Need help — Principal investigator with abusive behavior I am doing a postdoc with a principal investigator (PI) at an American university. Research is going great, with three publications in one year.
But the PI has serious issues. I would say he is a psychopath. I would have probably laughed in the past if someone would have used this description, but now it seems the best description and apparently he has the reputation to be this kind of person and a long list of postdocs who have suddenly left.
He lies endlessly, changes agreements we had (even behind my back, telling other scientists involved I would have agreed to things I did not agree to). If he does not get what he wants, even if it is unreasonable, he starts yelling. He has also been throwing around things in the office.
He also does not work scientifically, I don't know what he does. I have my own money, and he does not want me to leave because of that, but also does not treat me in any way well.
He also threatens me: If I leave, he will ruin my career. I have already an offer from another PI but am super scared that my current PI intervenes and I would lose my visa over that. Apparently he has intervened in the past when postdocs had offers such that offers were cancelled. How should I proceed? I am scared and can't focus, hate myself for that but can't handle the situation mentally. Feel like trapped. I love science and don't want to leave academia.

In my view you have three options: sit out, leave and stand up.
I share some thoughts about standing up. Your institution must have a behavioral integrity policy. You can talk to an ombudsperson or thrust person. You can do this anonymously. You are not the first and this is important information. Document the cases. Try to find and speak to your predecessors. What have they done in their situations and why? What was their outcome? What advise do you get from your ombudsperson or thrust person?
It takes a lot of courage to walk this route which in the end may lead to a formal complaint against this PI. There is no guarantee for success. Apparently this PI has been protected for a long time already on the expense of people with temporary contracts and lesser power. But it depends on history. You are not the first.
I cannot give you a single advice. If you can emotionally detach yourself, you can sit out your contract. But I understand you bring your own money. I fear he will not let you go easily anyhow. You are valuable to this PI bringing in research results and publications. You are feeding your PI.
If you can’t emotionally detach yourself, you should leave or stand up.
When leaving, do not be afraid that this PI may harm your reputation in science. Science is a huge place and your PI will have a reputation too. Trust me, PI’s loosing postdocs, PhD’s and students, not delivering results (publications and grants) are not taken that seriously. Especially when you can show your results.


How can a researcher in his early career attract good PhD students? As stated by the title, I want to know what a researcher in his early career, i.e., having not had any graduated PhD student yet, can do to attract good candidates. The reason I am asking this question is because PhD applicants usually look for supervisors who have many successful PhD students.

Presuming you have some way to fund their work, and you have positions to offer, I suggest you start by recruiting bright undergrads from your upper-division courses. Get them involved in your research before they graduate. Offer them positions as PhD students before they apply everywhere else*. I was so excited by my PhD supervisor's work (our work really), the lab environment, and the place where I was living, that I didn't want to apply anywhere but where I already was.

Some people will object that students should move around between their undergrad and PhD, and there's some merit to these arguments, but if you have funding and can't recruit, you may want to think outside the box a bit. If you don't have any money, or your department won't give you any positions (or whatever the system is at your university), get some!

If you want to recruit from outside, keep publishing. Publish in the best places you can. Become a hot shot. Advertise openings on your website and at the end of your conference talks (if that's acceptable in your field). Be aggressive about finding good students.

*: If they do want to apply elsewhere, write them the best letter you can and wish them well. Maybe they'll stay anyway. Don't be one of those profs with a reputation for trying to control the lives of your students by refusing to write recommendation letters!


Doing research in academia and not liking competition In short: is it possible to do research in academia (starting from a PhD position up to being a professor) while not liking competition?

I was an athlete in high school and I left because I was not really able to perform well under pressure. I thought that academia (or the research world in general) would have been a better fit. But I now realize how wrong I was. In fact, some fields are even worse. I like doing research and I really want to continue my journey in academia with a PhD. But that's it, research. I'm not interested in competing with other researchers. Actually, I'd love to learn how to collaborate rather than being faster to get it published before them.

I thought I could handle it but it's getting worse and whenever I start working on something that I would otherwise enjoy doing, I start panicking thinking that my peers are doing it better and faster.

Again,  is it possible to do (good) research in academia while not liking competition? Is it really fundamental?

Actually, the competition is largely in your head, not in academia itself.

I'll never be able to win a stage of le Tour de France, so why should I ride a bicycle? I'll never win the final at Wimbledon, so why should I play tennis?

Of course, there are extremely competitive corners in academia. If you are in a "hot" research area where many many people are chasing exactly the same very few goals, then, yes, you are likely to get scooped.

But imagine two scenarios.

The first is that you have a thousand people at one end of a field and there is a single prize at the other end. Everyone runs to get that prize but only one can succeed.

The second scenario is that the thousand people are wandering around the field, each seeking something that they find interesting. Here, everyone can succeed.

Academia is, except in a few instances, much more like the second scenario than the first. Collaboration is possible. Two can enjoy a sunset. But only one can capture the flag.

Another competitive scenario is being one of many junior faculty at a very (very) top university, in which only one can be promoted to a tenured position. It is, of course, very competitive and collaboration with your competitors may be sub-optimal. But collaboration, even here, with others is not to be spurned. Even being second or third on an important paper is a good thing for a beginning academic, so long as you don't quit with just that.

But most universities, even very good ones in the US, aren't like that at all. Life can be good. But there are also some people who thrive in such a high pressure environment and would have nothing else.

My experience in academia was that the greatest thing was that I could think my own thoughts and pursue my own goals. Much of that was in collaboration with people. Some of those folks were just about like me, and some were internationally known superstars. But it was always fun.

I studied at R1 universities, but taught there only briefly (visitor). But my sense of it was that even for people in the same narrow field, collaboration was highly valued. The most senior professors, were happy to share ideas with junior faculty in field-centric seminars. Often those junior faculty (and we grad students) would develop those ideas, even with help of the top researcher. It was a shared process to extend what was known.

Of course, if a person has a lot of ideas, it is also often the case that they don't have time to completely explore them. For such people, generosity in sharing those ideas costs them nothing. They may not be a co-author of every paper, but their stature in academia rises nevertheless.

Don't think of academic, or research in general, as a zero-sum game. Everyone can win, especially if everyone has their own goals and are not somehow driven to adopt the goal/value system of others.

The field of research is broad and richly endowed. Find the bits that are interesting to you.


Is attending a more expensive and prestigious foreign university a good financial investment? Here's the question: is university a sound investment? I'll be clear, since I know that this situation and this questions are experienced by many people. I'm going to face very soon the choice of where to go attending my Msc courses and obviously, after having decided which universities suit my tendencies better, financial considerations come on the way. I don't want to hear considerations like "yeah,it's all about your dreams, if you really want to go there then it's a worthy investment" because let's face it, even with your dream job life with 1000£ a month isn't easy. I'm not even complaining about how this world can be elitarist due to the high fees and life costs, I'm just pondering the best opportunities.
The choice is between staying here in my country where costs are way lower or trying for the upgrade in the best (and expensive) foreign university (namely I'm now considering Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial and Eth). I was wondering then if the 20000\50000£ investment is justified by a better salary and effective enhanced working chances? And in case of the decision to pursue an academic career, is it amortised in a reasonable amount of time?

Has someone experienced this path or similar one and can tell me something about it?

Just to give some feedback: I'm from one of the good italian universities and with grades making possible a decent (hopefully) prospect of career even here, either in or outside the academic world.

EDIT since it might be useful, I'm studying mathematics and planning to have my master in applied mathematics. The options are to get a specialization in financial mathematics or a general applied mathematics Msc that could yield to further academic continuance or to job in industry.

Ok, I have answer to this as I did finish all my higher education in the UK, and still living/working here.

Money Buys you a Place But Not a Future: Yes, you can spend money and get to very decent universities; but:

Exceptions: The Oxford, Cambridge, and Edinburgh are very wealthy and well known and funded, so they don't care much about anyone's money to be honest; however this might differ based on your field. But, the general rule, don't count on getting a place over there by flashing money.

University: Not so many universities currently looking for hire from postdoc level, yet alone PhD level. There is a mayhem over this, just talk to an academic living in the UK.

Conclusion Back to your question, no by paying extraordinary amount of money you will not get a better financial future compare to finishing your studies within Italy.


Will auditing impact graduate school admissions? I am in my last semester as an undergraduate and in a class in a field that I do not consider myself knowledgeable (but interested). I fear that I will be stressing rather than learning. The audited class will be a part of my final transcript, it will not appear until I am done with the class. I am also applying to graduate schools this semester, will this impact me? (It is not a part of my major, it relates to my minor, but I have fufilled the requirements for my minor so it is still an extra class, and as an auditor I do all the work (tests and assignments) and come to every class because I want to learn)

If the course is in your major (in which case you probably can't audit it unless you have already met your requirements) or related to the field of graduate study you are choosing, auditing it might make you appear to either lack aptitude or interest in an important area if there are other reasons to question your record, such as if your grades in other courses relevant to your major are poor.

