<issue_start>username_0: My question is in a similar vein to [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21276/best-practice-models-for-research-code).

My research requires code. I can write code and I know some things about writing good code. Both for readability, (e.g. standardised doc string, descriptive variable names, comments that describe the intention) and safety (assertions in the code, unit tests, sensible error messages). Adding these things takes me more time than omitting them.

At present I will typically do a bare minimum on my first attempt. So I will put a one line doc string in; use descriptive, but occasionally inconstant, variable names; and few comments. If the code doesn’t work first time I will go back and add unit tests and generally improve it's quality until it is functional.

If at a later stage part of the code needs altering significantly, (perhaps I realise I need it in parallel), then lots of the "polish" will need redoing. This does not make it enticing to polish more earlier on. Occasionally I will chase my tail over a fault that turns out to be originating in an older section of code, that I might have caught if I have been more thorough first time.

The code I write is almost always only used by myself.

Clearly there is a trade-off between doing things by the book and producing results fast. What would you look at to decide if you had found a good balance between these things?<issue_comment>username_1: As the

>
> code I write is almost always only used by myself
>
>
>

you only have yourself to please. So the only sensible answer is to balance things to minimize the frustration to yourself. Don't do things you see as frustratingly slowing you down until you are more frustrated by the problems caused by not doing them.

*However*, the more strategic question is whether you *want* to continue writing code that will only be used and seen by yourself. If you want to advance your career through collaboration with peers, or by building a group of researchers to work on and with your codes, then it will be better to do more earlier.

You then know you've found a good balance when the collaborators you want to work with still want to work with you after they've spent some time with your code.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You said:

>
> The code I write is almost always only used by myself
>
>
>

but I find this remark a little short-sighted.

In the moment, code may be used almost exclusively by the author/student-researcher, but eventually that student will graduate, and there may be some follow-on research to do. Woe to the next graduate student who inherits that mess, or the summer intern who gets hired to clean it up!

There are plenty of good reasons to invest a little time in writing better-engineered code:

* You (and others who may join the research team) will be able to further build upon a well-designed architecture
* What seems “self-documenting” now may be harder-to-follow than you think six months from now
* A lot of code gets ultimately gets used for longer than the original author speculated
* The more complex your code becomes, the harder it will be to debug later

Sure, there’s a tradeoff between immediacy of results and building for the future. But I’d cautioned against getting lulled into a false sense of security and churning out code as fast as you can with little regard to future maintainability and extensibility.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As you would with any other document, write for your audience. That is, write your code to make it help, as best as possible (yet still at reasonable cost), those who are reading it. Consider:

1. Will anybody other than you be reading the code, now or in the future? If it's a one-off script that you will quickly discard you need not worry much about readability. If nobody else is likely ever to look at it, you need to think about how likely your future self is to remember what was going on at the time and understand the conventions you used.
2. If others are likely to read your code, how technically adept with that particular language and libraries, and in general, are they likely to be? Can you use standard conventions used by programmers experienced in that language? Do you need write things in a way that experienced developers who don't know that particular language can quickly understand what you're doing? Do you need to avoid standard things (e.g., list comprehensions) that inexperienced developers might not understand well?
3. How well will the other developers understand the problem domain? Do you need to provide a detailed explanation of what you're doing and why you're doing it, or do you expect that when they look at a line they'll, e.g., immediately see that it's a form of Black Scholes equation and understand how and why it's being used there?

Keep in mind that making things more descriptive and adding more comments does not necessarily make your code more readable; for some audiences that may even make it less readable. Just as mathematicians can more quickly comprehend a dense equation than a long description of the equation written in "plain English," experienced developers familiar with a domain will take considerably longer to read verbose code written for a beginner than they will tight code written for an expert that communicates exactly what is needed and no more. As an extreme example, read this:

```
def double_a_number(number_to_be_doubled):
    ''' Given a number, this will return twice that number.
        Parameters:
            number_to_be_doubled: the number to be doubled
        Return Value:
            The doubled number.
    '''
    return number_to_be_doubled * 2

```

and then tell me if you think anybody would find it easier to understand than:

```
def double(x): return 2*x

```

Also be careful not to fall into the classic trap affecting inexperienced (and, sadly, even many experienced) developers of putting slavish devotion to rules ahead of the readability that those rules were supposed to promote. "Inconsistent" variable names and the like are not necessarily a problem (except for whomever is writing your [lint](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lint_(software)) configuration files) if your focus is on communicating with other developers rather than satisfying arbitrary rules.

And my last bit of personal advice, since you mention docstrings, always remember that a comment is only there because you couldn't write clear enough code. If you feel a function needs a docstring, look first to see if you can't improve the function name, change positional parameters to named parameters, or use any other techniques to make the code state more clearly what it's about. (And if someone's telling you to put in docstrings anyway, refer them to my example above.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: How careful you are should be a pragmatic choice.

The point of the disciplines is to help you write working code (which you can keep working and extending).

This is *not* an academic exercise (Perhaps this is the wrong forum in which to make this comment). There are "no points for box-ticking good practices" (perhaps there *are* in your environment).

The good practices are hard-won lessons from the commonality of programming practice. In an environment where many programmers collaborate on code, which will often be maintained over a longer time than ever anticipated, they help to limit the confusion and re-work needed.

You sound like you are well on the way.

If you are near the beginning of your programmer-journey, I would recommend you explore the meanings of "DRY", "YAGNI" and "SOLID". And I would put in a special mention for unit testing.

In my own experience, unit-testing:

* helps you document *what* you intended the code to do when you sat down to write it, and it will let you check that it is still doing it, even when you make some apparently completely unrelated change miles away in your code, months later. Including little details like `nothing will be reported as null` or `nothing will be reported as empty-string`.
* winkles out your misunderstandings of your primary language or the associated framework and libraries you merely glanced over the documentation for, before adopting. These misunderstandings make for time-consuming bug-fixing if you have to find them out by debugging the consumer of your mis-implemented code.
* will encourage you to write appropriately granular code: it is such a nuisance trying to write unit tests for code which tries to squeeze too much activity into each routine (method, subprogram, etc.).
* is best begun before you actually create the code which it will later test. This might help you to focus more clearly on what your code ought to deliver.
* will find out early for you, when your early code-design needs to be thrown away. This will discourage you from soldiering on with a wrong design which you've made too much investment in already to be willing to throw away. It's all about making working code, not about enshrining your first master-plan.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I think for the main question, "when is the code good enough?", the answer is simple: when it does what you want it to do, and you can be confident that the answer it gives you is correct.

There is definitely a trade-off for making your code nice, however. To me, that comes up in two places:

1. What if, six months later, you want to revisit your research results and see if you can come up with some improvements, or maybe you had hit a dead end so you are coming back to see if you can finish the work. Can you read your code from six months ago, and pick back up modifying it? Or is it too convoluted to follow and use? Ideally, you should be able to come back to your code in a year and easily understand what you were doing.
2. Your research does not exist in a bubble. Your next research project will probably be somewhat related to your previous one. Can your code be reused? Can parts of it be reused? Even if there are few benefits in your current project to making your code nice and modular, you may save yourself lots of time and effort down the line if you do this. Important functions and algorithms can then be moved over to your new setting with minimal adaptation. A side benefit is that you can replace certain pieces of your code with alternate implementations to see if you can get better results.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You say:

>
> The code I write is almost always only used by myself
>
>
>

Like others, I don't share this opinion. The code is GUARANTEED to be used by at least two people:

1. You
2. You three months from now.

Good internal documentation doesn't take that long, and will in the long run save you time and effort.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> The code I write is almost always only used by myself.
>
>
>

This comment seems somewhat misguided and I should predicate this by saying I write a lot of research code myself as well. The reason why I think this statement is misguided is because the code is being used for *something* (e.g., prepare data for analysis, analysis, modeling, etc.) and is ultimately going to impact any manuscripts you prepare. As such, ensuring that your code is readable by others is part of ensuring that your work is repeatable by others as well. Furthermore, if your code solves a problem that others have (quite common in research as well!) others may as for part of it to use in their own research.

That being said, with practice it is possible to write fairly readable code the first time around and just requires a bit of discipline. Some IDEs will force this upon you by checking variable names (e.g., do they conform to camelCase?), function names, function length, unit test coverage, and so forth. This tends to be a lot since it is unusual for people to go back and spend a lot of time improving code - once you have the results the bias tends to be to move on to the next project.

