looks like an usual physics paper, you can simply find a proper journal and just submit your work.

But I'd recommend first making your work available online to get opinion from people in the field, as they can point you to the proper journal to submit, they can help you with your writting and, more importantly, they can check if what you claim makes sense or not. I'd recommend posting a question to Physics.SE about the issue you found with a link to your paper.


Co-authorship nightmare When I was in my PhD program I started working with an Assistant Prof. X in the department. I collected a large and valuable data set and at some point X "borrowed" me two RAs to clean and to organize the data. X didn't provide any further help, I oversaw the data collection, managed the RAs and did the final checks on the data. After the data was collected, we agreed that we would share authorship in 2 papers involving the data. Then, if I wanted to use the data for any other projects I could use it without including X as a coauthor. X emphasised on several occasions that I didn't need to include X as a co-author in other papers that I started.

The 2 original papers got stuck, partially because X somehow stopped working on academic research and started taking other engagements (e.g. consulting, etc.). Due to this, X's tenure-track position is on the line as X could not make enough publications. I understand that this situation is bad and somehow X has grown "desperate" trying to pull the strings from here and there.

X came to know that I was using the data for a project that is in advanced rounds in a major journal. X started to emotionally blackmail me and other coauthor to include X on the paper. At the beginning we didn't give in, but finally one of the co-authors gave in and included X in the paper, although he hasn't contributed on anything in this project. Meanwhile, he kept telling others that I did wrong, etc. which isn't true given our initial agreement.

I don't feel good about this, as I believe one should provide meaningful contribution to deserve authorship. Now X has gone into a non-response mode for months and would not respond to any e-mails, messages, or any other form of communication. The original 2 papers were main parts of my dissertation and are still stuck as there is a lot of heavy lifting such as rewriting, revisions, etc. that I need to do alone. I am working on them, but I do not feel comfortable anymore about having someone in the paper who doesn't even reply.

At this point, I am not sure on what to do. The very straightforward answer will be to drop X from the papers, but is that correct? or should I just leave the 2 papers and move on into new things?, which may also mean to "loose" the data.

Added:
Thank you for your answers. I agree that gifting authorships is a wrong practice, although it is often difficult to convey to a group of authors who have very close friendship ties among them (that's what happened with the co-author who finally included X in the project). The main question now is whether I stop working in the existing 2 papers and put them in the drawer. They are interesting projects but given that they need significant work and X is gone (X and I knew this and that's why we decided to work together to "share" the load), it seems more practical and rational for me to move into something new (not using that data) with different people who are motivated to work.

On the more subjective side, X has gone around saying not very nice things about me, and this has somehow affected the professional and personal relationships that I had with others. Given that, I feel even less motivated to work on these 2 projects and "give free work" to X. Is it worth to give up the 2 projects? At this point I am still confused and this has generated a lot of stress both personally and professionally.

That is indeed a messy situation. The bad behaviour notwithstanding, I think there's no reason to not honour the initial agreement.

You should retain him as co-author on the intial two papers, without doubt. First, he made the data available to you, and without that these two might not have happened. Second, an gentleman's agreement is exactly that; you don't default only because the other person defaults.

About subsequent papers, I think you should be firm and say no, but also convey and convince X that he is an integral part of the first two papers; that won't change.


Qualitative approach to evaluation of academic production In Brazil, a government agency, named CAPES, takes care of evaluation of the postgraduate courses. Among other things, they receive criticism, because such evaluation is based on bibliometric approach. Explaining briefly, the main problem of following this approach is that it becomes counterproductive, because the academy spends time on increasing the number of publications, instead of focusing on quality research (it is considered more valuable to increment the postgraduate course classification).

A logical advice would be that the organization needs switch to a qualitative approach (here is a report, where four international guests shared this observation). My questions are the following.

Are there today any countries that can be models in regard to their system of the academic production evaluation? How such transition can be initiated, focusing on a qualitative approach?

I'm from Brazil and I understand you very well about our research/funding system.

Let's branch the problem in topics:

CAPES classify the papers by "research impact", it's basically how hard is the congress/conference... to accept your paper: (A1,A2,B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,C).
CAPES is responsible for funding research presentations and they have a very limited money.
Only A1, A2 and sometimes B1 are really relevant for the society. Nevertheless both are commonly international congress. (let's consider international travels are expensive in Brazil, plus the conference taxes)
Let's also consider, poor relevance conferences (B2,B3,B4,B5,C) are commonly in Brazil, sometimes on places where there are a lot of universities, e.g São Paulo, Rio, Rio Grande do Sul, etc. Furthermore, all of them are in Portuguese.