If it is a side interest, unrelated to your future area of study, then there is most likely no problem.

In either case, an admissions committee may consider it almost as if you hadn't taken the course because they have no way of assessing what your level of participation was, if you even showed up for class, etc.

(this answer applies to one course; if it seems like you audited every course you could in your undergraduate career that might say something else about you and suggest you were dodging a full workload - that doesn't sound like your situation here)


Should you list undergraduate work on your CV? Specifically, I'm worried about my first few publications listed on my CV being undergraduate work because: A) It might not be of my own inspiration, and I'm just tagging along with someone else's research. B) It might not be good. C) I want to start off my publication history with a bang.

I understand the huge benefit of getting research experience as an undergraduate, but I'm worried about starting off my research history on a less than optimal note.

Your publications are your publications, and unless they have been retracted, you should list them all on your CV. It is up to the reader how to interpret your undergraduate work, and you have minimal control of that in the rather raw format of a CV, whether or not you list them. But consider: if you do list them, then your degree history makes it clear they are from undergrad and to be judged accordingly. If you do not list them, however, then the reader may easily come across them anyway online and be left to wonder what awful shame you are attempting to hide.


Repeat citation for consecutive sentences When the next sentence in the paper or thesis shares the same citation with the previous one. Should cite one time only at the end of the 2end sentence or cite 2 times - one for each.

For example:

In the following paragraph, 2 sentences follow each other share same citation. Should I remove the 1st citation or not.

  Hybrid ... registration method. (Mani and Arivazhagan 2013) Combine
  the output of intensity method or f... method will be the input of another.
  (Mani and Arivazhagan 2013)

I've heard that in fields different from mine this is referenced with (Ibid.) for footnote-style citations. I am not sure about inline citations, but the Chicago manual of style says it is ok. If you google for "ibid references" you get more hints how to use this.


Do researchers at schools that publish good journals get priority in publishing in those journals? Take mathematics, for an example.

Do Princeton math professors get any sort of priority / preferential treatment in publishing in the Annals?

Do Duke math professors get any priority in publishing in the Duke Mathematics Journal?

What about more applied places - do NYU Courant professors get any priority in publishing in Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics?

My question is generally about priority / preferential treatment, not about specific schools or journals.

The answer is certainly not - not officially anyhow - except insofar as being a well known mathematician (which someone who is at a place like Princeton typically is) makes it easier to get one's paper accepted to a fancy journal. That effect is likely real (though of a magnitude that would be difficult or impossible to measure, and hopefully not too large), but it typically applies on a more global level rather than a journal-locale-based level.


Okay to state very specific research interest in statement of purpose? *I am applying to Psychology PhD

For graduate (PhD) applications, most universities ask for a statement of purpose and instructions simply state to discuss your research interests. This type of open-ended prompt suggests to me that they may also be anticipating a rather wide range of research interests from the student. However, for my case, I actually have 2-3 research questions I intend to look at. I have also contacted a professor at the university, to which the professor responded that the questions were interesting and exciting to research. However, since the questions are very specific in nature, they do not correlate very well with many of the other professors' interests in that department. Only the professor with whom I have been in contact with has those topics listed as their areas of interest.

From a PhD admissions committee perspective, would a student who has clear ideas of what research questions they want to research be viewed positively (i.e. sees the student as being prepared) or negatively (e.g. student's lack of interests in other professors' labs), assuming GPA, GRE, etc. are adequate.

I thought about writing my specific questions but also state that I'm open to new ideas, but I was not sure whether that will come off as being snobby or, conversely, desperate.

Any advice from people who have read or written a statement of purpose would be greatly appreciated!

First, how about asking the opinion of the professor who has the common interest with yours?  S/he will hopefully be able to assess how much influence s/he might have with the admissions committee.

For the rest of my answer I will assume the professor advises you not to make your statement too narrow.

I suggest you start off rather broadly, for approximately one paragraph, talking about an area that includes at least one of your specific research questions.  At this point you are filming the city from a helicopter or drone.  In the next paragraph, you can bring your camera down to street level, and start describing one or more of your specific questions, as an example.

If you are really creative, you could write the broad paragraph in such a way that at least one other professor in the department could see some spark of commonality.


Are there Conference Proceedings that have impact factor? In Medicine, an Impact Factor of a journal is important indicator (IF) of journal quality.

Are there examples of conference proceedings that have a formal IF figure computed?

Are there examples of conference proceedings that have a formal IF figure computed?

There is nothing like the "formal IF". What you are referring to is probably the Thomson Reuter's Journal Citation Reports impact factor which is one of the most respected measures in the academic world. As such, to my best knowledge there is no such thing for conferences.

However, there are other sources which could prove useful as an estimate of conference quality:

As already Charles pointed out, there are exist cached versions of Citeseer's estimated impact factors for computer science, but this is too old to be useful.
Furthermore, Google Scholar lists ranks of top venues mixing journals and conferences in their listings. Here is an example of top publications for AI, as you might see, there are several conferences mixed in. They list h-index of the venue instead of an impact factor.
Another very useful, resource for ranking conferences is Microsoft Academic Search, where you can find profiles of conferences, such as this one for IJCAI and they also publish rankings for different categories of venues, see an example here.
Finally, you might find useful the Australian Research Council's ERA conference rankings from 2010. In 2012 they decided not to rank conferences any more, but the 2010 list is still very useful and at least somewhat authoritative. They would rank conferences into categories according to their own quality metrics, which however (at least in my area) correlate with the community's perception.


If I haven't had a response to a request for recommendation letter a month before applications are due, should I contact someone else? I have two profs that would make great references for me since I worked closely with them on some research. I emailed them 2 weeks ago (which was nearly 6 weeks before the application deadline). I heard back from one of them immediately but still haven’t heard back from the other. To be fair, it was the day before the holidays. I sent him a follow up a couple of hours ago. This is a professor who has always responded back to me within a few minutes. Still haven’t heard back. The application is due in less than a month and I’m really panicking I’m running out of time! If I need to find someone else, I don’t want to give them short notice. So should I contact someone else today?

Another question, I’m not really sure if this other person would be an appropriate reference. I worked with her on a research project (the same project I worked with the other professors on). She’s not a professor (which is fine) but I didn’t work all that closely with her on the project. I helped her out with a few specific tasks, but the other references would definitely be better able to evaluate me. I know you can’t tell me if she would give me a good reference, but does anyone else have a similar experience with getting a reference from someone you only worked with briefly on a project?

If I do ask her, what should I say in the email on such short notice (and since we aren’t that close)?

Contact the second person anyways, but continue to try and get the slow-responder to get the recommendation to you.  This might mean extra work for you, but having backup options tends to be a safer bet.  Good luck!


Can i continue studying architecture in Germany after i did two year of bachelor degree in architecture in Lebanon I started studying architecture in Lebanon and I have finished two years of bachelor degree and when I started the third and final year I decided to continue studying abroad,
So my question is: can I continue studying the third year or should I start from the beginning?
P.S.: I have a high school degree and the university I'm studying in is known internationally if this can help ! Thank you :)

The way this typically works in Germany is that you enroll at the new university for the desired degree. There will be requirements regarding what modules you need to pass for this degree. You can then apply for courses you have completed elsewhere to be considered as equivalent to some of those modules (this is called "Anrechnungsantrag"). The department will examine what topics were covered (which may require you to obtain translations of the syllabus etc), whether they consider the standards of the previous university sufficient, etc.
It is common that there are quantitative limits on how many modules you can do this for. Since you will ultimately get a degree from the new university, they'll want you to have done substantial studies with them. It seems far more plausible to me to get 1 year worth of modules acknowledged than 2 years.
Getting a definitive positive answer before enrolling is not likely, but if you haven't chosen the German university yet, getting in touch with the relevant
Prüfungsamt at your candidates for a pre-inquiry might give you some indication of how open to the prospect they are.


Should the title be changed when converting a conference article into a journal article? Recently, a (Springer) journal invited me to extend a (Springer) conference paper. The conference paper was published in April. After the extensions, I can submit the journal article as post-conference publication.

Regarding my question, should / must I keep the name of the conference article (when writing the journal article)? Or should I modify the name of the journal article?

According to the conference website:

  The conference proceedings are to be published in the Springer's LNAI (indexed by DBLP, EI, Scopus, and Thomson ISI).

In other words, your conference paper is already published. The journal paper will therefore be a new publication, and as such, you could use a different title, to avoid any confusion (and it will be a different paper, since you have to expand it).