So the bottom line is that you should try to write code that is good enough to share with others the first time around. You never know when a reviewer may ask to see the relevant source code.
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: [**This**](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/14971/84565) question contains this:

>
> 2. After months of work as an RA in a research group, at the end of the semester, my adviser informed me that he was not satisfied with my research and would not continue to fund me.
>
>
>

I am just curious, how do supervisors determine that a phd student is not doing great? What factors do they consider?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors are not always the best mentors yet a good one is a good people manager who has had training in Positive Reinforcement by Dr. <NAME> as we all did at work in the 80's. The process involves setting objects, measuring results and getting constructive feedback with consequences for negative results after retry.

Start by writing your own measureable objectives following guidelines from your boss, review with him/her with a timeline and testable criteria, # of critical problems, and performance metrics etc.

Measured accompishments, can be self-rated and compared with boss for discussion on defining clear expectations , refining goals and strategies for improvement.

It can be simplified into Time , Performance (multi-tasking), Quality and Cost Savings for a performance expected that is expected with some level of experience... or exceeded in more than one significant way

Then there are soft skills such as being; reliable , self-reliant, innovative, creative and networking in a way to save time yet not over-burdening , being resourceful, positive attitude towards self and others.

Learning how to learn is the hardest for some to accomplish. yet this is the main goal in Univ, as in industry the practise becomes more diverse and also more focused. e.g. learning how to condut a business plan or lab report or Design Specifications with a Design Validation Test plan and report using structured concise yet simple results to prove validity of the specs and accuracy of the results.

A perfect design is one that only meets "all of the necessary specs" such as Cost, performance, quality and reliability under any environment expected. Climatic, Mechanical, Electrical, Chemical. etc. ; benign or to extreme.

Yet with a faster learning curve gained from experience of failures of others and self by learning solutions and constant reading. This is the fastest way to grow under pressure.

I suggest to request 15 minutes of your bosses time to discuss expectations and you return with this understanding in writing in measureable concise results.

You may also solicit colleague review feedback as everyone is your customer as you are to them for information. Having it in writing for your own learning process is a tool for self improvement.

If it is worth doing, it is worth documenting, but critical issues should always been done in person.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: As a postdoc, I have supervised only Master's students. To determine how they are doing, I typically pay attention to three different aspects:

* Ability to learn. Can students learn new skills (experimental or computational techniques)? The more advanced a student is, the more independence I'd expect here.
* Understanding of subject matter. Does the student understand how their research fits in the broader research field, and why they are using the techniques they are using? Can the student come up with better ways of answering their research question/come up with a better question to answer/find the good question to ask?
* Ability to prioritise. How easily does the student identify and work on the most important sub-question to answer? As a project comes close to being finished, can the student keep up a strong pace to deliver final results as quickly as possible?

I don't have a rule to determine when someone isn't doing good enough - I have never had to make that decision. Probably that decision would come when I find that, despite feedback, someone isn't improving on these aspects as I think they should.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I've recently got my PhD in Europe and I am doing applications for the postdoc positions in Europe and in the US. I've got two possible offers and I am a bit confused to decide which position would be better for my future. One of the offers is from the US and the other one is in Europe. My initial plan was to choose the position in Europe and to spend some more time to expand my academic network by staying close to home. Meanwhile, I am almost sure that I eventually need to go to the US either I decide to stay in academia or go into the industry in the future, since it is very difficult to settle in the Northern European countries as an expat or a foreigner researcher due to different reasons (mostly because of the social life, language and funding options etc.), at least I need to spend some time there to be not seen as only moving inside of Europe. I am also not planning to go back my country at the junior research level since it is too challenging to secure a job as well (Mediterranean country).

I still would like to take the position in Europe and then try to find a better position ( as research associate, Assistant prof or instructor/ senior postdoc) in the US later. Do you think would it be better to go there directly after my PhD? Would it reduce my chance to find a position in the US if I do a postdoc in Europe first?

PS : The position in the US is so close to my current field, it is very similar to my PhD topic. I will still learn different methods and expand my skills technically but the scientific approach is not so different what I have done in my PhD. It has good job benefits for two years (e.g. health, pension etc.) except the visa (J1) though.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to this question will come down to your personal circumstances and goals. There will be advantages and disadvantages to both options (both professionally and personally) that only you can know and weigh up. And, of course, it matters more how good the postdoc will be for your development than what continent it is in.

However, it sounds like your goal is to eventually end up in the US. In that case, my suggestion would be that there is no time like the present to make the move. Getting a position in the US is tough and it helps to have as many local contacts as possible, so you should start building them up as soon as possible.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Take a dice. Roll it. If it's an even number, go to the US, if it's an odd number stay in Europe. If you feel bad after rolling the dice, roll it again.

Sounds stupid, but might be the best advice in your case ;-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Do you think would it be better to go there directly after my PhD? Would it reduce my chance to find a position in the US if I do a postdoc in Europe first?
>
>
>

The first question is personal opinion, but I can offer some thoughts about the latter question.

* For primarily teaching positions, yes. I don't know if either of your postdocs involve teaching (if so, they're not super relevant to primarily teaching posts anyway, but math postdocs in the US typically involve teaching) but if so, teaching in the US system is a boon. Also, it's easier (cheaper to fly you in) to interview if you're already in the US, but you could always try another postdoc in the US first.
* For a research position, a US versus European postdoc doesn't matter too much in and of itself, but you should go to conferences in the US and meet people and tell them about your work. For this type of position, you should take the postdoc that you think will be most beneficial to your research. (Caveat: if the research you would do in Europe is not so popular in the US, this will make it harder for you to get a job in the US.)
* For an industry position, I don't know too much about this, but I guess like for teaching positions it would be somewhat easier for companies to interview you if you are already here.
* One thing that may be a possibility is to take both postdocs and defer one. At least in the recent past this was not so uncommon in mathematics. E.g., you may be able to do the postdoc in Europe for 1 year, and then postdoc in the US, or start the US postdoc first but take a year off to postdoc in Europe.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc working in one university till 1. July. I am leaving for another university after that. During my stay at my current work, I wrote a paper as a first author for a conference that will kick off in September.

Which affiliation should I use? Taking into account that the conference travel will be covered by the new employer, however, the paper is written at my current university.

By reading [this article](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9731/academic-affiliation-which-to-choose), it looks like using the two affiliations is one approach. But I'm not quite sure if the new employer will be happy with this.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there's any need for judgement in this case. At the time of publication, you are going to hold a position at your new employer. Therefore, your current affiliation should be your new employer.

The work was performed at your old employer and not your new employer. Therefore you must put your old employer on the paper to disclose this.

The way to do this actually depends on the journal/conference. Some put your new employer on the top with a "work was performed at old employer" footnote, and some swap it, so the footnote reads "now at new employer". Find previous articles and copy them.

The affiliations in papers are necessary for the integrity of publications. For example, people need to contact you if they have any questions or concerns about the paper. If misconduct is detected, the institution where the work was performed holds some responsibility.

The travel is paid for by your new employer. Therefore, they are entitled a funding credit along with other funders.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You are conflating funding sources with affiliations when they should be discussed separately.

The affiliations tell you where the work was performed. The work was performed at the old institution, so it must be listed as an affiliation, and should be the primary affiliation. If you have done work on the presentation at the new institution—for instance, used your research time to prepare the presentation and rehearse it in front of colleagues—then you can list the new institute as an additional affiliation. It should be listed as a "current address" in any event.

As for the funding issue, since they're providing the resources for you to travel, it can be acknowledged when listing anybody else who sponsored the research alongside those other sources.
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: Publishers such as Elsevier and SAGE provide LaTeX templates for manuscripts to be submitted to their journals. Can one post that version of the paper in our websites if the paper has been accepted to such journals? I am referring to a manuscript that only I have modified and has not been modified by the journal.<issue_comment>username_1: If a journal allows authors to post their pre-prints, the general rule—although it is by no means absolute—is that you may use the manuscript in the form in which it was submitted to the journal, but you cannot use the version created by the journal's production staff.

However, you should consult the specific policies of the journal to see exactly what is or is not allowed, as not all journals allow preprints.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Regarding the general question of preprints for submitted and accepted papers, I direct you to username_1's answer. Regarding the minutiae of journal style class files, all the ones I am used to include the basic details of the licence they are supplied under in the text of the `.cls` file itself. In particular Elevier's `elsarticle.cls` appears to be issued under the terms of the [LaTeX Project Public License](https://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt), and which is fairly clear that there isn't any great land grab being made in terms of the final product.