Well, at this time I guess you already see the problem... Summarizing, the Brazilian research is very correlated with local congress and that makes everything easy even for CAPES (due to funding), even for researchers (due to easy paper acceptance), then you create a perfect productivity system... With a lot of useless research.

In my opinion, poor impact research are irrelevant. Then, I guess the solution would be change the impact rank  and  funding to only classify (A1, A2 and B1). This probably would make everyone work hard and then you probably would change the status quo in a long-term.

Note that is theoretical scenario. As I said before, this kind of system is perfect for lazy researchers and their financiers.


How to implement flipped classroom for 18 year olds? I teach an introductory programming course at university where 99% of my students are 18-20 years old. They are used to the old and boring education system they know from high school, so they are not precisely "motivated" about learning. And since we have to have exams (I'm with a team of teachers where most of them tend to "keep things as they are and don't make me work extra") the kids' goal is usually to pass that exam with the least effort, regardless of whether they learn to code or not.

Our teaching materials are organized so that one teacher presents the theory to students and then I explain whatever they didn't understand and present them with exercises.

As they are just beginners, they don't know enough to create cool programs yet (I'm teaching the very basics of control flows, some data storage in memory and command line programming). So I'm trying to make them motivated and would like to try flipped classroom methodologies.

However, I'm not sure about how to implement it. Let's say I make videos explaining the topics so they can dedicate my whole class to practice their coding skills. I've tried making videos before (both short and longer ones) and about 5% of the students watch them, as they feel they don't have time to waste given that there are so many other exams they need to pass (other subjects). Also, since this is about programming, there isn't much to be discussed, it's like math: you sit down and get your hands onto code.

How can I best bring in any new motivational tools like flipping my classroom?

The underlying idea of a flipped classroom is that you use face to face time for things that require it and nothing else. You don't "present" or "cover" material when face to face. This requires a number of things, but it will probably require buy-in from your colleagues as well.

I used to teach an entire degree program with these ideas. As you note, you need a way to keep the students engaged in the course when not face to face. There are a number of ideas for that, some of which require you to change work habits a bit.

It is possible to make the course "round the clock" so that a student can always get a question answered. One vehicle for this is a class wide email list to which everyone, teachers and students, is subscribed. People submit questions to the list and other people, including students, answer the questions. Teachers need to at least monitor to make sure that incorrect information isn't passed around. When I did it, no questions were off limits as long as they were course related. Code couldn't be submitted to the list under our rules, however. I've also used wiki software to the same end, with the advantage that wiki posts can be preserved for future offerings of the course.

To do the above, however, requires that you teach the students that their learning is a group and cooperative effort, not something done in isolation. The core of this idea is that the facts and skills don't flow from teacher to student, but all around the group.

For the content of the course, you can use readings (preferably short) and videos (also short). Don't rely on just video, however, as it has a down side that the audio quality can disadvantage certain students. And if the video is more than a couple of minutes it is easy to lose track an/or miss some things.

But you also need to assure, at least a bit, that students actually do what you expect when not face to face. For this you can include a few fairly easy questions that students must submit to you as their "admission ticket" to the next face to face. You don't need to have a "pop quiz" in the classroom for this, but just a hand in "homework."

You also need to run the course expecting that, at least at the beginning, students won't do the readings very faithfully. So expect a lot of questions, perhaps on the mailing list, to which the answer is "go watch video 83".

The face to face "classroom" sessions should also be cooperative. Teams are good. Pair programming is one of the best ways for beginners to learn to program, but you have to use it properly and faithfully. It isn't just one person programming and one watching. There are other questions on CSEducators that have resulted in detailed descriptions of Pairing. Two people participate in creating a program, but in slightly different ways, with roles switching frequently (minutes). Test first development also integrates well with pairing.

If you use a cooperative learning environment then grading is an issue that you can solve with peer assessment. There are ways to make this valid and non-threatening, largely by making it positive. Partners and team members detail both their own contributions and the positive contributions of peers. You can ask "who were the top contributors and why?" for example. You can ask for the main contribution of yourself and your partner to a pair project.

Note also that short quick questions can be answered on the mailing list. An advantage of this is that every student sees any student's question as well as the answer. During face to face sessions you can also have longer discussion, say about testing strategy or the difference between for and while if many are confused. But try to spend as little time as possible on such low level things, deferring them to the readings/videos and the mailing list. Use the face time for active, rather than passive endeavors.