EDIT
However, there are precedents, for at least one previous edition of the conference you're mentioning, of authors having the same title in the conference and in a journal edition (taken from DBLP):

Peerasak Intarapaiboon, Ekawit Nantajeewarawat, Thanaruk Theeramunkong: Extracting Chemical Reactions from Thai Text for Semantics-Based Information Retrieval. IEICE Transactions 94-D(3): 479-486 (2011)
Peerasak Intarapaiboon, Ekawit Nantajeewarawat, Thanaruk Theeramunkong: Extracting Chemical Reactions from Thai Text for Semantics-Based Information Retrieval. ACIIDS (1) 2010: 271-281
Yongli Wang, Dongxiao Niu, Ling Ji: Power load forecasting using data mining and knowledge discovery technology. IJIIDS 5(5): 452-467 (2011)
Yongli Wang, Dongxiao Niu, Yakun Wang: Power Load Forecasting Using Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Technology. ACIIDS (1) 2010: 319-328
Moamin Ahmed, Mohd Sharifuddin Ahmad, Mohd Zaliman M. Yusoff: A Collaborative Framework for Multiagent Systems. IJATS 3(4): 1-18 (2011)
Moamin Ahmed, Mohd Sharifuddin Ahmad, Mohd Zaliman M. Yusoff: A Collaborative Framework for Multiagent Systems. ACIIDS (1) 2010: 329-338

Looking at random references from the journals in question, it seems quite frequent to have the same name for a journal paper and a conference publication the previous year. In other words, I stand corrected, and you might want to keep the same name for the journal version.

As pointed out by DavidRicherby and Mangara, it's likely to be field dependent. Hence, the best approach is probably to look at previous editions of the journals in question, and check if there are matching conference papers.


PhD adviser moving to another school - Should I follow? I'm a doctoral candidate in Biomedical Engineering. I've finished my coursework and I'm in my first year of PhD research currently - I had 3 more yrs. to graduate. My PhD adviser has decided to move to another university (50 places lower-ranked). I will not need to be a TA after the move, and can fully concentrate on my research, a perk offered by my adviser.

Setting up the equipment all over at the new place will cost me 6 months. But since I can concentrate only on my research, I am expecting I will make up for it.

In my current university, there is no other adviser working in the same field as my current adviser. If I choose to find a new adviser at my current university, I may spend an yr. extra, learning about the new subject area. I will also have TA duties all throughout, which will ultimately push back my expected graduation date by at least 1.5 yrs.

I am unable to decide between

a more valuable peer group at the current university (better overall experience and exchange of ideas) and
earlier graduation possible at the new university.

Please share your advise and help me decide (I see the benefit of extra 1.5 yrs. towards post-doctoral experience, but I may be missing something).

Having a good advisor and working on a subject you're interested in are the most important things during a PhD in my opinion. I've seen many fail because they were fed up or just didn't click with there advisor for whatever reason.

Also consider your long term goals. If you moved, set up a new lab and worked closely with your advisor for the next few years, could that be the beginning of a research group at the new university, which you could be a part of? Otherwise if you're looking to move out of academia afterwards, does either university have partnerships or close contact with employers that you'd be interested in?


Is there any reason to register the copyright to your PhD dissertation with the US Copyright Office? I am in the process of submitting my thesis online. I think most of the people here are familiar with ProQuest. One of the option you have is to have them register the copyright to your thesis with the US Copyright Office (in your name).

From my point of view, a thesis should not be copyrighted simply because I think of it as an extended paper. I will gladly let people use my work and cite me appropriately.

Having seen that option though, I am wondering if there is any reason to register the copyright to a thesis.

Registering a copyright with the US Copyright Office is a legal formality that establishes a public record of your claim to the work.
It is mainly useful if, in the future, you want to sue someone who infringes your copyright. Specifically,

  Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration
  is necessary for works of U.S. origin.
  If made before or within five years of publication, registration
  will establish prima facie evidence in court of
  the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in
  the certificate.
  If registration is made within three months after publication
  of the work or prior to an infringement of the work,
  statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to
  the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an
  award of actual damages and profits is available to the
  copyright owner.

These and some other similar benefits are described in this circular from the US Copyright Office.

Based on your post, you seem to have some misconceptions about how copyright works. Note that:

Even if you do not register the copyright, the work is still copyrighted. In the United States and many other countries, a creative work is protected by copyright automatically as soon as it is written down or otherwise placed in a fixed medium.
Even if you do register the copyright, you can still make the work available under a permissive license, such as a Creative Commons license. See Is Creative Commons against copyright? for more information. For example, with CC-BY-NC you can choose to allow most non-commercial uses of your work as long as it is attributed to you, but still prohibit others from selling your thesis as an expensive book on Amazon.
You mentioned that you want to "let people use my work and cite me appropriately." Copyright does not prevent people from doing either of those things. Even if you reserve all rights under copyright, people are still free to use the ideas in your thesis. Copyright only protects your expression of your ideas, i.e. the words or images you used to express your ideas. So copyright prohibits people from copying large parts of your thesis verbatim into their own, or from posting copies of your thesis on another website (unless you choose to allow those things by assigning a permissive license to the work), but not from building on your work (and citing you). See Does copyright protect the author's creative ideas? for more information.
You wrote "a thesis should not be copyrighted simply because I think of it as an extended paper." The vast majority of papers are also copyrighted.


How much do letters of recommendation help in a statistics PhD program application? I am an undergraduate mathematics student who is looking to apply to a Statistics PhD program. I asked a few professors how much letter of recommendation help a student get in to a PhD program and I was told the following.

  Not much. Often professors don't want to insult a student, so they write good letters. Lots of people get good letter, yours won't make a difference.

and

  Letters of recommendation are everything. They practically are your  application.

and

  They help some, but it depends on who it is from. If it is from a stat professor that is good. A math professor is OK too, but stat would be preferred. If they are not stat or math, they won't care at all.

As you can imagine, I am now even less clear of how much a good letter helps.

Is it true letters of practically make or break your application? Or are they simply a formality?

I have no direct experience with statistics programs, but I know of no reason to think they differ from math programs in this respect.  Assuming that's the case, letters of recommendation are absolutely critical, at least in U.S. universities.  I agree with the person who told you they practically are your application, and I'm mystified by how someone could tell you they make no difference.  (I wonder whether it's someone who has never served on an admissions committee or was educated in a very different system.)

It's true that just about everyone gets what might appear to be good letters.  The issue isn't whether they say bad things about you, but rather how strong they are and how compelling a case they make.  I've certainly seen many cases of letters written by the same person that differ enormously in their effect, even though they are all nominally positive.

The third piece of advice you received in no way contradicts the second.  It's not enough for a letter just to include flattering comments about you.  It needs to make a compelling case for why you will be successful in statistics, written by someone who knows exactly what it takes to succeed in this field, has seen other strong students to whom you can be compared, and has a reputation to protect that will keep them from exaggerating or trying to manipulate the admissions committee.  A senior statistician is the best case, but a junior statistician or a mathematician may also be able to do a fine job.  A letter from a chemist will not be helpful, and a letter from a professor of literature, no matter how enthusiastic it is, will hurt your case (by demonstrating that you have no idea how the application process works or that you couldn't find anyone more relevant who thinks highly of you).

Exactly what is required depends on where you are applying.  At the top departments, you need letters that make a very strong case indeed.  Even outstanding students will be rejected, and you need letters that set you apart from the others.  At much lower ranked departments, it might be possible to make a favorable impression based largely on grades and test scores, but even then you'll still need good enough letters.  (The bar will just be lower.)


What are predictors of the success of PhD students? Every year we organize a competitive international call for PhD students (in the area of biology). What measurable criteria should we use to predict their academic success and award them research fellowships?

I realize that part of the question is ill-defined because it is not clear how to define “success” for a PhD student. But since I imagine that many of us have this problem and have potentially thought of a solution, I would love to read your thoughts on this question.

The major quantifiable predictor of success in research is... success in research. People who have done research successfully in the past are more likely than not to continue to do so.

For students that have not done research in the past, the best predictor I have seen for success (whatever that may be) is expressed in a quote from The Unwritten Rules of PhD Research, by Marian Petre & Gordon Rugg:

  A willingness to learn for themselves and good judgement about when to stop and ask for feedback.*

It's not exactly quantifiable, but you can get a sense for it in an interview.
(Of course, this quality can be learned, so a lack of it doesn't necessarily predict an inability to succeed at research.)

* I took this quote completely out of context; the authors there are actually discussing the role of the PhD advisor, and they mention this quality in reference to a student "who can be pretty much left to get on with it, with supervisory meetings being something that both parties enjoy, and where each party learns from the other."


How can I balance teaching computer-assisted skills and risks of cheating at exams? The situation I have in mind is concerned with teaching introductory probability and statistics to business students, and there may be similar situations in other fields. Because of the risks associated to cheating in exams where computers are allowed, exams are restricted to basic hand-held calculators and datasets are consequently very small : compute mean and standard deviation for less than 10 data points, etc. As the material gets more complex (regression analysis) the sole option is to ask about analysis of printed computer output.

As a consequence, a lot of time is spent both in class and in student study time on learning such useless skills as computing standard deviations with a calculator (even I get it wrong half the time). This in turn leaves less time to teach what actually is useful : doing basic analysis with the computer (Excel, to start with). Another consequence is that it turns the students off any interest for the material as they understand that what is taught in class has little relevance for practice.