This doesn't apply to names or images, both of which might cause copyright issues, unless the journal's instructions clearly state otherwise.
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: I'm a rising senior studying Psychology, and will be applying to PhD and Master's programs in the Fall. I have already shortlisted the advisors from the schools I would like to work with and whose research I find fascinating.

Would sending them a quick email now (late May) asking whether they are taking graduate students and expressing an interest in being a part of their lab in 2019 be too early? Should I wait until the term starts in September/October to reach out to them?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming you’re talking about the US, the summer would be a good time to start contacting faculty about your interest, although the exact amount of funding and the availability of open positions more than a year ahead of time is murky at best. So you’re not likely to get a commitment at this time, but you will make yourself known to the research group, which could be of benefit in getting an admissions offer.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, it's never too early to at least make yourself known to potential supervisors (or even potential research collaborators). Bear in mind, though, that different supervisors approach contact from potential students quite differently. For example, some are responsive, others won't respond until they have more information about whether taking students will be feasible, and some actively choose not to respond to potential students so as to ensure all applicants have a fair go.

Good luck!
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: I took the general GRE two years ago and received V167/Q161/W5.0 or V98%/Q78%/W93%.

I am applying for PhD programs in applied mathematics this fall and plan on taking the GRE mathematics subject test.

My question is, should I focus on doing well on the subject test or also study and retake the general exam?

If my general exam scores are "good enough" then I suppose I would like to simply focus on the subject test. On the other hand, I am slightly worried about my 78th percentile score in quantitative reasoning.<issue_comment>username_1: Neither.

Good PhD programs have concluded that the general GRE serves as a poor predictor of success.

Some programs do use the topical GRE to screen the first round of applications but after that, it’s the trifecta of: grades, statement, and letters.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1 is correct that GRE scores are not much use in graduate admissions. However, you should put substantial effort in to the subject test because you want to get bast the first round of screening.

If you have your other admissions tasks taken care of, then sure, you could retake the general GRE. Just be sure you are better prepared.

While the GRE is dubiously useful for determining how good someone is at graduate research, it does provide a simplistic test of planning ability. A good score indicates sufficient planning ability to sign up for the test in advance and study for it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Other commentators have suggested that little notice is taken of GRE in graduate admissions, but I am a bit more uncertain about this. I think some faculty will give little weight to it, but others will use it as an estimation of your abilities (in conjunction with other evidence such as your undergraduate grades) In any case, if you are going to submit these results as evidence of your abilities, you should make sure they put you above other applicants, instead of below them.

With that in mind, **you are right to worry about your quant score - it is a bad score (relative to the program you are applying for)**. The distributions of GRE general scores by intended major can be found [here](https://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_table4_extended.pdf), and as you can see, for students intending to pursue "Applied Mathematics", the average GRE Quantitative score is 164 (SD 6). Your score puts you above 78% of general test-takers, but it puts you in the bottom half of those applying for postgraduate maths. Students who make it into postgraduate maths generally have *very high* levels of quantitative ability. Around 20% of them get a perfect quant score in this test.

Based on this, I would suggest you retake the general test and try to at least beat the average Quantitative level for postgraduate maths applicants (GRE Quant 164+). Your verbal and written work is well above the mean, so just try to hold your scores here, but really, you need to improve your Quantitative score.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]


<issue_start>username_0: Just a quick question regarding authorship. Recently, a PI won a grant, which was used to buy some computer equipment (~$1000 piece of computation equipment along with some other equipment not relevant to the post).

I am a student that has been using the piece of equipment, as it was not being used by their students.

I am now going to be submitting a manuscript, which used the equipment as mentioned above. Does this entail the PI who won the funds to pay for it authorship? Or, as I believe, just acknowledgment (for both the grant and the PI who won it)?

EDIT 1: I should note, my research has nothing to do whatsoever with the PI's grant or their research.

EDIT 2: I found this [interesting paper](http://jme.bmj.com.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/content/40/10/683) on the subject.<issue_comment>username_1: Authorship, no, not if the only contribution was a piece of equipment. Authorship at a minimum requires an intellectual contribution to the project.

Acknowledgment, perhaps. $1000 sounds like a fairly minimal investment for an acknowledgment even, but the standards for what is worthy of acknowledging are much more up to the authors of a given paper. If the work truly would not have been possible without the equipment, then it may certainly be appropriate. If you were just borrowing someone's unused computer, that doesn't sound acknowledgment-worthy to me.

On a brief note in the other direction: some people come here and ask authorship questions where they feel someone (usually an advisor) doesn't deserve authorship, but in reality they made a substantial intellectual contribution to the project. Norms for this vary by field, but make sure when you are assessing answers you get here that you are describing this PI's complete contribution accurately.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Is the grant related to the project you worked on? If so, in my field (CS) that would be enough. Without their intellectual contribution there would have been no grant, no equipment, and no project.

Perhaps you should ask why are you writing a manuscript without supervision from a more senior researcher (if that's the case).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Journals have clear requirements of the authors, so it seems like you're asking a trivial question. But the rules do get bent/broken every day, so perhaps it is useful to point out that those requirements aren't a huge deal. It isn't like patents where including a non-contributing inventor can invalidate the whole thing. Keep in mind people stick their neck out by co-authoring your paper; if you commit misconduct or make a major error, they look bad too.

But the job of all authors isn't done until the paper is published. You need them in the loop at each step, and with an unsubmitted manuscript you aren't near the final step yet. So the real question is are you compelled, by custom or politeness or something, to offer an opportunity to co-author your paper to those who have helped you. This doesn't mean just slap their name on there like you would a reference, but to send them the draft and ask them if they wish to co-author it. Which implies that they will subsequently contribute meaningfully, and thereby earn legitimate co-authorship. And indeed the boundaries of what kind of favor rates this response probably varies by field.

I will say that burning bridges (by annoying people who had expected their minor contribution to pay off) can hurt you, while minimizing the number of co-authors doesn't help you too much. It may even hurt you as you appear less collaborative.
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: I have a revised manuscript which I submitted to Nature Communications. The status of the manuscript says 'Reviewers Assigned' for about 24 days. What does it mean? Is it under review by the reviewers? Or reviewers are not responding to the editor after the request to review the revised manuscript by the editor? Just want to clarify, that this question is specific to the editorial process of 'Nature Communications' which is not usual and not related to generalized peer review process. I think I am asking this question especially because Nature Journals have their own editorial workflow which is not as same a typical workflow of many journals.<issue_comment>username_1: It can mean many things, if the status has been same since you resubmitted your manuscript then editor might still be waiting for all the reviewers to send the editors their review reports, in some cases when one reviewer is too much busy and needs more time to finalize his review report, editors waits for him to send his comments then they contact the author and make a decision on the basis of these reports and send you acceptance, rejection or revision based on their reports.

Also if one reviewers has recommended for rejection and one or two reviewers has endorsed the publication then editor weighs the comments of all the reviewers and then make the final decision.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It means reviewers have been invited, but you can't read anything more than that. Whether or not reviewers have accepted the invitation is usually confidential information available only to journal staff. Depending on the range of statuses the journal uses, this status might even mean that some reviews have been received.

In any case, there's nothing to do except wait and see.
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: In Europe, we judge students based on their work and abilities. How are their grades? Do they have relevant work experience (TA/RA, maybe part-time industry work, etc)? What projects have they done? What courses have they taken? And of course the odd recommendation letter is always a nice bonus.

We expect students to write up a summary of all these things (it's called a *resumé*) upon which they are to be judged, and further detailed inquiry can then be made during a possible interview process.

However, as **I** understand it, it seems to be quite different in the USA. Reference letters is all that matters. Be a mediocre student, but have a good friendship with Professor Abstract Algebra? You're as good as made. Be a fantastic student, but be a bit shy or having done most of your work independently of the professors? Tough luck.

I am particularly bemused by so many of the questions on this very site where professors come to talk about awkward situations where they are being forced to write a recommendation letter for some student that they don't even know. *Who the heck is <NAME>? I lecture to hundreds of students, for Christ's sake!*

Or when you in turn get students here asking for questions about how to approach a professor they've spoken very little to all year and ask them to write a recommendation letter.

And yes, I get it. One day, one time, you'll get a fantastic reference letter from a professor who actually knows and has worked with a particular student, and that reference letter will give you a better understanding of the capabilities and experiences of this student. I get that. But that's only part of the whole process here in Europe: That's the bonus I mentioned in my first paragraph, but we don't make it our everything. We realize that some people might get luckier with recommendation letters than others.