Don't lose track of the fact that people learn by repetition and reinforcement. In a normal classroom that is usually provided via homework. With a flipped classroom that flips also. The little quizzes (tickets to play) are a minor part of the learning, though they should be a (small) part of grading. The repetition and reinforcement comes in the face session.


IEEE rejects my paper saying that it is plagiarised I submitted a paper to one of the journals in IEEE and editor responded with a rejection letter saying that it is plagiarized. But am very sure I have not copied any content or idea from other authors and have cited all references correctly.

I had submitted the paper in another journal of IEEE ( Transactions in Vehicular Technology) and the editor wrote back advising me to submit in a different journal as this was a survey paper.

What might be the reason? Can I write back to the editor?
Please help.

To answer your question, yes you can and should write back to the editor and request that they provide the information related to this accusation of plagiarism. Such accusations are quite serious and they should not make them without being willing to provide support for their claims. It would be entirely unreasonable for them to refuse to produce evidence.

In the event that they will not detail why they are making claims of plagiarism, and you are absolutely sure you have not inadvertently plagiarised,  I would suggest you bring the matter to whatever office or work group in your University deals with aspects of academic integrity. They may be able to put more pressure on the journal to produce evidence.


Payment for publication after graduation I recently finished my PhD and later a paper of mine (resulted from PhD work) got accepted. There are some charges for publishing, and my supervisor now wants me and other research collaborators to contribute to the payment equally.

Is this normal?

As far as I know, PhD students are not expected to pay for publication, neither are research collaborators.  Any experiences with similar situations?

Thank you

Edit:  Regarding collaboration, my research was not part of a collaborative project. In fact, I had a scholarship from the university and was doing my research with minimal supervision. At some stage, my supervisor wasn't able to help me, and then I had to establish collaboration with other institutions. My research collaborators contributed to my research more than my supervisor did and I find it odd to ask them to pay.

Who should pay for the publication? In most cases, the money comes from the research project, or main research institution, i.e. in most cases the funds should be appropriated by the team leader or research supervisor. This typically means that the senior author is responsible for paying the article publishing fee.

If the research project was a collaborative effort with no specific funding, another option is indeed to ask all collaborating institutions (not individuals) to share the cost. This would include all institutions, not individuals, and probably only staff members — grad students or post-docs typically do not have their own independent funding.

This should have been clarified before the paper was submitted to publication. This is the best practice whenever submitting a paper to a journal that requires paiement (e.g., gold open access venue), to avoid surprises and disappointment from all collaborators.

In no case should you use you own personal money to pay for this publication! This is a professional cost, and it should be paid from institutional funds.


Should I acept my second choice? I applied to a PhD program, and after all the interviews I got a firm offer for a fellowship let's call it PhD A, that I have to give an answer to before a deadline (next week), since they have
Now the lab in which I did my master's thesis, and in which I have been working since 6 months applied for a grant to finance a PhD student (me) but won't have an answer before a May. Let's call this PhD B.

Now my problem is that I would prefer staying in the lab I am at for PhD B, but, even though it might be small, there is always a chance that it wont get the grant, so if I say no to PhD A I would be left with nothing.
And on the other hand, if I accept the fellowship offer for PhD A and my lab gets the grant, I would prefer doing PhD B.

The real problem is this deadline, because the PhD A wouldn't start before October, and so if I also get an offer for PhD B after having accepted offer A, I would prefer not to burn any bridges by just leaving after having accepted.

So my question is what do you think can be done in a situation like this?

In this case, I would do the following first. Go to your present admin/PI and let them know what you have said here and ask them what would happen if they don't get the grant. Is there the possibility that you can be kept on with other funding, or is it absolutely dependent on the grant?

If you are valued enough where you are, it is just possible that they can make some arrangement to keep you. "I'd rather stay, but it seems uncertain, and I have this other offer. What can be done?"

I think it is probably worth asking the question.

But if it isn't possible to make an accommodation, then you need to decide how much risk you are willing to accept. That is personal. It would depend on the likelihood of other options, of course.


Should I mention the reason I changed labs so often on my C.V. and/or cover letter? (Due to lack of funding) I have changed labs 5 times in the past 13 years as a research lab technician. Every time the reason was only because a lab ran out of funding. Unless the recruiter contacts my references, they might think it is due to a personal problem.

So should I mention that the reason was due to a lack of funding on my C.V. and/or cover letter? If so, which one(s)?  If not, why not?

These are molecular biology and biochemistry nationally-recognized labs in the U.S.