In short:

time is wasted on outdated methods
useful skills remain untested and mostly unlearned
relevance is lost (course is "boring")

I would rather avoid complex, time-consuming and costly methods of computer surveillance. Blocking wifi (jamming) internet access during exams is not an option due to local legislation and there is no access to a lab (students have to have their own laptops). Having the students use their computers as cheat-sheets is less of a concern.

So my question is: how can I improve the situation?

The main objective is to bring in more computer-assisted skills while limiting the opportunities for cheating.

My undergraduate multivariable statistics class was designed like this: there were 5 larger computer labs, where we got to analyse large amounts of data using various computer programmes to try to answer some questions. We found out in advance that there were 15 sets of data, and 5 versions of the questions, so everyone had a different assignment. These labs were used to check our computer skills.

During the final exam, we were tested on theory: proofs, deriving formulas, explaining which statistical test we would use for some hypothetical situation, and one question on interpreting the output from the statistics programme (MINITAB) that we used the most. This way, we were tested on the computer skills in a setting that was very similar to how we might use them in our working life, and the exam was pure theory: I never even opened my calculator during the final exam. Giving us different data sets, as well as requiring a full lab report analysing the output ensured that we actually understood what was going on with the computer and made it very difficult to cheat.


PhD program application - CV (3+ pages) versus resume (1-2 pages) in the US I am applying to neurobiology Ph.D. programs in the US that focus on disease research.

I am seeking opinions on my personal situation regarding the decision to include either a resume (1-2 sides) OR a CV (multiple pages) in my graduate school application for the schools that don't provide me much space to write about research. I also want to know about whether or not I can include research experience blurbs in the CV.

Originally, after being told by most schools that allow up to 5 recommendation letters to only submit 3 and after being told not to upload anything in the "optional and additional uploads," I felt a resume would be better for my application. Less writing and easier to read for the admissions faculty. However, I know many Ph.D.students that have submitted CVs, and almost every school I'm applying to states that I can submit a CV.

I don't have that much to discuss, aside from 3 significant 2+ year teaching experiences as an undergraduate student and 3 research experiences (2 summer internships + home university research since I was a freshman). Unfortunately, I won't have a paper out for at least another year due to an ongoing study. I am also active in several clubs/honors societies. Thus, my current "resume" is 3.5 pages long. I could probably get it to 2 pages, but this is where you come in.

Would you suggest to expand even more, possibly elaborating more on my research experiences so that my CV is around 4-6 pages, or would you recommend to keep it as a brief resume? For the CV, can I include 4-5 sentence research descriptions after I list the knitty-gritty stuff (e.g. program, what I did in that research program in regard to career building, etc.)?

The main reason I ask this is that I'm slowly starting to figure out some schools give me absolutely no room to discuss research experience. For instance, Johns Hopkins allows me to write a single page personal statement while answering quite a few other large points; thus, elaborating on research is hard. Also, I just contacted Duke who had a similar case in their application, and the Ph.D. admissions advisor for neuroscience told me to include details about my research experiences in the CV or the optional supplemental uploader. Harvard told me not to utilize the optional supplemental uploader to further discuss my research, although they allow CV uploads.

Regardless, for some of these schools, I will need to at least include a few extra sentences about my research whether that be through the optional file uploader or a CV. Has anyone had this internal debate or has a strong opinion on the better option? Thank you!

In the United States, when applying to a PhD program, you should upload a CV, not a resume.

Your CV should not include any descriptive sentences.  The current custom is for CVs to be a list of facts, with no qualitative information.  Put the descriptions in your personal statements.


Document required for German National Visa application I have recently been offered a PhD scholarship in a funded project in University of Duisburg Essen, and I want to apply for visa for the same. the issue is the lab I want to join does not have any Non-EU student as of now and the lab's administrative staff is asking me for what document is required for my Visa application. I want to know what information should I ask for to be written in the Document. And also what other documents should I prepare.

I tried searching on google and here and could gather the following documents:

Travel health insurance poilcy
Accommodation proof
my Bachelors and Masters academic transcritps
Blocked account??? (since I have a scholarship offer do I really need this)

Thank you in advance for any help.

Don't trust google for legal advise!!!!

Instead ask the international office of the university you want to attend. Even if the lab has no experience with non-EU students, the university as a whole certainly has. For Duisburg-Essen look here: https://www.uni-due.de/international/index_en.shtml


What should a supervisor do about a PhD student who does not try to improve? What should a faculty supervisor do about a PhD student who does not seem to be trying to make their work better?  Let's assume the supervisor has given detailed and specific instructions, which the student agrees to follow.  But the student either does not finish the instructions or includes many errors.  The supervisor points out the errors.  This process has been repeated for several years, affecting both the student's research and job search.  The student is from a different country, and has not adjusted to academic communication practices, despite being aware of the need to do so.  The student has done a lot of things, but continues to have poor quality execution and pace.

Typically the supervisor does not wish to kick students out of the group.  What is the right course of action?

Dealing with wayward students comes with the territory of being an academic. Not every student will be successful and, unfortunately, you have to be prepared to deal with that.

It sounds like the situation has gotten out of hand, as it has gone on for years. Expectations need to be set early and often, so that, if things do go off track, the problems are addressed as soon as possible.

The other answers offer good suggestions, but your comments suggest that you [I'm assuming you are the student's supervisor] are worried about how it affects you. So I will offer a different suggestion:

Involve other (more senior) faculty from your department.

If you involve other faculty, they will share the responsibility for the outcome (thereby reducing the possible damage to your reputation) and, more importantly, they will be able to give you better advice than random people on the internet.

Where I did my PhD, there were established procedures to involve other faculty: Early in the PhD, each student had to pass an oral qualifying exam involving several faculty, which helped identify struggling students and provide feedback. Also, there was an annual student review in which the entire department met to discuss the PhD students one-by-one, which allowed their supervisors to raise issues and get input from others. Finally, each student's dissertation committee was officially a standing committee (although for most students it only convened for the defense). That is, for problematic students, the dissertation committee would convene regularly to assess progress and set goals for the student. The committee thus shared responsibility for "kicking out" students.

Does your department have similar procedures? If so, follow them. If not, suggest that such procedures be implemented and informally approach other faculty in your department for help.

Remember that it is in no one's interest for a student to continue on a bad trajectory (including the student's).


How important is primary authorship in judging someone's research contributions? I wanted to know how the research profile of a doctoral student or a post-doc is usually judged in academia. In the list of peer-reviewed conference or journal publications, how crucial is the position in the authors list, to judge the research calibre.

I am aware that being the first (primary) author is most important. As an example, consider a case where a candidate has 4-5 publications. In all these publications he/she is neither the primary author nor the supervisor of that project. On the other hand, assume he/she has 2 highly ranked publications as the first author. Which of these two cases can be used as a comparative study of the candidate's research contribution.

I see these days a kind of rat-race for papers, where each publication has more than 4 authors. Is the "number of papers" parameter lone enough?
Agreeing that working on multiple projects is important, should the focus be more on publishing one's own work rather than collaborating on multiple papers where the contribution is not significant.

Your focus needs to be on accomplishing significant work, and then receiving appropriate credit for that work.  Number of papers is often a reflection of that, but is not, ultimately, the metric on which you will be judged by anybody who is actually thinking of hiring you.  More distant reviewers of various sorts (e.g., for a grant or a tenure case) are more likely to apply publication-based metrics out of a lack of knowledge or imagination.  Anybody who is considering hiring you, however, should be less interested in what your rank order in authorship is and more interested in what you have accomplished (which is partially reflected by author order).

For example, in your question about comparing a candidate with middle authorships vs. first authorships, I would want to know what, exactly, either candidate had done.  Did the first author candidate actually conceive the work and do most of the writing, or were they just acting as a lab tech on behalf of the more senior authors?  Was the middle-author candidate just along for the ride, or was it a complicated project where their contribution was critical, but others happened to be more critical.

Thus, in a statement of purpose or other self-presentation, I look for a candidate to be saying, "I accomplished all of these things (as reflected by these publications)", rather than simply "I have all of these publications."


Amount of edit after submission (conference paper) I will be submitting a conference paper that proposes a new method for analysing a particular kind of data within the next 2 weeks. However, I think that I may improve the method slightly during the following 4 weeks that the reviewers use before giving feedback. The improvements will be minor, but it would be nice to include. It is out of the question to wait with submission for another conference based on this potential improvement.

Is it okay to simply replace the old results with the new results if the results improve after submission? More generally, how much can one add to a conference paper after it has been submitted? Is it only allowed to add elements that the reviewers request?

The general rule of thumb for conference papers is that nothing you add should be such that it would cause a reviewer to worsen their opinion of the paper.  That's a very fuzzy boundary, though, and it's certainly possible for somebody to make changes that would be considered too much.  Moreover, such changes would likely go unnoticed for most conferences, since there is often little checking of differences between the initial and final versions, except in the case of borderline papers.