So why do Americans put so much weight on recommendation letters?<issue_comment>username_1: Do you have any actual data to support your assertions like these?:

>
> it matters less who you are and what you can actually do, but more how many professors you are able to suck up to. Reference letters is all that matters
>
>
>

Recommendation letters are valued because it is difficult to objectively assess the other criteria you mentioned:

* Grades vary greatly by institution, and in many cases have become inflated to the point of meaning very little. Because so many students get "A" grades, a GPA only points out the occasions when someone does not receive an "A" which may be because they are a terrible student, because there was a course they chose not to prioritize, or because they had a professor who disagrees with grade inflation and attempted to give objective grades with reasonable variance at the top. Reading a GPA doesn't tell someone anything about which of these possibilities is true.
* Test scores are only very vague predictors of future success.
* Research projects are hard to evaluate. You could base it on publications, but for someone with a short career, like an undergraduate being evaluated for graduate school, minor setbacks that are normal in research can have a huge impact on publication productivity. You could base it on how many projects someone says they worked on in their personal statement or on their resume, but how do you know what their actual impact was? Maybe they are taking credit for everything that happened in a lab where they washed the dishes.

Reference letters are also flawed. There is often an expectation that references be incredibly glowing and praise-worthy, so a more honest letter might come across as critical when it is really just meant to be honest. Any admissions committee worth their salt knows about all these flaws, and therefore uses the combination of all the information they have to make decisions. Inconsistencies are just as important, and can let a committee identify possible weaknesses to address in an interview.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think Bryan's answer gives a nice perspective on the issue. A perfect system does not exist, and different continents have developed different (imperfect) ways of dealing with the fundamental recruiting problem that it is hard to judge whether a specific student (or employee) will perform or not.

What I want to add is that, if you peek behind the covers, the European and American systems don't actually differ all that much. You assert that in Europe "your CV is all that counts". That is, unfortunately, quite naive. The CV of your average student is simply not expressive enough to be "all that counts" - good grades are at best a weak indicator of research potential, and (despite your counterexample from France), also in many places in Europe many students have very good grades, to the extent of being low-value as a discriminator in hiring. Grades also do little to measure the soft factors such as motivation or being a good team player, which ultimately matter more than whether a student had an A or a B for some largely unrelated undergrad course.

How professors in Europe largely have dealt with this uncertainty is by personally asking the professors that the student worked with before what their impression of the student was - so you still have your "recommendations", but not through written letters but through informal email or telephone exchanges. This was possible because traditionally, students in (at least central) Europe were not particularly mobile - most prospective PhD students did their undergrad in the same university, a close-by university, or a different university where the professors are already in close contact. Applicants from other places were often rejected outright. Now times are (slowly) changing and more and more PhD students come from abroad - and, lo and behold, suddenly formal recommendation letters are becoming important as well.

Another aspect that I am missing in your question that at least central and southern Europe has historically had a problem with *rampant* nepotism in academia. So I find it particularly curious that you draw Europe as a haven of objective hiring strategies.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> How are their grades?... What courses have they taken?
>
>
>

Good questions! These are relevant *everywhere*. Of course, one institution's A is another institution's B-. Ask *any* professor, in *any* country, whether undergraduate grades are a reliable indicator of graduate performance. Graduate school admission is not a reward for getting good grades.

>
> Do they have relevant work experience (TA/RA, maybe part-time industry work, etc)? What projects have they done?
>
>
>

Also good questions, but you *can't take the applicant's word* on them. Okay, this applicant said he wrote an operating system from scratch as an independent study project. But if you haven't heard from the professor who oversaw it, how can you know whether that's as impressive as it sounds, or whether they wrote a buggy real-mode kernel and a buggy CLI and squeaked by with a "pass"? Or that applicant said she spent a summer helping revolutionize the efficiency of desalination plants, paving the way to turn the Sahara green. Awesome, but only her supervisor can tell you whether she was actually *involved in the process* and *effective as a researcher*, or whether she just made posters all summer because she wasn't competent enough to do anything else.

Academia, at its very core, is *collaborative*. You stand on the shoulders of giants, and do your best to help the next generation see a little further. Part of this is helping the right people advance in their field, both because they're promising in their own right, and because they can potentiate the contributions of others. A formal letter saying "Lisa has a real knack for experimental design, and you should ignore her organic chem grades because she was working through some stuff that semester" is a lot like an email saying "You should consider switching to acetone as a solvent, toluene never worked for us." It's one researcher collaborating with another.

As for the difference between the US and elsewhere: I've definitely noticed in some countries that grades are *extremely* important and evidence of relevant extracurricular work (such as on a CV or in a letter of reference) is much less so. I suspect that's correlated with how historically standardized university examinations have been in the country. I guarantee you, though, that in many/most European countries, references are just as important as they are in the US.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it's partly a historical thing. From what I remember reading in my history classes, recommendation letters were big during the industrial revolution. I seem to remember a passage where the historian talked about it literally being a case of job or no job for a laborer moving to a new city. Think about it: they weren't looking for real skills or talent, since anyone could work a machine. They probably cared more about your willingness to work stolidly and follow orders reliably, since you were easy to replace but having to do so could slow down production. They would want to know you were committed and wouldn't cause problems, and the best way to confirm that would be the word of a past employer. Nowdays, skills and experience are far more important since we do more specialized work, but employers still want to get a reading on your character before they spend the money to make you part of their team, as it's very costly to hire a new person and then have to terminate them and hire again when they can't adapt to the new workplace.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: The original question is, indeed, snarky. Take, for example, these claims:

>
> Reference letters is all that matters. Be a mediocre student, but have a good friendship with Professor Abstract Algebra? You're as good as made.
>
>
>

Nope. Sure, you may have a great relationship with Prof A.A. But astute readers of reference letters can read between the lines of the recommendation letters--that's plural for a reason. One good letter and two tepid letters are not going to elevate a mediocre student to admission to a top graduate program.

Furthermore, the assumption that the letter is the only evidence of a student's ability is odd. Most programs will examine, among other things, grades (including the rigor of the courses that were taken), the GRE examination scores, and other evidence of motivation and potential. Few phenomena in the social world are monocausal, least of all graduate admissions.

>
> Be a fantastic student, but be a bit shy or having done most of your work independently of the professors? Tough luck.
>
>
>

Some programs--at least, in the United States--seek to train potential scholars who will work in the lab or in the field, or with data, *and* in the classroom. Ultra shy students whose teaching potential seems limited may not get a strong letter. But my experience is that letters matter at the margin: two students with near identical records on paper are hard to differentiate without the reference letters. So, as a tie-breaker, letters can be very helpful indeed. And we do counsel students who want to go to grad school to work to make a good impression on their faculty, so that their referees can write *useful* letters for the application dossier.

>
> We expect students to write up a summary of all these things (it's called a resumé) upon which they are to be judged, and further detailed inquiry can then be made during a possible interview process.
>
>
>

I thought the Europeans called what we call a non-academic resumé a CV. Anyway, we ask for similar materials as part of our application packets.

>
> One day, one time, you'll get a fantastic reference letter from a professor who actually knows and has worked with a particular student, and that reference letter will give you a better understanding of the capabilities and experiences of this student. I get that. But that's only part of the whole process here in ~~Europe~~ the United States.
>
>
>

Same thing here. We can tell the difference between a heartfelt and useful letter and a perfunctory one. And most of us won't even write these letters if the student is utterly unknown to us aside from a face in a lecture hall. I urge the OP to see the pile of paper we read when we serve on graduate admission committees. It's a bit taller than a stack of reference letters.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Speaking from an American industry perspective, as opposed to an academic one, I've been on several teams that hired regularly. I was given an copy of the resume (CV) several days before the interview, or sometimes an hour to before, but never ever saw a letter of recommendation. On some teams we'd meet the applicant as a team, on others we'd meet one on one.

We'd ask questions about activities we saw on the resume and attempt to gauge the applicant by how competently they answered the question, plus over all impression of the applicant.

As someone already said, there is no perfect system. And certainly trying to judge a person's character in a single interview is prone to failure. We certainly hired more than one who did not work out in the end.