I am not in molecular biology myself, so I may miss some subject-specific details. In general, though, spending 2 - 2.5 years in each postdoc-type position is not uncommon or particularly strange. Most of the postdoc positions I ever see are advertised for 1, 2, or 3 years; and longer postdoc positions are quite uncommon. On the contrary, I believe, if someone spends 5 to 7 years in the same place, the questions may arise as to why they did not progress and move to a better post somewhere else?

If you have spent at least one year in every lab, I believe, that is fine and you do not have to explain anything (until you desperately want to do so).
If you spent less than a year in some of the labs, this may look strange and this deserves an explanation. The cover letter is the best place to address such questions.


How should I mention on my CV that I will leave my current PhD program when I apply to a new one? Currently, I am a PhD student on paper. However, I would love to apply for a PhD program abroad. I do not intend to finish my current PhD. I am doing nothing for it. I am just a student. However, I have been striving to find a PhD program abroad and become acceptable (money issues, language skills etc.) for a long time.  My goals are concrete about my academic development and I feel I am highly motivated. I would love to complete my studies in a more respected university and experience a new academic environment. My current supervisor and former supervisor from MA fully support my decision and intention. In case of getting a certification of acceptance from a new program abroad, I will definitely leave the current program. I have to do that. So, how should I mention or imply on my CV that I will leave my current PhD in case acceptance for a new one?

Your CV is not the right place to mention this. Instead, you should write a brief explanation near the beginning of your personal statement or cover letter which explains your reasons for applying to a new PhD. I would advise that you think carefully about how you explain your motivations. If you sound like an uncommitted student (even if that is down to your environment rather than yourself), a new supervisor or department are unlikely to want to take you on.
Make sure that your CV is an honest record of your past employment and education. You should not omit your current position as a PhD student, even if you aren't really working for it.


If I refereed a paper at one journal (and it was rejected) should I referee it again when it's sent to another journal? A couple months ago I refereed a paper for one journal. Due to a number of factors, I recommended that it not be published in that particular journal, and gave the author a bunch of comments on how they could easily improve the manuscript. The editor of that journal followed my recommendation (and perhaps the recommendation of other referees I am unaware of) and did not accept the publication.

This morning I received another review request, this time from a different journal but for the same manuscript. I've never had this particular situation occur before, and am wondering what the expected thing for me to do is. Should I review the manuscript again as if I hadn't before, should I let the editor know first and see what they say, or what?

There are no problems associated with you reviewing a paper again, regardless if it resubmitted to the same or a different journal. Since you have seen the paper earlier and know its earlier problems you can better judge how it has improved and to what extent it is now publishable. You should definitely let the editor know that you have been involved in the process of this paper earlier even if he/she has not indicated the paper has been rejected somewhere before. That information provides the editor with a better perspective of the development of the paper and can make the decision to accept or reject easier since the willingness or capability of the author(s) to improve the manuscript is set in perspective.

You can always contact the editor and state that you are willing to take on the review but felt it was necessary to convey the information. I do not see it as necessary but it is of course a nice gesture.


Is the English-version of a paper previously published in a different language considered an "original contribution"? I am an academic in a Portuguese-speaking country, so there is some incentive for me to write in Portuguese. However, much of the literature I deal with is in English, so I would like to publish in journals from anglophone countries.
Given this state of affairs, and given that no matter how many translations are made of a work, the research leading up to it remains one research, I had the idea of maximising my audience by publishing in both in English (abroad) and Portuguese (in my country). That is, I'd like to publish a paper first in a Portuguese-language journal, and then later submit it to an English-language journal, or vice-versa.
However, as we know, originality is typically a requirement in academic journals. But are translations of papers previously published in foreign languages considered "original work"?
At face value, I think the answer might be "no": the work, as a research, has been published elsewhere, so it isn't quite "original". But that would mean that no research published in Portuguese can ever find itself as a translation in an English-language journal, which also sounds a bit exaggerated. If that is the case, what is the appropriate venue for translations?
I'm aware some journals have a policy giving editors discretion to consider exceptions to the originality rule on a case-by-case basis (see e.g. [1]). Still, I was unable to find information on how situations like this are typically treated. Obviously, as a matter of ethics, the original work would be properly referenced in the translation, which would be flagged as such.
So, paraphrasing: is the (original) translation of an academic article previously published in a foreign language considered "original work" for the purposes of publication?
P.S.: I imagine this may differ from field to field. I do research in the fields of law, Social science, and philosophy.