Personally, I tend to use the following rubric to decide:

Are the changes a strict improvement?  Sometimes improving one aspect causes degradation in others, and that's not OK.
Is the improvement worth its own paper?  Post-acceptance additions should be incremental only.
Will adding new material require dropping anything else significant?  Conference papers often have strict page limits, and new material should not displace material important for acceptance.

What you describe sounds likely to pass this rubric.  Even if it does not, however, remember that in fields with peer-reviewed conference publications you can typically publish an "extended version" as a journal paper.  Such extended versions are an excellent place for any incremental improvements too large or too late for the conference version to go.


How to deal with co-PhD student demanding too much time? Me and another PhD student have the same schedule. However, they are not pulling their weight and I feel as if I have to do far more than necessary to compensate -- I have to do research, read papers and explain them to them, give presentations, do their work, and have long meetings with them to discuss things that I already know. They read only papers that I specifically recommend, and so are bringing no knowledge/ideas/viewpoints I don't already have. They constantly interrupt me while working and act extremely entitled to (large amounts of) my time. We're at the same point in our PhDs.

They are rude and I don't wish to invest a significant amount of energy teaching them how to be a functioning member of the department. I have already tried teaching them how to find papers to read and research avenues to pursue independently, and how to manage their time so that I don't need to do the work of the 'group' entirely by myself every time. It hasn't worked. At best, they will go and ask someone else to explain whatever topic I've asked them to learn about, and then we're on the same level again.

We are involved in research projects together (without anyone else to notice this behaviour) and I do not wish to abandon the projects. We are also required to take classes together with the same goal (to prompt/produce research projects) next semester, and so I want to know how best to handle this before this repeats itself.

We have to work with one another closely for the next 2 years so I don't want to burn bridges, but I was wondering whether it'd be within reason to tell my supervisor, or whether I should just take action to avoid this person and not burden myself with them as 'co-researcher' or co-TA ever again? I close my office door and let the student know that this means don't interrupt, but this has not been respected. I definitely don't want to isolate myself from the rest of the group but at this point I don't really know what to do except work from home.

You need to enforce your boundaries better. I understand this isn't always easy to do, emotionally. But "no" really can be a complete sentence. Or "not now, I'm busy." This person has no authority over you, so if they don't respect your "don't interrupt me when my door is closed" policy, stop opening the door for them.


Article "communicated by" What does it mean when it says under a journal article that it has been communicated by "XYZ" where XYZ is not the author but some other scholar with a very strong reputation? What is the relationship to the actual author and/or the content? Is this some sort of seal of approval to get results out and known quickly? (I am specifically wondering in the context of mathematics and mathematical physics.)

Generally, XYZ refers to the editor that handled the paper at the journal.


MSc in mathematics from MChem? I was wondering is it possible to study an MSc in applied mathematics with a background of a masters in chemistry? I have an absolute passion for mathematics and would love the opportunity to study a single year masters.

Would I be given the opportunity to take the entrance exams without formal training? Or would I be discounted instantly?

I have read extensively into the content of the course I have in mind including looking at all their past papers.

I understand it is going to be an individual basis depending on the university and my grades but wanted to hear has someone done or heard of anything similar?

Just from a quick look at a few applied MSc programs, there are a number of classes that would be difficult to complete without serious background in mathematics: classes like partial differential equations, applied algebra, probability theory and combinatorial algorithms were a few that showed up in most that I doubt you could manage without rigorous undergraduate preparation. However, if you have taken classes to prepare you for this (like a minor as an undergraduate), or the MSc you have in mind is less rigorous, or you are willing to devote a year or so to prepare on your own, I fail to see why they would refuse you to take the entrance exam. At least in the US, a good subject score on the math GREs would show the university that while you have a less traditional background, you can still do well in the program.

Basically, it comes down to how mathematically rigorous the program is and how strong your math background is. Liking math is unfortunately not enough to pass a class on PDEs. You would probably need to provide some evidence in your application that you have a sufficient math background, and taking a standardized exam with a good score, even if it is not required in the country you are applying, would be one way to do so.


Is it standard for a math research paper to include less detail in proofs than a typical textbook would? I am a fourth-year undergraduate student in Mathematics. Recently, I read a mathematics paper. It seems that the proof in the paper is not as convincing as what one might find in a textbook. For instance, the authors skip some calculations and arguments in the proof. I feel that the detail in the textbook is better. In addition, the instructor in my undergraduate year always checked the completeness and the detail of the proof in exam and homework.

Is this a standard practice in writing mathematics papers? What is the advantage (if any) of skipping some calculation and argument?

I plan to apply to a graduate school in the future. If “the skill of minimizing the proof in math papers” is important, then how do I learn this habit and unlearn the old habits of my undergraduate years?

Yes, it's normal. Homeworks and exams are written to prove that the writer has certain skills; papers are written to prove something new. The reader's skills are not under question, so a different style of writing is appropriate. Also, journals used to have stricter page limits than they do now, so there was quite some pressure to be terse.  Conversely, somebody who has a hundred exam scripts to mark needs all the details to be spelled out because they don't have more than a few minutes to give to each script.

It is conventional to omit "routine" calculations that the reader should be able to do themself. For example, one might just assert that a certain function reaches its maximum at x=2p/(1-pq) and assume that the reader is capable of setting the derivative to zero and solving. The reader will typically trust the writer (and the peer-reviewers!) to have done the calculation correctly.

In my view, some authors take this too far and omit calculations which can take hours or days to reconstruct, which is a royal pain when trying to adapt or extend the result. Over time, as you read more research papers, you'll learn what is an appropriate level of detail: the big hints come when you start to co-author papers with your advisor.


Repository which allows anonymous authorship This question concerns a problem related to a paper submission in the field of psychological methods. As part of the review process, I was asked by the journal's editor to provide my appendices as online documents at an author-controlled site, and not in the main text (simply to shorten the paper). Since these documents will be reviewed as part of the journal's blinded peer-review process, the authorship of these documents should be blinded as well until the publication of the paper.

My question is which research-related sites allow this kind of submission (i.e., a document which is made available by an URL, with anonymous authors)? As far as I know, sites like arXiv or Zenodo do not allow anonymous submissions.

I am thankful in advance for any advise on this issue.

Edit: I am aware that a similar question addressed the anonymous storage of research data for a paper submission. However, the responses listed there (Dropbox, supplementary material in the submission) are not useful in my case. Dropbox is only a last resort, and I am not allowed to submit these documents as supplements.

Thank you for all your suggestions. After researching possible options online, I found a web service similar to Dropbox which is available to researchers at my (Swiss) university (https://www.switch.ch/de/drive/). I think this will do, since it allows the anonymous sharing of files via links. Probably similar services are available to researchers in other countries as well.

As a last resort, Dropbox could also be used for this purpose.


How many published papers should you have when applying to PhD programs? I'm thinking about applying to PhD programs focused on Deep Learning and Theoretical Neuroscience this fall, and quite frankly I feel like I'm not good enough.

I just started doing research in the past 6 months, and I feel like I'm so far behind my peers its not even funny. I have a paper accepted for a small conference in the fall, but after talking to some folks at Phd programs at places like Stanford or MIT, I hear that students often come in with multiple first author publications. Is this true? I don't know how I can compete with that :/

I want to do research, I love it and have been working 80 hour weeks juggling two RAships and a research internship at a startup this summer, but I just feel like I won't be able to get into a solid background because of my non traditional background.

I'm finishing two Master's degrees, one in Biology and one in Computer science, from Harvard and Georgia Tech respectively. I previously did my undergraduate studies in Cognitive Science from UCSD. My GPA in my masters is a 4.0. I'll have theses written for each program as well.

My undergrad was non technical and weak (some family issues, I finished in 2.5 years without a strong focus on doing particularly well), and my research record is short, if a little intense. I've worked in Industry and have started a small, semi successful ML startup.

Do you have any advice for a nervous kid?

You should be fine.  Realize that there are other kids coming out of liberal arts schools and going into top Ph.D. programs with almost no research experience.  And they do fine, getting into R1 grad programs, and producing work during Ph.D.  All of the kerflutter about undergrad research will fade into the background when you are in a real Ph.D. where there is sooo much more time to spend on research than undergrads (for whom it is a collateral duty...even if they manage to collect a few cap feathers).

Your application will consist of grades, test scores, letters, and other things.  Probably the importance is in that order.  We get kids all the time here who ask about overcoming the opposite worry (subpar grades and standardized test scores) by research.

Just do a decent job and apply to a few places.  You sound like quite a catch, really.  Also, realize that getting into good grad schools in the sciences is quite a bit easier than the whole hothouse environment of high school kids targeting Harvard.  Odds are much more in your favor.  The bigger question to consider is if you should spend more time in school or get a job.  But just put the whole ardent high schooler wanting to go to Brown mindset out of your mind.  It's a different thing, now.


As an undergrad in research, how should I deal with a uncommitted PhD co-worker? I'm a sophomore in CS planning on grad school, so I asked Prof. A to do research, hoping that I may eventually get some publication (which was understood).