But once again, we never ever saw letters of recommendation. Again, this might be different from industry to academia, but to me letters of recommendation are totally irrelevant.

username_6
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: Recommendation letters are indeed a double-edged sword, they're meant to cover a void that isn't shown in GPA or a regular CV. For example, a friend of mine who teaches in the chemistry department of my university has a very bright student, she is in a research group and they just won an award to do some research in Standford next year. Now, she wants to be a researcher, and this opportunity is great and all, but she has a GPA of 2.0 because she got pregnant, abandoned and had a lot of financial difficulties. There are many who face big difficulties that tarnish their grades, and legitimate recommendation letters are a way to express those kind of situations.

You have to notice that most of the time recommendation letters are sent directly to the university of the applicant with their template, this way they're usually more honest. Some abilities and aptitudes are better explained by teachers and coworkers, such as teamwork, leadership, confidentiality, soft skills in general.

I live in a very corrupt country, so I understand your concern, but most of the nepotism actually takes place either in person or by other means of communication. Letters of recommendations can be a part of nepotism it or a way to "legitimize" it but they're in any way the core of the problem.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: As suggested by the OP, I've been on several hiring committees for postdocs and selection committees for graduate students at a US university and recommendation letters are always carefully considered (although they might be considered in Europe too). Recommendation letters matter because we are hiring people, not robots. When I am hiring a graduate student or postdoc, the recommendation letters carry a lot of weight for me because **I'm going to be working with this person almost every day for a few years**.

**Grades, previous research experiences and publications tell little about how the person is to work with and can be misleading about what their strengths and weaknesses are.** In my experience, there is not much correlation between grades and research productivity. Even if a person is first author on a paper, it's not clear how much of the work they did or how much was done by the advisor.

Recommendation letters tell you what a person's strengths are and (often implicitly) what their weaknesses are. Perhaps Candidate A is first author on a paper in a prestigious journal and Candidate B is first author on a paper in a less prestigious journal. With that information, you might consider the first candidate to be better. However, if the recommendation letter for Candidate B says something like "Candidate B came up with the idea for the paper independently, performed the experiments using method X, and wrote most of the paper themselves. I only offered a bit of counsel on the research plan and the organization the paper," then this would provide strong evidence of Candidate B's research skills.

On the other hand, let's say a person has worked in three labs previously. By itself, it may look like they have a lot of research experience. However, let's say they do not obtain letters of recommendation from any of their former supervisors and instead I get letters of recommendation from professors who barely knew them. Without some kind of explanation, I will assume that they have poor personal relationships with their former supervisors. Maybe this person is ambitious and productive, but is difficult to work with? It would make me think twice about hiring them.

I often see comments like, "Candidate C's spoken English may appear weak, but their written English has improved significantly over the last year and they have become excellent at organizing and writing scientific manuscripts" or "Candidate D is expert at experimental method Y, but needs to work on their scientific writing." This is invaluable information that can't be gleaned from a CV. If I hire them, I already have some idea what I need to work on with them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: Ignoring the tone of the question, addressing a couple points:

>
> How are their grades?
>
>
>

This is extremely hard to normalize, and assumes that grades, which test being good in class, translate well to research potential. They don't, and I can think of several examples of students who were middling at best in classes, but excellent researchers. Additionally, letters may help put those grades into context in a way where the letter grade might not.

>
> Do they have relevant work experience (TA/RA, maybe part-time industry
>  work, etc)? What projects have they done?
>
>
>

It's interesting that you assume these things are not associated with the same soft skills (getting along with a professor) that you assume drive recommendation letters. I would suggest this is not the case.

There's also some issues with bias in research experience - in the U.S., that's often students who don't have to hold things like summer jobs to pay for tuition who can afford to buff their CV instead. A letter lets a professor talk about someone's intellectual curiosity, keen insight or engagement in class, etc.

>
> Reference letters is all that matters.
>
>
>

This is just patently false. We have GPA requirements. We have GRE requirements. I read people's cover letters critically.

>
> Be a mediocre student, but have a good friendship with Professor
>  Abstract Algebra? You're as good as made. Be a fantastic student, but
>  be a bit shy or having done most of your work independently of the
>  professors? Tough luck.
>
>
>

Only if Professor AA can speak to your abilities as a researcher, and you have the evidence to back it up.

If you've done independent work that's interesting and stands up on its own? Talk about that, and I'll take a look at it. You know how I know? Because I've hired people who have done exactly that.

>
> And yes, I get it. One day, one time, you'll get a fantastic reference
>  letter from a professor who actually knows and has worked with a
>  particular student, and that reference letter will give you a better
>  understanding of the capabilities and experiences of this student. I
>  get that. But that's only part of the whole process here in Europe:
>  That's the bonus I mentioned in my first paragraph, but we don't make
>  it our everything. We realize that some people might get luckier with
>  recommendation letters than others.
>
>
>

**Context is important**. I've had letters that explain circumstances that, looking at a CV, are odd or worrisome. I've had letters talk about someone's potential, how much of their research project is truly theirs, etc. I've had them speak to the shortcomings of a student, so I can evaluate how much that matters to me, or if that's a potential for growth in my lab. It lets them talk about passions that are hard to quantify (outreach, teaching, etc.).

It's part of a holistic process. I also weight grades, and research experience, and career opportunities. I'm keenly aware of the bias issues that sometimes arise in letter writing, and actively look for them to make sure I'm not weighing them heavily.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Many reasons have already been mentioned.

One reason might be that there other (demographic) criteria for the inclusion of students. To put it blantly, letters of recommendation give you some leeway for covert racism.

For example, much of the "well-roundedness" that was expected of candidates (personality beyond their grades) was originally a means to discriminate against Jews in academia, since they didn't attend church activities which were so important back then. Nowadays, it is used to discriminate against Asians.

I have had Asian students explicitly asking me to get their well-roundedness across in their letters. I have met admissions officers telling me that they limit their intake from Chinese students by a quota because otherwise they had too many Chinese.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I think the reliance on letters of recommendation for admission to graduate programs in the U.S. educational system (which is not at all homogeneous, and is not really organized in any way), is substantially due to the general breadth-but-shallowness of *all* (to my knowledge) undergrad degree program requirements, plus the wildly varying resources of all the various colleges and universities, plus the wildly varying opportunities (due to both the college/university and students' socio-economic situations).

The typical (maybe not most-elite) U.S. grad programs in math allow people 5 or 6 years, explicitly acknowledging that many students will need to learn a good bit more... since in most cases they simply did not have time/opportunity to do more math coursework as undergrads.

Yes, often, getting an M.S. in math in the U.S. compensates for this, *if* one can do the M.S. at a reasonable place. Oop, but most M.S. admissions (currently, in the U.S.) do not include funding. So, if money matters to a person (and, to some, it simply doesn't! a colleague of mine chronically expressed bafflement at faculty concerns about salary and benefit... which was eventually explained by discovery that he was an heir to a billionaire), a paid-for M.S. is probably infeasible.

So, one would/should want to be admitted from B.S. to PhD (and maybe, in effect, get an M.S. along the way), because most admissions to PhD programs pay tuition and a nearly-livable stipend.

Simultaneously, applicants from nearly every other country in the world have been operating under a different system, so that their B.S.'s are U.S. Masters', and their Masters' are a fraction of a PhD.

So, perhaps, by some formal rationale, essentially every U.S. student fails in comparison to non-U.S. students.

Perhaps so, *in\_the\_short\_term*. But the short term is not the criterion of most interest.

Yes, it would be reasonable to speculate that a head start gives a *permanent* advantage. But, very-interestingly, this seems not to be the case (in my observation). Sure, in some cases, but, *by* *far*, not reliably so.

So, how do we compare apples and oranges? I think that rhetorical question is a correct explanation/analogue of the issue of comparing students from different educational systems. (Which is a legitimate version of the original question. If, as in some comments, it's about "asian-americans" versus "anglo-americans", then I have nothing to say!?!)

So, how to gauge the probable successes of people with different starting points, and with most U.S. candidates having so little tangible experience that it is very difficult to assess their talent for mathematics based on coursework grades and GRE. Not to mention my "very-mixed" feelings about typical undergrad U.S. math curricula actually giving an idea what live math is about.

(I have to add that I'm glad I was able to "test out" of essentially all undergrad math... partly, indeed, by being a good test-taker, but also by having read lots of books. No internet then, and TV went off at 10:00 pm...
If I'd been required to sit through two years of calculus (as it is presented in The Tomes), and then any of the pedantic [sic] versions of undergrad math, I don't think I would have seriously imagined that I could be a mathematician. More importantly, I would not have *wanted* to be a party to such grim, oppressive stuff. A substantial part of my luck was to be a good test-taker... which, let's confess, is not really much related to real mathematics. :)

In other words, in the U.S., undergrad grades, GRE, and that kind of thing are not a sample that I find/have-found most useful for imagining U.S. students' future success. Comparisons to students from abroad are difficult.