No.  A translation is not considered an original work in the context of submission to an academic journal whose stated policy is that submissions must be original work that is not published elsewhere.*
You can still send an email to the editor explaining your idea and asking if they’d make an exception to the policy. Some journals, in some circumstances, might consider it.
You can also translate your paper anyway and make the translation available via a paper repository such as arXiv. It will undoubtedly increase the exposure and impact of your work.
*Translation is of course a creative activity requiring skill and expertise, and in other contexts would certainly be considered a kind of original work.


Job requires recommendation letters from Senior Research Scientists - who is eligible to write letters? I am wondering who are treated as Senior Research Scientists?
Whether or not Assistant Professors, PostDocs, Project Scientists are treated as Senior Research Scientists?

I am asking this because I need couple of recommendation letters to make an application for tenure track scientist position. I am asked to take these recommendations from Senior Research Scientists.

In general, I would interpret "senior researcher" as somebody who has a permanent (or potentially permanent, such as tenure track) position doing research at a research institution.  It excludes graduate students, post-docs, people with purely teaching positions, etc.

However, if you are applying for a specific position, I would add one additional criterion for what counts as a "senior researcher."  Your letter writer should themself hold a position at least roughly as advanced as the position you are applying for.  The people reviewing your application want the person writing the letter should be familiar with the hiring standards and criteria for positions at that level.  So while it may make sense for an assistant professor to write a letter for you if you are applying for an entry-level tenure track position, you would want a full professor (or equivalent) to write you a recommendation if you are applying to a senior-level tenured position.


How to find out the tier of a university in the USA? How I can find out the tier of a university? Is it available in any website or report? If yes, what is the link?

I tried to find out the list and I got some pages which says how the universities are evaluated. I was more interested in current list.

Typically, when people talk about tiers in context of universities, the assumption is that they refer to levels of teaching and/or research activity within some standardized framework. As far as I know, the most well-known framework of this kind is Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. Based on this question, I further assume that it implies an interest in university research tiers (which matches the traditional Carnegie Classification framework - the Basic criterion).

Thus, in order to find a research tier of a university, click LOOKUP link in the main menu of the above-mentioned website and enter your search criteria on the Institutional Lookup page. The request will generate a list of results or a single result, depending on your criteria. Click on the linked title of the relevant institution and browse the resulting webpage. On that page, find Basic classification row, which contains the target value. For example, performing the search for my current institution (employer), Georgia Institute of Technology (aka Georgia Tech), we find that it belongs to the category of Doctoral Universities: Highest Research Activity. This is what usually refers to as (the highest) R1 tier (for more details about the shorthand labels, see this page).

Note that, while level of research activity is the most popular classification criterion, there are other criteria (see Listings -> Standard Listings). Also note that Carnegie Classification is focused on the academic ecosystem in the United States. I am not familiar with similar national or international frameworks (but have no doubt that some exist).


Being forced to publish a paper? Background: 25 years old, I have a BA in Anthropology, graduated in 2016, but currently working in a field unrelated to my degree.

I have been involved within a scientific organization for the past 3 years doing anthropology related projects. The whole involvement was completely voluntary, though I also got to travel two times to different countries because of it. But overrall, it was money loss + missed chances to start my current job earlier.

During the past 2 years, the organization started to publish a journal with collected papers from other people in this field (most of the authors are known only locally in my country). The director (senior colleague of mine) of the organization started to push me to publish in it to which I, naively, accepted without realizing how actually difficult is to write a good paper. The reason he did this is because I had an experience with few methods which are rare in my country, but then no-one could review them to check if they are done correctly.

I have a draft version of the paper, however, the final results are not quite what I was hoping for. Because of the lack of good quality data, the results are obviously flawed and knowingly publishing bad quality results might hurt me in the long term if I decide to pursue academic career later down the road. But currently, I'm quite satisfied with my job (which is unrelated to anthropology) and I will never put this paper in my CV. Furthermore, I doubt that I will continue working in anthropology in the future.

The only thing that's killing me is that I already promised to deliver a paper, and this would be the second time that I would not send a paper for publishing. The first one that I did not send was when I was 22 (two years ago, because of the same reasons). During that time, the director got a bit offended and told me that some one could benefit from the methods (even though they were never actually reviewed by some professional experienced in applying them, so they could've been flawed).

What would be the best thing to do in a scenario such as this? I really do not like to publish bad quality results. Should I talk with the senior colleague and risk to burn bridges?

My first guess is that you think your work is worse than it really is. This is a variation on Imposter Syndrome of course. The director, however, knows your work and presumably something about the field. His faith is stronger than yours.