Prof A. is THE star in our department (and in the field as well) and is all busy fundraising, giving talks, etc. So as I expected I was assigned a PhD student B to work with (so this is B's project). Basically I'm building the software infrastructure of online surveys related to the research, and B is responsible for giving me data so I can populate my survey templates and publish them online.

Now the problem is that B has put off their share of his work (or at least it seems) repeatedly -- they'd promise "I'll take a look at your UI tomorrow and give you feedback" -- then two weeks would pass by, I'd email, and eventually get back to me one week later ("sorry I got busy..."). This has happened a few times, and I believe I finally have the UI the way it was wanted and the entire system ready to deploy -- but seems to be unable to  deliver me the data. Again I emailed, still no responses. No luck finding the Prof in their office either.

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to tell Prof A. about this (who after all  funds this project)... I have put in too many hours of work (for free) to quit this project, and worst yet the Prof I'm working for doesn't seem to care, and I never dared to ask about authorship (so there's no promise). What should I do?

You seem to be in a complicated situation: you are doing grunt work for a person who is not very committed to it, and on top of that you don't know if you will get anything back (the authorship issue). They say that hindsight 20/20, but you should have discussed both the authorship issue and the project timeframe (deadlines, milestones) before getting involved. That would make it much easier to get the PhD student to do his work by reminding him of the deadlines and of your stake in the project. If you are just supposed to get no authorship or only a footnote acknowledgement, you could let it be and let the PhD student dictate the pace of work. When you don't have a stake in the paper, you are not losing anything if it gets delayed and someone else publishes it before you. It is his loss, not yours.

Now, in your current situation, I would approach the student (perhaps together with the PI) and ask about the timeframe for the project and if there are deadlines. This will automatically have the effect of reminding the PhD student that he has to do his part of the work. It will also get the PI's attention without looking like you are complaining about the PhD student to him. While you are at that, you can also try to get your authorship doubts solved by also asking if there will be any paper written and what will your role be in that.

You are doing undergraduate research work, but you are not meant to be anyone's servant. Once you have put work into it, it is your right to know that your work is not done for nothing.


How to write a letter to an editor for pointing out needed corrections in my submitted journal manuscript Few days back I communicated a paper in a journal and some silly mistakes are there. While citing some other author's paper in my paper, instead of reference number it is showing a sign of question mark. I know that's a mistake while running the LaTeX code. I didn't check in hurry. Shall I inform the editor about my mistake? If yes, then how should I write a letter to convey this?

Yes, you should inform the editor.  Simply resend the  corrected paper, and explain the error.  There is no need to write an extensive letter or to make a grand apology. Something like this in an email will do fine:

"Dear Editor,

I am sending you a corrected copy of the paper titled '...', submitted on XX.  There were errors on pages A, B, and C in the citations.  They appeared as "?" instead of the correct citation, due to incorrect processing in LaTex.  This version has the correct citation and I have proof read it for other errors.

Best regards,

Monalisa"

Also - give the file a different name than the original and a different time stamp so there is no confusion between the corrected version and the original.


Research in computational neuroscience or computational medicine in Europe How popular is research in computational neuroscience, or computational medicine in (mainland) Europe? I'm aware that INRIA in France does some good work, but do you know any other such groups and what kind or topic of research do they so? Many thanks!

For computational neuroscience in germany, the website of the National Bernstein Network Computational Neuroscience (http://www.nncn.de/en) might be a good ressource for you.
They list groups that are part of the Network, distinguishing between "centers" "groups" and "collaborations - i assume corresponding to scale of their involvement in computational neuroscience.


In case I upload an unpublished conference paper or technical report of mine to Academia.edu is it protected from plagiarism? I would like to know if an uploaded unpublished paper of mine it is safe from plagiarism, including just parts of it (e.g. title).

I meant that if somebody copies part or the entire unpublished, but already online, document and publishes it, is he/she then liable of plagiarism?

Liability for plagiarism does not depend on whether the plagiarized work was published or not.

If somebody uses your work and passes it off as their own work, it's plagiarism.


Quitting a postdoc: how to justify myself with my PI? I am 8 months into a postdoc that  is not matching with the job description and the proposal. The project was about investigating an unknown phenomenon that emerged during some experiments carried out before my started.
However, someone just switched some columns in some databases and this caused the misinterpretation. Therefore, my project now only consists in fixing the databases, and what is emerging is that there is no new phenomenon at all. There is nothing new worth a publication.
Since I already have an alternative lined up, I will quit my present institution. I will give no more than a two-week notification before leaving, as I have to start with the new position.
Some other info:

my PI perfectly know of the situation and of the data mistake.

fixing the remaining data is something that someone else in the team could easily do and in any case it is so trivial that they will be able to find a replacement.

I do not have any teaching or mentoring assignments.

Now the question. What should I tell my PI? Should I be sincere and (politely) tell him that I don’t like the project anymore? Or should I find some other excuse not to risk offending him?

If he is a reasonable person then be honest. Something like:
I was happy and enthusiastic to come and work with you on the project, but it changed before I started and I don't see any advancement for me in the current situation. I've found another position that I think will be more productive and need to start it soon. I'm sorry that it didn't work out.
Hopefully all of that is true.


How faculty might assess a PhD applicant who already has a PhD degree? What concerns/worries a potential PhD supervisor might have when he/she sees an application from someone who already has a PhD and applying for the second one? The fields of study are distantly related (engineering - physics).

What questions should be addressed in the initial letter by the applicant?

The first PhD is not a complete failure but an applicant wants to pursue his ultimate interests. The applicant has a postdoc position secured but has serious doubts working in the field that is not of major interest for him. Postdoc applications in the field of main interest didn't result in getting a position.

Here are the concerns I would have:

Is this person seriously going to spend another N-years getting a second doctoral degree, and then go seek a postdoctoral position before pursuing the job they presumably want to have? If so, what is this going to do to their career, and do I want to be party to that?
How did this person get all the way through a PhD in something other than their "ultimate interest"? Do they know what their "ultimate interest" is now?
Did they try to switch fields mid-PhD, or get some credentializing in the field they wanted to be in. If so, how much? If not, why not?
Do I think this person has strong prospects in this field? They've failed to get a postdoc - was this the result of just a small number of applications, or genuinely a problem. Again, if their postdoc application was weak, do I think it could be salvaged?


Reviving a Rejected Proposal -- Question on Ethical Considerations A friend of mine wrote a research proposal a few years ago. When he had 80% of it done, he pitched the idea to a colleague who joined and wrote the extra 20%. The proposal got rejected. A few years later the friend is trying to write a different proposal that has some aspects (but not content) in common with the old proposal. However, the colleague who co-wrote the old proposal will not respond to multiple emails requesting him to join the new proposal -- they probably lost interest but for some reason won't come out to say so.

Lets assume the proposal goes ahead to submission  without involving the earlier collaborator. If the proposal were to get funded, isn't there a risk, that the earlier collaborator could turn around and claim they somehow influenced the direction of the new  proposal yet is not credited on the proposal? How in general do people move on after a joint proposal gets rejected; and some members won't be interested in joining offshoots of the old proposal. Of course in this case there is the added challenge of the earlier collaborator refusing to come out and make it clear that he is uninterested. How does one avoid the potential accusations of being unethical?

In the background that you have presented, I see only one half of the question being asked: "Will you join on this proposal?"

The clear next step is to query again with the other half, in order to make disinterest explicit, writing something along the lines of:

  Since you have not responded to my emails asking whether you would like to join this proposal, my understanding is that you are not interested.  I am intending to go ahead with this proposal, so unless I hear otherwise from you, I will assume you have no objection.

This places the question squarely with the other person.  If they respond one way or another, it resolves the question.  If they do not respond, you are free to assume that they are accepting that you submit without them.

Do, however, make certain to do due diligence to determine that the other person hasn't changed institution or email, such that your communications are not being received.  You may also want to try a phone call before giving up on contact.


Should I cancel / alter office hours for committee meetings? My contract requires that I maintain a certain number of office hours a week where I am available to meet with students.  In practice this time is rarely entirely taken up by student meetings however.

Recently I have joined some relatively large university committees that (not surprisingly) have a hard time arranging meeting times. I have historically indicated that I am unavailable to meet during my office hours but I am not sure if this is the appropriate position to take.

The solutions that I see are:

Consider this time booked and unavailable.
Consider this time flexible and reschedule office hours as needed (this would likely be somewhat frequent and could also just create more downstream conflicts).
Cancel the office hours as conflicts arise.

What is the appropriate way to deal with responsibilities that conflict with office hours?

My feeling is that it is fine to cancel or reschedule office hours when other responsibilities conflict, provided:

You announce it to students several days in advance;
You tell students that you  are happy to meet them at another time, if they make an appointment.


How to make a professor send his LoR? My professor is extremely busy and has still not send the letter (application deadline was 15 Dec).