(About bias: If the question is really about kids in the U.S. with various ethnic backgrounds, then, no, there's no excuse. So, does "Asian" mean "someone literally from Asia, who's gone to school in Asia", or does it mean "a U.S. kid of Asian ancestry"?)
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: There are several important journals out there that are not peer-reviewed, such as [Network Security](https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/network-security). Do such papers provide any value for the author(s), especially for whom want to apply for a PhD program.<issue_comment>username_1: Basically, it's a "free masters degree" to members who otherwise don't qualify for the masters degree, for various reasons.

Here it is, direct from Oxford:

>
> Conferment of Degrees
>  7.1. The procedures for the conferment, both at the Encaenia and on other occasions, of Degrees by Diploma, Honorary Degrees, Ordinary
>  Degrees, and Degrees by Incorporation shall be determined by
>  regulation, and the regulations concerned shall be published from time
>  to time in a Handbook for the Conduct of University Ceremonies.
>
>
> 7.2. (1) In the case of a person in any of the categories set out in paragraph (2) below who does not hold, and is not qualified for, any
>  of the Degrees (other than Honorary Degrees) of Doctor of Divinity,
>  Doctor of Civil Law, Doctor of Medicine, Master of Arts, Master of
>  Biochemistry, Master of Chemistry, Master of Earth Sciences, Master of
>  Engineering, Master of Mathematics, or Master of Physics of the
>  University, Council shall as soon as possible propose to Congregation
>  that a Degree of Master of Arts by Resolution be conferred upon that
>  person without fee, if (and only if) he or she holds both a bachelor’s
>  and a doctor’s degree (other than an honorary degree) of any
>  university or universities or of any such other institution or
>  institutions as Council may determine by regulation from time to time,
>  or that at least twenty terms have lapsed since he or she first became
>  a member of a university or such other institution, or, in the case of
>  a person who is not a member of any university, that he or she is at
>  least 25 years of age.
>
>
> (2) The categories referred to in paragraph (1) above are:
>
>
> (a) the Chancellor;
>
>
> (b) the High Steward;
>
>
> (c) the Vice-Chancellor;
>
>
> (d) the Proctors;
>
>
> (e) the heads of all the colleges, societies, and Permanent Private
>  Halls included in Statute V;
>
>
> (f) the members of the governing bodies of all the colleges and
>  societies included in Statute V (but not of the Permanent Private
>  Halls);
>
>
> (g) the principal bursar or treasurer of each of the colleges and
>  societies included in Statute V (but not of the Permanent Private
>  Halls), if he or she is not a member of its governing body.
>
>
> (3) In the case of a person excluded because none of the conditions in
>  paragraphs (1) and (2) above is met, Council shall proceed as soon as
>  possible after one of them has been met.
>
>
> (4) Nothing in this regulation shall restrict the power of Council to
>  propose to Congregation that a Degree by Resolution be conferred
>  without fee upon any person it considers appropriate.
>
>
> 7.3. A Degree by Resolution shall be deemed to have been conferred with effect from the approval of the resolution by Congregation.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's ecactly as described in the wikipedia-article you were linking: He had to spend 6-7 years at Oxford to recieve the title. Since he was faster than this time span with his doctorate, he recieved the Master by Resolution after his Doctor.

The degree "Master of Arts by Resolution" indicates, that no further studies or exams were necessary, but is is given "by resolution".
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: One of my friends has a lot of research works, but he is kinda of lazy in the publishing process. As a result, he has a lot of unpublished research materials. Right now, he is realized that he needs citation count to be able to get some benefits which I don't want to disclose here but I could just tell it's not academic benefit but it is heavily related to only citation count and not even the number of publications (ridiculous yeah? but sadly true!). Also, if he publishes those research materials under his own name and cite himself it will be counted as self-citation and again it is worthless to be qualified for that benefit. This matter leads him to publish his research works under the name of his other friends and in those papers he cite himself just for sake of citation count. The research materials are not questionable and in my opinion even they're remarkable. But he is reluctant to publish it under his own name because he thinks he will miss that benefit and he does not have such a long time to publish his researches under his own name and wait at least a couple of years to accumulate citation counts. This is a really complicated problem and I'm wondering is it a real research misconduct or not? More generally, it really hurts me that some good researchers will be judged solely based on some numbers like citation count, which leads people to these kind of activities. Any idea or suggestion is appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: This does not sound ethical at all. I would say that both your friend and the people who are willing to take credit for his work are lying and misrepresenting their accomplishments.

Furthermore, what your friend is doing is extremely short-sighted. If the material in his publications is remarkable as you state, then he will gain far more citations in the long term by having his name on all of them, rather than trying to artificially inflate his citation count for short-term gains.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If I understand your post correctly, "Bob" writes a paper but names "Alice" as the author - with her permission. **This is a clear misconduct, because Alice did not do the work attributed to her.**

Alice might get in serious trouble when anyone figures out, for example if

* someone contacts her to ask more details or
* someone realizes that these papers do not fit to Alice's other publications (or even her education, if she is from a different field)
* *etc*

In the aftermath of these troubles, she will be in need to admit that she the actual work was done by Bob, thus, he will be in trouble as well.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I recently agreed to review a journal paper (in theoretical computer science). After I started to read it in depth, I found out it is much harder than I expected - over 60 pages with over 20 theorems with detailed proofs. Also, the topic is not exactly my expertise - I do not know a lot of the related works that the authors base their results on.
So far, I managed to verify about 10 of the shorter theorems. They seem correct, though I have some minor comments. The other theorems seem so long and complex that it will take me weeks to review, especially if I would need to read and understand the theorems in the cited papers that these theorems are based on. What should I do?

I thought of writing to the editor and explaining the situation in detail. Maybe the editor will be able to find another reviewer that will verify the other theorems. But I do not know how such letter will be perceived. In particular:

* Is it common for a reviewer to review only a part of the paper, and leave the rest of the paper to other reviewers?
* On the other hand: is it my duty, as a reviewer, to complete my review, regardless of how much time it takes?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is it common for a reviewer to review only a part of the paper, and leave the rest of the paper to other reviewers?
>
>
>

I have done that on at least two occasions. Sometimes it is the only honest option.

>
> On the other hand: is it my duty, as a reviewer, to complete my review, regardless of how much time it takes?
>
>
>

Not really. It is commonly considered a duty of a career mathematician to contribute to peer review of mathematical works (at least) proportionally to their own publishing. Whether you achieve this by refereeing some really tough papers or a lot of simple ones is up to you.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ### Consult the editor

Adding to @darijgrinberg's answer: Consult with the journal's editor(s) before making any decisions.

They might:

* Tell you more about what's common in a situation such as the one you're in.
* Possibly decide they want to switch reviewers or divvy up the review work
* Tell you what they expect from you (including telling you or hinting at you what they would regard as unethical).
* Pressure you into continuing (not such a great outcome - but I have to add this in fairness)

Don't feel awkward or inappropriate about taking this up with the editors, it's the responsible thing to do.
Upvotes: 5


<issue_start>username_0: How would you weight each factor below on choosing an advisor?

1 - My interest in the advisor's research topic.

2 - How well he/she dedicates time and effort to guide me.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a Hobson's Choice as stated. In reality you need both.

But in reality each of these ideas is defined by a wide range. Your interest can be a little or a lot. The more interested you are the better. But if your interest is zero it is a big mistake to choose that.

The support provided by a professor can be a little or a lot. Even if it is "low" the needed support may be provided by others, say post-docs or senior lab researchers. But if the support is zero (in time/effort), again, it is a big mistake to choose this. Moreover, the *kind* of support provided by different advisors can vary widely. They can be the source of a problem that you solve, or they can be a collaborator.

In realistic situations you need a balance. Moreover, the balance is partly determined by yourself. How wide are your interests? How flexible are you? Are you driven to a particular sub-sub-sub-field or are you willing to explore anything "interesting"? How much guidance do *you* need? Are you a dedicated self studier or do you need a kick to get moving in some given direction?

Think about your own personal situation and make a choice. But zero on either of the two indices you are looking at is probably a bad choice.