But to ease your fears, I'd suggest that you try to work with the director to refine your paper. Along the way you can bring up your reservations naturally and, probably, address them. If you can arrange this, then you might include the director as co-author, depending on the degree of collaboration.

Even if your paper isn't perfect (few are), you probably have something valuable to contribute as the director indicates. Indeed, the methodology of the paper might be much more important to the community than the immediate results.

Also, I hope that the publication system of the journal includes good reviewers. By submitting it you will get additional feedback from knowledgeable people that will help you improve the paper before final publication. Even without the director's direct help, the review should be valuable.

Publishing just seems like a big win to me.


Doing a PhD while being unable to travel due to disability I’m starting a PhD but I’m disabled and can’t travel. This means I won’t be able to present my work at conferences. Has anyone had experience this? Will it negatively impact on my research?

My tutor is aware but I’ve already had a sponsorship declined because I can’t travel to training courses.
(I agree that the rejection is unlawful but as I'm only just starting out I cannot risk offence.)

My intention is to publish work. I can never travel far from where I live. I'm aiming to work either in my local university or local industry. Networking and conferences just isn't possible. They would have to come to me. It's a shame because I'd love that aspect but I'm working within my limitations and trying to change my life.

Conferences can be useful, both for presenting your work but also for networking.

Some conference organisers will be willing to let you present by videoconference, if you explain the reason. Others will not want to do that - perhaps for good reasons, perhaps for really bad ones which may or may not be legal. You can also have your paper presented by a co-author, which means that you can certainly get your work included at conferences and into proceedings - but if you don't do it yourself, you don't gain much recognition.

The networking side is much harder, as you can't do that by videoconference - at least, unless you or a funder invested in a telepresence robot or similar. Not being able to network effectively is certainly a disadvantage for your future career, but should not be an insurmountable obstacle, and should certainly not prevent you from doing a PhD.

You don't mention where you live, but in many jurisdictions having a sponsorship declined because of disability (where the disability does not prevent you from studying at PhD level) might be illegal. It certainly sounds deeply unethical to me.


Master's and PhD at different Japanese universities I have just finished a BSc degree in maths at ETH Zurich and I am now planning to continue with an MSc and a PhD in Japan.

My question is this: is it possible to do an MSc at one university and then do the PhD at a different university?

In Europe this is not only socially acceptable but nothing unusual. But as far as I know, Japan is different; how different I don't know. I would very much like to apply to one university for the MSc and then relocate to somewhere else for my PhD. But I'm rather worried that this may mean that the professor supervising my MSc will lose face. And of course, I can't just ask them directly because they might not tell me the truth out of politeness.

Institutions prefer their recognized terminal degree to be the final education before its graduates continue in their careers. By doing so, the graduates provide the evidence of the efficacy and value to society of the institution's academic programs.

However, as you have said, in Europe, the MSc is not recognized as a terminal degree. An institution in Europe from which you might graduate with a MSc should expect, if you continue your studies, for you to be successful in the program to which you apply.

The correct way to ensure that you contribute to the local reputation of the institution to which you consider applying is to ask them if the degree is intended to be a terminal degree, or if it is considered strong preparation for the terminal degree that you wish to pursue.

You should also inquire about this at your terminal degree school of interest, and you should strongly consider the advice that the institution you want to pursue your terminal degree at gives you in that matter.

For example, I inquired at Columbia about their PhD in Economics, and they suggested, as I expected, that I complete a Masters in Statistics first.

Communication, in the spirit of your notable tactfulness, is the best way to ensure that you meet the expectations of the institutions that you are interested in.


Is it better to submit a new research grant proposal or an extension of previous work? When submitting a research proposal for a funding agency, I heard two different pieces of advice from principal investigators that have won several awards. The first suggestion is to submit a proposal that is directly related to the PI work and consider that as a preliminary result. The second piece of advice was to submit something totally new which might extend the boundaries of science. I wonder if there are any general recommendations for research proposals that would increase the chance of being funded.

There is no one-size-fits all answer. The key factors to consider are: (1) alignment to the funder's mission and (2) credibility.
Alignment to the funder's mission. Different funding agencies have different motivations. Some have a particular capability gap (whether mundane or extraordinary) and want to fund the group most likely to fix it. Some routinely fund well-established university groups and just want to see progress. Others specifically exist to fund high-risk, high-reward endeavors. Whether to propose "incremental" advances based on past research or "revolutionary" advances will depend on the funder's needs.
Credibility. Even for high-risk programs, successful proposals will usually provide a basis of confidence that the proposed idea will be successful (i.e., simply writing down some crazy idea to "extend the boundaries of science" will not be enough). In some cases, this basis of confidence could be the involvement of the proposal authors themselves (due to their publication record or performance on other programs). In other cases, this could be that a proof-of-concept of the proposed idea was already carried out and gave good results.