What can I do here? I am mailing him polite reminders and he is very willing to help but unfortunately very bad managing his time.

This letter is crucial. Should I contact the department letting them know or something? I am getting desperate.

At this point, you should probably give up on your hope that the professor will send the letter. If he hasn’t done it three weeks after the deadline despite repeated reminders, then I think a revision of your assessment that “he is very willing to help” is in order. Without trying to psychoanalyze him, all that one can say is that for all intents and purposes he is behaving like someone who is not at all willing to help, so that should be your working assumption from now on. Sadly. :-(

My recommendation is to look ASAP for someone else who can write you a decent letter of recommendation. At the same time, it may be a good idea to contact the department, explain the situation (including enough specific detail about the professor’s strange behavior to make it likely that they will be sympathetic to your situation and willing to be forgiving about this), apologize profusely, and say you are working on getting a letter from someone else as soon as possible, and that you hope that they will still be able to consider your application.

Good luck.


Can I become a research psychologist by studying maths and computer science? I am currently studying maths and computer science in University of Barcelona, Spain, and I love research psychology. The question is: "is there a way to end up as a research psychologist following maths and CS studies? If not, what are the paths I could take without going far from maths?"
Thanks for your attention and apologies for my English!

Sure you can! There are some things you'll need to keep in mind, though, to make sure your current plans for undergraduate fit your longer-term desire to be involved with psychology research.

First, psychology research take many, many forms. There are many inter-disciplinary fields of psychology research that actually prefers at least some background in computing and strong quantitative skills, especially in areas like human factors (also called engineering psychology or ergonomics in Europe - in the US ergonomics usually means something a little different), Human-Computer Interaction, and some programs of "applied psychology" and industrial-organizational psychology. Cognitive psychology also has quite a lot of use of computing backgrounds, while some fields of psychology lean heavily upon advanced statistics, such as some experimental social psychology. On the other hand, some areas of research psychology - such as clinical/behavioral/counselling - typically do not make much use of computing or advanced math at all. If you wanted to go into clinical research I'd strongly question your plan to study math/computing instead of a more related field like psychology, sociology, etc.

The second issue is being perceived as needing to make a switch, and so having to try to convince people that you have sufficient background in psychology to be accepted into a psychology program. Most programs in the US I've seen request someone have the equivalent of about 5 classes in psychology if they don't have a degree in a psychology-related field. Will you be able to get any psychology classes with your current plant? If not, then wanting to go into any research field without actually studying that field first is a questionable plan, at best. It's a different matter if you want to switch after completing your studies - but if you are still studying, why not switch now?

The third issue, noted partially in the paragraph above, is your preparation to do original research and so be able to make the most of your time in a graduate program. If you are studying math, this may or not be actually helpful in research. Psychology research most commonly uses quantitative skills in the areas of data analysis and advanced statistics. While a math background can help prepare you to learn the stats, it may not actually teach you the stats at all, and it most likely has no course in research or experimental methods. Similarly, computer science only sometimes includes any courses in stats, and rarely stats you'll actually need to use (ANOVA, linear regressions of all varieties, non-parametric stats, factor analysis, etc.), and it very likely contains no course in research methods or experimental design.

My personal path was actually to start studying in computing and I considered a minor in applied math, and I became interested in the intersections of computing and psychology after I discovered fields like human factors and HCI existed. I used the research-based focus of the psychology field to give me the stats and experimental design training I needed, and used the computing background to enable my particular research interests in applied technology. This combination has worked very nicely for me so far, but it is particularly challenging at times and requires you to be very self-driven and willing to teach yourself things that aren't the focus of any of your classes and may be outside the area of expertise of any of your professors.

The fields of computing, math, and psychology are very large and varied, and so while there may be an area that might be just right for you that allows you to combine all your interests, you'll need to work hard to 1) begin to locate just what that area might be, 2) ensure you are getting the preparation you need to thrive in that environment, and 3) be willing to get creative, because most established pathways, advertisements, and listed opportunities are often tailored for more "traditional" students wanting to go from Undergraduate Program in A to Graduate Program in A.

Finally, you should be aware that inherently multi-disciplinary fields can be a bit..."different". The same basic area of research might be called a half-dozen different things, and the home of a department might vary by University. An example of this is human factors-related programs are sometimes hosted by a psychology department, sometimes by an engineering department, sometimes by a computer science department, and sometimes even by a business department, each with their own unique flavor and research focus - and you might be a great fit for one but a terrible fit for another. Meanwhile one program may be called one thing but seems to really do research in another. My first research project was considered primarily psychology research at my home institution, yet is being published in the top conference in the area of HCI; the topic of the project was actually the topic studied as "human factors" 10+ years ago, but is now considered primarily the domain of HCI. My next research project is in HCI, but a lot of related previous research was in the field of aerospace engineering, geospatial information systems, and remote sensing. If being in such weird situations terribly bothers you, you might want to consider a more "traditional path". I thrive on the complexity, but it really isn't for everyone!


Bad reference VS no reference I just have graduated university and currently am applying for a master degree and various positions on different labs as I am eager to go deeper into science. I have been asked for two references together with other documents. As I had two different internships I have asked my former supervisors to write me a recommendation later, one of them wrote me a very good reference but my bachelor thesis supervisor besides explaining what experience I have gained in a lab wrote not a very positive reference stating that the analysis of data I have done were hard to understand and not on time. In my defense she never (in two years) gave me actual requirements for data analysis or dead-lines. So I guess it all was just pure miscommunication that was not solved on time. At the end of reference she wrote that in order to avoid such mistakes I should communicate more with my future supervisor and complete all tasks in time.

My questions are:

a) is it such a bad reference and situation as it seems to be?

b.1) is it likely that a very good reference from another internship supervisor will outweigh the image to my benefit?

b.2) Shall I still include reference if it is lowering my profile?

c) is it better to ask a reference from another lab colleagues and not include reference of my supervisor at all? Most likely it would raise a question why I am not providing a reference from my former supervisor instead :(.

d) shall I send only one reference?

It is such a pity that I can not rejoice the great deal of experience I have accumulated during two years work with this supervisor because it seems to be more as an obstacle rather than a step closer to my further academic career.

Thank you for your answers in advance!

The bad reference is given to prevent you getting the position, it is a warning to whoever might supervise you. From what I have seen, it is quite common for far more subtle and hidden negative messages to be put into an academic reference than what you have described. In these cases the references are not used because the letters are there to convey a warning. That's not to say I know the right answer, but my feeling is that a bad reference gives you no chance whereas a single good reference gives you at least a shot.


Which country or countries inspired the post-communism Polish higher education system? Which country or countries inspired the post-communism Polish higher education system?
Is the current Polish higher education system modeled after the German system of higher education?

The higher-education system is inspired by Humboldt's model and  guided by standards for higher-education defined by the Bologna process, which was "signed by education ministers from 29 European countries in 1999" and has since been adopted by 48 countries.


Politics in forming collaborations as a postdoc Graduate students talk to other researchers, other than their formal advisors, all the time, whether at their home institution or at conferences. They get help on specific tasks, ask for input on their current work, or even to discuss research ideas.

However, as a graduate student, forming a significant collaboration with another researcher without checking in with his/her formal research advisor can be seen as "going over the advisor's head". Of course there is no hard and fast rule about this, and exceptions abound I'm sure, but then the student runs the risk of arousing the ire of his advisor, especially if the researcher is not a close associate of the advisor. Sometimes, this is because there may be "bad blood" between the advisor and the researcher, unbeknownst to the student. Also, if there is indeed politics between the two, the other researcher may be less prone to responding to the student, as the student is essentially seen as "belonging" to his or her advisor.

Is this still the case as a postdoctoral researcher? Does one gain more independence as a postdoc? If there are political differences between your hiring faculty Prof. X and potential collaborator Dr. Y, will Dr. Y be more likely to shy away from collaborating with you just because you're associated with Prof. X?

Talk to your boss in general terms at first.  Then you'll get a feeling for whether a "go for it" approach will go down well locally or not.  You may have a good idea of whether you're working with a natural collaborator or not, but an early discussion is still worthwhile because they can warn you in general terms about rivalries/conflicts of interest etc. Try your hardest to keep your boss in the loop at all times. Of course this isn't always possible when you meet people at conferences.

Don't make promises you don't have the authority to keep -- so discuss possibilities rather than actually inviting someone until you can clear it.  It might not be just your boss but politics/policies that you have to deal with.  Money is always a good get-out: If you don't hold the budget yourself, everyone knows you can't just spend it without authorisation.


How should I write research description essay in my PhD application? I am currently trying to apply for a PhD position in a university. For the completion of application I have to write two essays:

Statement of motivation
Description of research area (with vacant PhD position)

I have written my statement of motivation but I am unable to write a description of research area. In the application there are different research themes which have a vacant PhD position; we have to chose one research area from these themes. I am interested in one research area: its title is catalytic study of X-material . I have never worked in this research topic or material. So I am in a dilemma on what to write in my description of research area.