---

However, at the undergraduate level this is a less critical choice since you have a variety of things to do beyond research. As you are just getting started in research, it might be wiser to choose someone who will give you more help rather than less despite a low interest in the specific topic. At the doctoral level, the topic becomes more important.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would weigh the second factor much more heavily. It's hard to know how interesting a subject will be before you get started with it, especially if you're new to doing research at all. But the engagement of your advisor is important no matter the topic.
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: Sometimes it happens that a professor traveling has his TA or RA fill in for him/her delivering a class lecture. Is this experience appropriate for a typical engineering CV, and if so how would it be designated?

[This question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62599/should-i-add-guest-lecturer-experience-in-my-cv) deals with what sounds to me a somewhat greater honor, being invited to give a lecture in another department at your school. The answers there suggest that this should be listed as a "guest lecture". A related question is whether my first scenario can be described as a "guest lecture". I have seen it described as such on CVs. But my recollection as an undergrad is when a prof mentioned a "guest lecturer" coming, it was usually a bigshot, or some specialist, not some Phd student.

I have a feeling that the professor in the first scenario would use whoever is TAing as substitute, if the TA was at all competent. I have also heard those on search committees say it looks like resume-stuffing and can do more harm than good. On the other hand, a well-received comment by @DavidRicherby in [this post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119614/can-i-say-no-when-my-principal-investigator-asks-me-to-help-cover-lectures-next) suggests that it is a good idea to include substitute lecturing for your PI on a CV. Do folks on search committees (whether at more teaching-oriented or research-oriented institutions) have an opinion?<issue_comment>username_1: I would limit the term "guest lecture" to cases where you were specifically invited to give a lecture to the course, because of your ability to contribute something special that the regular instructor could not do. (E.g. you have special expertise on a particular topic, or experiences to relate, or notable achievements, etc.) I wouldn't apply it to simply covering a class (teaching routine material) because the professor is away.

However, you would normally have a separate section on your CV describing your teaching experience, which would include an entry showing that you were a TA for this course. Under this entry, you could describe your duties, which could include something like "occasional lecturing".
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are two different parts of the CV that you're confusing. One of them is "Invited Talks" (or a similar phrasing) which is part of the research portion of the CV and is intended to show that people are interested in your research. This would include colloquia, conferences, and seminars at other schools. If you're very early career you can include seminars at your own school, provided they're research talks.

A totally different part of the CV is your teaching experience. If you have very little teaching experience and you're applying for jobs that involve teaching, then it would make sense to include that you have lecturing experience substituting in a particular course. If the rest of your teaching experience is just grading or running recitation sections, showing that you have a little experience lecturing to a larger class can look good.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You are probably correct that *Guest Lecturer* and *Substitute Lecturer* aren't the same thing. But both could be listed on the CV as separate items. You want to make your best case there while being honest and informative. Just label it appropriately and, if necessary, provide a phrase of explanation. "I was honored by Prof Dimsdale to cover several lectures on mumble magic theory".

Normally a Guest Lecturer will speak on a topic of his/her own choosing, whereas a substitute will speak on the normal subject matter of the course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Rather than asking "Does this count as X on my CV?", you should just describe it as what it is. State in the teaching section of your CV that you gave three lectures in advanced quantum widget theory, covering the absence of the usual lecturer.
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: Assuming the home university only pays 1/2 of 9-months salary in the period of one-year sabbatical.

Can it be legally allowed? or does it violate any rules in general? What would be the worst consequence if doing so?

Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: The only legal rules that are likely to apply here are the contractual rules for the terms of the professor's employment with the university, combined with the university's policy/contract relating to sabbaticals. Whether or not this is allowed would depend on the terms of the sabbatical, as set out in the appropriate university policies and employment contract.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is possible; ask your HR department whether it is possible for you.
Upvotes: -1


<issue_start>username_0: I’m about to finish my PhD in Sociology. I’m from Pakistan, and I’m totally blind. My PhD research was quite interdisciplinary. I studied factors influencing environmental concern about environmental problems in Pakistan, as well as factors influencing environmental behavior at home. Now I want to do a post doctorate from anywhere in Europe, North America, Australia or New Zealand.

Can my blindness be a factor in acceptance / rejection of my application?

If not, what should be my first step for finding a post doctoral opportunity? My research interest is in the domains of environmental sociology and environmental psychology.<issue_comment>username_1: In the United States there's what is known as the [Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990)

which prohibits discrimination based on disabilities and mandates reasonable accomodations. Full or partial blindness will definitely fall under that category, and so they are legally prohibited from discriminating against you and if hired will work with you to help out. Many other locations have similar laws. In Canada the laws vary from province to province, but most of Canada has similar laws. Many (although not all) European countries have similar laws or regulations as well.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Can my blindness be a factor in acceptance / rejection of my application?
>
>
>

As others have said, most Western countries have laws preventing discriminating against you due to blindness. However, the standard is that they you must be able to do the work given a "reasonable accommodation" -- i.e., they could reasonably prevent you from flying a plane or being a sharpshooter, as there is no reasonable way they could enable you to do the job. Since you did your PhD research already, it seems likely that you can do the work despite your handicap.

Note, however, that most post-docs are filled (at least in my experience) by interviewing with a professor or small group of professors. Most professors want to do the right thing; however, it is difficult to do an apples-to-apples comparison between two candidates at the best of times.

At any rate, all you can do is apply and hope for the best.

>
> Are there any helpful websites that I can frequently check for available post doctoral opportunities?
>
>
>

I don't know (and "shopping questions" are actually not allowed here).

>
> Is it necessary that my research should be on a population of a country where I’m studying for my post doc? i.e., if I’m studying in New Zealand, and I want to collect data from people in Pakistan, is this discouraged?
>
>
>

I don't know your field, but I seriously doubt this would be a problem. Here in the US, at least, there is plenty of research into different regions of the world.

>
> What should be my first step for finding a post doctoral opportunity?
>
>
>

I would start by talking to your advisor, trusted old professors, or friends to find out where such jobs are typically announced. They may also be willing to introduce you to their network.

If the goal is a faculty position, I would consider reading <NAME>'s book -- plenty of advice there about best practices for preparing for and interviewing for a faculty position; though the book is widely written, she is an anthropologist and has lots of advice that seems like it would apply well to your situation.
Upvotes: 5


<issue_start>username_0: Yesterday, a colleague from my school's history department brought me a student's final project from her history class. The assigned project was to produce a "creative" project dealing with a historical figure/event covered in the time period of the class (20th century United States). One student wrote a short play about the Great Depression. Another student designed a simple computer game that he ran on a Macintosh Classic II from the 1990s.

However, the student in question here (whose project I was shown) wrote a diary for a famous American serial killer. The diary **graphically** details the killings this man performed, including hand sketches of female genitalia, clippings from some porn magazines, and (as far as we can tell) splatters of real blood. *It is a horrifically disturbing piece of work.*

The student did technically fulfill the parameters of the assignment. He produced a (seemingly) historically accurate project on a historical figure from the 20th century in the United States. (Neither my colleague nor I really wanted to fact check every detail of a 200 page diary written in scrawled handwriting and splattered with blood and sketches of vivisected women). The writing is decent, albeit rather repetitive and somewhat simple. My colleague is likely going to give the student a fairly high grade on the project.

**However**, the graphic and disturbing subject matter, alongside the frighteningly realistic psychopathy, have brought my colleague to wonder if she should show the project to department or university administration. We were not sure if this student just had a distinct (and disturbing) gift for creative writing or if he was actually writing from personal experience (or something?). Is it a cry for help? Is the student a serial killer (unlikely)? Does he enjoy fantasizing about vicious crimes?

We are not psychologists, so we are not going to try to psychoanalyze this student from a professional standpoint. We also want to tread lightly around punishing and censoring a student for "thought crimes." However we also do not want to become part of history ourselves by being "that one professor" who saw potential signs of a violent criminal and opted to just give the kid an A- and be done with it.

Should my colleague show this project to university administrators?

---

### Addendum

There have been a few questions about the structure and reasoning behind this class. This is a class that emphasizes history through the lens of "creativity." The thesis of the class is essentially that historical figures were highly creative and that we can learn a fair amount about history by examining "creativity." The class is usually taken by STEM majors as a general ed requirement. I took the class (years ago) and it actually was very interesting and I learned a lot about history.