When to use academic titles in presentations in Europe? I have M.Sc. (tech.) in physics. I am doing second degree in MD. I normally just present my work without academic titles in MD studies.
I am thinking the benefits of using academic titles in different fields.
Some of my friends use MD in medical stuff, while M.Sc. (tech.) in technical stuff.

However, many times, I have to deal with epidemiology and statistics where I use tools in Physics.
In these cases, I am thinking if I should use the academic title because my work is so different than anyone else in the group.
Same goes for the reports which I write.

In Finnish culture, we do not want to emphasize what you have achieved, which is the reason I am not using the academic title.
However, I am not sure about it.

Other titles which I can use EUR ING soon.
I think it is extraneous in such presentations.
Not sure which are the rules when to use this one, for example.
I think it is enough to leave the latter in CV.

If I understood correctly, you live in a culture where flaunting one's title(s) comes across as a bit crass; at the same time, you wonder if mentioning your title on the first page of a powerpoint presentation might increase your credibility when you are presenting to certain audiences.  (Did I get that right?)

You may be able to get the idea across in a more subtle way, that people would not interpret as bragging, on the first or second slide, as an acknowledgment.  For example, you could acknowledge the mentorship of Prof. XX in the YY Master's program at ZZ University.

That's just an example.  Does it give you some ideas?


Supervisor getting another PhD student with the same project? I just started a PhD supervised by a clinician and a bioinformatician. The bioinformatician informed me they have received funding to get another PhD student to work on the same disease/ broad question of machine learning.
I love this PhD topic, but I am very concerned about a new student working on the same question. I wonder about how we will divide up our research. I do not like the idea of it as I do not know how our research will grow organically, and I had big plans for what I wanted to publish during this PhD, which is longer than average in duration.
Is it usual or right for 2 students to have the same question? Has anyone got experience of this and how did it work?
When I was doing my Master's I had a similar thing. A different clinician wanted to add another Master's student to my exact project, but in the end the other supervisor blocked it. In retrospect, now I know the topic better,  there could have been space for another student and I to go down different routes. I think it would have occurred in the much longer term however (after the 1 year mark), and would have limited and been to the detriment of my research. Of course the commitment of a masters is much smaller.
I suppose I also wonder if it's a reflection of their perception of my capabilities.

Having a close colleague with whom to discuss tough sticking points, potential research ideas, etc. will be INVALUABLE for you.

There is nothing quite so lonely as being one of the experts of the world on a very narrow subject and never having the opportunity to discuss that subject with another person who shares your understanding.

You will likely produce better work as a result of having this other student around. And you two can collaborate.  Don't think of this as zero sum. Think instead about collaborative potential and about this student as a sounding board. Some of the greatest research I can think of was produced by pairs or groups.


How should I reference my Github repository with materials for my paper? I am writing a paper describing some of the research I have done. As part of my work I have developed an open-source library and made it available on Github.

How should I link to it?

Should I cite it in the bibliography or make a footnote with the link to the software?

Such resources, especially if they are a supplementary to the paper, i.e. in some sense a part of it, should be referenced in a footnote and not in bibliography.

Do include not only the URL but also a short description; and do try to keep that URL valid - once you publish that link, it's frozen forever.

It also helps to include the opposite citation. In the readme file of that library, include full citation information of your paper. This will allow others to gain extra information about the methods, and also give you citations if/when others build upon your work.

Some publishers also support binary attachments for supplementary information. If they do, you should use it - prepare a package of the current stable version and upload it there. It allows for reproducability, as a specific version is referenced which relates to the actual paper, and not some improvements done in 2020 that change everything; and it also attaches all relevant information together with the paper at the publisher's site, which will stay valid even if that github repository goes away for whatever reason.


Are studies centered around one's own students regarded as publish-worthy scholarship within educational research? I have read a number of papers within the field of educational research where researchers simply used their own classes for testing. For example, they test one of their classes with a certain type of instruction, but leave another class without this instruction, then: (1) test which group of students did better and (2) collect student opinions about the lesson.

While I can understand why a teacher might conduct an "informal" study on their classroom, I cannot understand why this would regarded as publish-worthy research. It is possible that I am simply misunderstanding the benefit and purpose of publishing such studies?