Should I write about the property of X-material, current research or should I make a research proposal for that research area (catalytic study of X-material)?

Normally, to be registered successfully for PhD project you have to write an abstract (10-20 pages) (and make a presentation). This should cover roughly and shortly:

state of the art
state of knowledge
open questions
the very specialized niche of your work and what the motivation is(better understanding, prototype, measurement accuracy improvement...)
how you are going to achieve this (probably), i.e. a reasonable working and time plan

As you are still applying for a PhD position, it has to be much shorter, so show to the committee that you can identify above points analyzing literature and summarize them in 2-3 pages.

To make things more easy, google similar current published PhD thesis related to this topic and read the preface (above points will often be summarized there within 2-3 pages). Don't write an essay, if the committee asks you to write 3 pages of decription of research area, write exactly 3 pages ;)

PS: Oh forgot, why are you are motivated for this topic you don't know again? Maybe after writing the description of research you should polish up the statement of motivation also a bit based on that ;)


How many PhD students does a typical STEM professor graduate during their entire career? The discussion on this infogram made me wonder about the number of PhD students that a full research professor successfully graduates in their entire career.  By professor, I mean a full professor, not an associate or exclusively teaching professor or other positions referred to as professor depending on field and location.  Of course, the answer is not a single number, but rather a probability density function that is a function of field, place, time, university, and probably other factors.  To narrow the scope, I formulate the question as:

For selected fields and countries, what are recent figures on the mean and standard deviation (alternatively median and median absolute deviation, in case the distribution is non-Gaussian) for the number of PhD students successfully graduated per professor throughout their entire career?

It depends on the size and staffing needs of their lab. For example, theoretical computer science and mathematics professors may need no lab support at all.  Thus, they are under no pressure to take grad students or post-docs and can choose just the ones that they want.

However, if you are doing work on stem cells, you may need a great deal of lab support. You would want a team of doctoral students and a couple of post-docs at any one time. In order to maintain continuity, you would want to accept at least one doctoral student each year. So if you had a 20 year career, you would have at least 20 students (or 20 - 7 = 13 given that it takes students 7 years to graduate and you don't want to leave students hanging at the end).

You'll need to narrow down what you mean by a "STEM" field in order to get a more precise answer.


Do arxiv papers matter at all while applying for a doctoral program in Physics? Consider an applicant in a Master's program with a fairly good application in terms of LORs, GPA, research background, and standard tests. If this applicant, who is applying to a doctoral program in Physics in the US, also has a collection of writings in arxiv would this add any more value to the application?
In other words, can arxiv papers boost an application's value in any way since they might show the self-study activities of a student?

Yes, they might be a benefit, but, since they aren't refereed, it might be limited unless it they are remarkable in some way. If they are also submitted to a journal as well, then it would be worth more.
It would, however, require people examining your application to take a look at the papers and make some judgement. They might be willing to do this, or not. They might be impressed, or not, depending on what you have there.
But, as you suggest, self-study, and especially research have value for doctoral applications.


Last year of my Ph.D studies I am a Ph.D. student in pure mathematics and I am in my final year of graduate studies. I found that academia is not suited for me: unstable job, low salary, and a self-sacrifice culture that it is based on the motto "Publish or Perish". I want to ask you what are the odds to get a good job with a Ph.D. in pure mathematics? I am truly lost. I consider myself a big failure. I have expended three years of my life in pursuing a thing that it is useless and purely theoretical. Currently, I only want to make some good money in the industry. I want to ask you: what can a pure mathematician do in the real world? Is there any kind of investment banking or hedge funds interested in hiring mathematicians holding a Ph.D. in pure mathematics and a master´s degree in big data and business analytics?
Thank you very much for any response.

Well, I think few people make a lot of money doing mathematics unless they are "quants" in stock investments, or actuaries in the insurance industry. People don't normally go in to mathematics for the money, but, rather are driven to do it by some internal inescapable mechanism.
My advice, such as it is, is to evaluate your options. It may be that finishing is the best option now, as it shouldn't be far off.
Yes, academia is in a bit of a mess now and the post doc merry-go-round is pretty destructive, but many people in the past have also finished their degrees in terrible economic times. My advisor had just started his studies when the Russians came over the border into Czechoslovakia and shut the universities down. He was delayed for years but did well (after escaping later). I graduated into an economy with no jobs for mathematicians. When we landed on the moon, funding for science and math dropped off a cliff after years of growth. More people had already been hired than could be justified in the new world. I had to take a job at a very low level college, though some thought I was one of those "most likely to succeed" types (My mom, anyway). I also had to change fields to CS and was only able to make partial use of my math skills. But I survived and eventually it worked out.
But, someone who can do mathematics can do a lot of things that require analytical skills.
Your advisor seems like a resource. I hope you are using that to advance. She may not need to worry about her own future anymore, but I hope she worries about yours and her other students. I assume that she has a circle of collaborators with whom she is in contact. If you aren't part of that circle, you need to become part of it. Have her, for example, get you invited to give talks at other places. Right now your advisor is your chief mentor, I suspect. But as you move on, look for others willing to help you advance.
Build your own circle.
And, publish or perish isn't universal, though it is at top places. And it isn't so terrible if you really like to write papers. You are down now, but you want to make your trajectory and exponential one. Once it gets better it will continue.


Does anyone know of an international postdoctoral association? The number of postdocs is increasing worldwide. Because of their technical expertise and dedication, postdocs are rapidly becoming the backbone of most large science laboratories.

I am aware of institutional associations for postdocs, which are venues for networking, exchange of ideas, solving problems. At the local scale.
Examples:

http://www.nationalpostdoc.org

http://jhpda2.jhu.edu

https://uwpa.wisc.edu

However many postdocs move from their original departments, and became international. And it is my impression that similar challenges are faced by postdocs around the world, and it is quite hard finding out how things are going with colleagues abroad. Especially on delicate matters, via cold emails.

Please, would anyone be aware of some international association where postdoctoral fellows worldwide could meet, and discuss their difficulties and experience?

It's a great idea Scientist/Tommi but there's none yet that I'm aware of.

A lot of issues are common to different countries, but there are many important differences too. A good reason to look up your national/sector/discipline association, and a possible roadblock to the establishment of an international group.

In Australia it's the EMCR Forum*. They recently asked about similar international groups that advocate for and represent early and mid-career researchers and got a few bites: https://twitter.com/EMCRForum/status/950530138491400197

full disclosure: I am deputy chair of the EMCR Forum in 2018


Lost my passion and interest in what I used to love Story: Great MSc Computer Science student lost interest in what he used to love

------ PAST ------

Since I was a kid, I was really passionate about the things I love. I was always ahead of my schoolmates and always prepared in advance for the material. Simply to say, I loved learning new things.

When I got into high school puberty hit me and I kind of get out of track in the first two years, but I hit hard in next two years excelling with GPA 5/5 (I was put in class of highly competitive students). Last year of high school, I did find something that gave me hard dopamine spikes, and that was programming. Just in 1 year, I earned 3rd place on State Competition and manage to get to National Olympiad. I also attended competitions of physics and mathematics. I loved the thrill of the challenge.

Took Bachelor of Computer Science, though I learned hard only the subjects that I love. I was great student (top 10 in my area) and I successfully finished it with a GPA of 4.5/5. Meanwhile, I found high interest in Artificial Intelligence and subfield of Machine Learning. I did AI courses online from Stanford, Coursera etc., since I started my bachelor studies (4 years ago) and I really liked that area. I finished my diploma thesis related to pattern recognition and my bachelors in record time.

----- RECENT ----

But after finishing bachelors everything changed. Seems like I was worn out, burned and unmotivated. I got programming job that was paid good but I hated. I completely lost my interest in programming. My driving force just dissipated in air.

Now, I got really good scholarship that got me in one of the top research universities in Europe. Still, my interests in AI dropped to 0. Seems like nothing is challenge now and I don't feel the dopamine spikes that I felt when I was discovering the field (which was novelty for me). Obviously my GPA is not good because of this (even though there are easy subjects that I've already have lot of pre-knowledge but still no motivation to learn them). I am now in my second semester of my studies. I took job as research assistant still don't feel motivated at all.

----MY OWN OPINION ----

From knowing myself I would say that I only thing that makes me motivated is learning new stuff from new fields. Whenever I learn something from one field I easily get bored and switch to something new. I put my whole effort and strength to learn it (when I am motivated). I could not specialize in one thing because of this and I am angry on myself.

I never suffered from depression, I always sleep 7-8h, eat regularly, love to go to the gym, love reading books. I was taking some supplements on my own thinking that I'm suffering from depression but without any help.

Please write here your opinion and advice, I would really appreciate hearing it.

Thanks a lot in advance.

A senior professor I am acquainted with once uttered, "In choosing one's career, the point is not to find what you like most; the point is to find what you dislike least." I find it wise and would like to share it with you.

I would say you may first study a field you dislike least at the present stage and at the same time try to search what truly interests you.