  Within educational research, is it regarded as acceptable practice to publish research which is only conducted on such conveniently available groups?

Within educational research, is it regarded as acceptable practice to publish research which is only conducted on such conveniently available groups?

Sadly, yes. In fact, some of the most noted and most often quoted work on the psychology of learning was conducted by Jean Piaget on his own children.

However, there is a benefit to conducting such small studies of the type you describe. In the type of study you describe, where an instructor teaches two sections of the same course at the same institution to the same body of students that are otherwise identical except for whatever change in pedagogy the instructor desires, many confounding variables are inherently accounted for. Principal among these are the "instructor effect" and the "student-to-teacher ratio". Additionally, two sections at the same institution should be influenced similarly by demographic, socioeconomic, and academic effects on the student population.


What can a PhD student do when a professor is no longer interested in advising them? I am a first-year PhD student. After about  months into my program, my adviser has asked me to look for another lab. I have had no luck so far with other labs in my department. He told me as my background is not similar to his research work, I cannot succeed in this area. He told me to look for a lab which matches with my background and interest. I have funding for this semester but so far have no guarantees for the future.

I have talked to the graduate adviser, and they said there are no options for departmental funding.

Given this situation, what could be my best option? I can’t even earn a master’s degree without funding, and from what I’ve heard, transferring to another university would be tough since they may not view my case favorably.

I would urge you to not lose hope and keep an open mind about your research interests. If your field is more applied than theoretical, it is very much possible to find advisers from other departments who might be doing the same flavour of work. Contact everyone you can! Talk to other students and see if any of their advisers has funding.

As far as teaching assistantships go, often times departments take applications from students outside their own (this is true particularly for departments that get plenty of research money, example, some engineering ones). Don't hesitate to reach out to the staff in those departments!


How to overcome lack of ideas periods? As a background, I am a PhD student in Physics. I have published 3 papers with my supervisor and 3 without my supervisor,as an independent work. After all these, I reached a point where I don't have any good ideas anymore. I don't know what direction I should approach. I have some ideas, some of them are not so good being too simple, and others too complex and might be done in long periods of 2-3 years. the question would be on how to increase productivity and find new good paper ideas?

In my experience a major point is to engage with other's research. The most common occasion is to attend regularly seminars, and go to conferences. By listening to research talks, you will learn about tools which might apply to some of your questions, and about questions for which you might have the right tools.

Another possibility is simply to read other's research, but it is quite difficult to decide in what direction to read, while when you have a weekly seminar to attend you get in touch with ideas regularly without having to be proactive.

Maybe there is a subfield, with connexion with what you already know, where you heard things are happening and someone wrote a nice survey? Then read that and see if it leads you somewhere.


How does PhD candidate salary compares between differen European countries, and the USA? I would like to know which is the salary average of a PhD candidate position in chemistry in different countries of Europe or in USA.

I know that in Germany and France the salaries are around 1300€ after tax and in Spain, Italy and Portugal around 900€ (correct me if I´m wrong).

it depends on your contract.

In Germany you have a contract as TVL 13.

Fulltime netto: 2200-2400 Euro


Getting peer review for research without submitting to conference or journal Is there a way to get your research article peer reviewed without submitting to a conference or journal?
I am imagining something like openreview.net or even some private peer review system since you would most probably publish that article later in a conference/journal.
Note I work in computer science mainly Machine Learning

The way most people do this is to call one of their "peers" and ask them to review the paper. This could be a co-worker or someone from a different department or university. If you do not know anyone, talk to someone who does.


Institute affiliation link in google scholar As you may have seen, in google scholar, there is no link for some institutes in the profile page of researchers. I wonder why this is so. After a great deal of searches I figured out that the main reason could be not having a verified email, however it seems to be not. A sample institute without link in profile of its researchers is as follow:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&view_op=search_authors&mauthors=GSK+company&btnG=

I would be grateful if you could help me to figure this out.

A scholar who wants their profile to link to an institute page needs to do two things

Include the institution in the profile's affiliation field, and
Verify an email address at the same institution.

The only place I've seen these requirements stated is if you go to an institute page (example) and click 'Learn more'.

Implicit in requirement #2 is that Google Scholar can recognize that the verified email address is related to the affiliation in question. It seems flexible enough with formats for use with university purposes, but maybe not for larger conglomerations. For example, under your link I can find a profile affiliated with GSK directly with a verified gsk.com email address where said link shows up. On the other hand, it seems that the system does not recognize that the same email domain is used for GSK's subsidiaries.