There have been questions about the grading on the assignment. I do not know the specific metrics for grading the project. I said that my colleague may give an A- on the project as just a hypothetical filler grade. I do not know what she will grade the student on specifically. I guess it comes down to how creative we think writing the F-word 200+ times in a pornographic notebook splattered with a bloody substance is. Let's not act as if all violent porn is to be elevated to the pedestal of artistic acclaim just for the sake of radical liberality. I'm not the grader of the assignment and I ultimately cannot answer how it will be graded.<issue_comment>username_1: The "administration" is probably the wrong place to look. Instead, see if you your institution has some mental health staff, whether just associated contacts, or counselors, or even a dedicated behavior concerns advice function, to get proper advice. If the university is well-organized enough to have one of the latter, chances are they've also established policies requiring you to pursue this. And such an advice line would be well suited to tell you how to go about it. If your university doesn't, figure out where to report it.

Note that, unless your institution is highly dysfunctional, reporting concerning behavior and having a professional talk to the student in question shouldn't be considered a punishment, but a safety net.

As Buffy points out in a comment, the law may further require you to do some things, and avoid doing other things. While one would hope that the mental health support staff are well-informed, contacting the legal staff (University Counsel) may be useful. That said, as a non-lawyer person, I imagine most legal pitfalls concern naming the student when you shouldn't. Your initial inquiries need not include the name of the student, until you're convinced that you should.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> [A student wrote] a diary for a famous American serial killer... graphically detail[ing] the killings this man performed, including hand sketches of female genetilia... [The student will likely receive] a fairly high grade on the project.
>
>
>

It seems like **the student should be commended** for their account of historic events.

>
> It is a horrifically disturbing piece of work.
>
>
>

That seems like an excellent portrayal of a serial killer.

>
> (as far as we can tell) splatters of real blood
>
>
>

You've acknowledged that it might not be real....

I'm left thinking: *The student should be commended*. That said, I don't have the full picture and you certainly "do not want to become part of history ourselves by being 'that one professor.'"

The OP has been commended (in comments, e.g., [by Nic](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121480/reporting-a-student-who-may-be-psychologically-disturbed/121539?noredirect=1#comment321985_121480)) for acknowledging that they feel somewhat out of their depth. So, this seemingly isn't an issue that the OP should deal with alone: I recommend **delegating responsibility to your department head**. This isn't shirking; it is the right thing to do. (At least in my opinion.)

There are also ramifications to consider: As [commented below](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121480/reporting-a-student-who-may-be-psychologically-disturbed/121539?noredirect=1#comment322152_121539), "[I]f it all blows up, you can point fingers. If you don't, and it all blows up, fingers will be pointed at you."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Not to be dismissive of this, but to be honest he sounds like the average "edgy" teenager/young adult. Maybe he's a fan of horror/slasher movies/history or just interested in serial killers specifically. I'm very interested in this type of things myself, and I'm not violent in the slightest. I also did some questionable school projects when I was younger, not only because of my interest in these subjects but also partly for shock factor and to stand out from the other works (which seems to have happened here).

That being said, there's always a **chance** he *could* become a serial killer or show signs of violence, etc., but anyone in your class could without explicitly demonstrating it. If anything, show it to your superiors or talk to him about it just to clear your conscience, and if you notice any other worrying signs maybe suggest an appointment with a mental health specialist.

Grade wise, I do think he deserves a high grade if he did a good/accurate and detailed work, independent of opinion or personal taste on the matter.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: TL;DR - if you're worried, contact the department head and recommend that they keep an eye out for further signs.

Let's start with the obvious: if you think that there is a clear and immediate threat to you, the student, or anyone else - contact the authorities.

I don't think that this is the case here though. The most reasonable explanation in my opinion is that this is a student who wants to be edgy/different, and has a thing for horror. Some of the things you point out do not sound too outlandish to me (at the risk of sounding crass, you can get a pretty good idea of what genitalia look like after 5 minutes on the web), but you are a better judge of that.

If you feel like this is unusually weird, and it raises red flags in your opinion, I would the department head. Your reaction needs to be measured when you present the case. The student committed no crime and took an unusual approach to an assignment. If you start a whole thing involving psychological services etc., it may turn out to be nothing, and may be construed as 'thought police-ey' (your department head may -rightly- think that you're overreacting). Just state that the work made you uncomfortable, and that its content may be indicative of some underlying issues. There is no ethical issue with showing students' work to colleagues (including department heads). Your department head will be in a better position to make a call - they'll be able to find out whether the student has been showing other disturbing signs in other classes, or on campus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Yesterday, a colleague from my school's history department brought me
>  a student's final project from her history class. The assigned project
>  was to produce a "creative" project dealing with a historical
>  figure/event covered in the time period of the class (20th century
>  United States).
>
>
>

What a strange university level type of history assignment ! Why would you want a student of history to get creative ?

>
> (Neither my colleague nor I really wanted to fact check every detail
>  of a 200 page diary written in scrawled handwriting and splattered
>  with blood and sketches of vivisected women)
>
>
>

200 pages with drawings ? That seems overzealous, way too much work for an assignment, doesnt it ?

Although it's not your job to put a diagnostic on the student, it is possible that you dont find in the institution anyone whose job it is. In that case, **you still gotta do something *as a citizen***.

The teacher can interview the student about the essay under the guise of finding it interesting and unusual, but with the real intent of probing the student. A paranoid/guilty student wouldnt submit such paper. I suggest the interview focuses on discerning the fantasy part in it and possibly concludes with a counselling offer if suitable.

The interviewer should ask questions as an amazed reader wanting to know more about the genesis of the work, this is well within the scope of teacher student interaction

-is this real blood? Is it yours ?

-did you write the thing on a word processor before handwriting it ?

-what sources did you use ? Did you get creative ? Where ?

-how did the idea come to you ?

-how much time did you spend on it etc....

Now if the student says it's his blood (shows you the cuts), wrote all by hand without word processor, intertwined a lot of fantasy with few historical detail, and has always been fascinated with such things then it is certainly worthy of spending extra effort finding shrink help for the student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Talk with the author about his motive to write such a piece and whether he used real blood. If yes, ask why he used real blood. After this you can decide how to proceed. I mean, is it really necessary in such a forum to suggest to ask the most basic questions?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: ### First thing's first: Handle potential immediate danger

Your colleague should contact the student - most preferable in person if she knows she will see him / pass him by somewhere; if not that, by phone; otherwise by email, but also possibly through known friends of his.

When first contacting, your colleague should not be overly alarmist - so as not to make him break contact. She should commend him for his effort; casually sneak in a question about whether he is on campus, taking his exams, or whatever it is he's supposed to be doing; and asking him to come in for a talk about the work, to explain some aspects of it (e.g. during reception hours).

If the student cannot be contacted, is incoherent, or suggests that he is in distress - then it's emergency mode. I'm not good at giving advice about interacting with people when they're potentially-suicidal or potentially-homicidal; I'd say Google it or maybe other answers here on the site are relevant.

I'm just saying - don't have your colleague mull this over, wondering what exactly to do, in case the guy is in danger of harming himself or others in the immediate future
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> Should my colleague show this project to university administrators?
>
>
>

Yes. It's lunacy for the instructor to try to handle this alone as a purely academic issue. The student should know *a priori* that submitting what sounds like hundreds of pictures of mutilated women and what appears to be real blood is out-of-bounds for a college class. The fact that this is not the case suggests very deep problems.

At any institution I've experienced, there is some well-defined path for reporting and getting students appropriate help. For example, at my college we have an Assessment and Care Team (ACT) whose mission statement includes "Initiating appropriate intervention without resorting to punitive measures", etc. Reportable behaviors include "Material, written or spoken, in coursework suggesting possibly self-harm or harm to others", etc. Among the members of this team are the Dean of Students, Public Safety, Counseling and Health Services, etc.

The fact that you and your colleague don't know what the recognized process is at your institution indicates that you're pretty far out of your depth. Ask your manager/chair immediately what the correct contact is. I'll close with one more quote from our college's ACT document for faculty, which I think is top-notch advice:

>
> Know your limits: Only go as far as your expertise, training, and
>  resources allow and trust your feelings when you think an individual's
>  problem is more than you can handle. If you are unsure how to respond
>  to a specific student, consult with Counseling Services or a member of
>  ACT.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: You should do nothing, for the following reasons:

(a) The student did an excellent project and should be rewarded for that.

(b) Morality is attached to actions, not character. The act of killing someone is contrary to ethics, but character traits that allow one to not be grossed out by the idea of killing someone is not contrary to ethics.

(c) People are horrified by different things. For myself, I am very squeamish and discomforted by apparently "moderate" depictions of misuse of power. Yet to most people, these depictions are just harmless entertainment. See point (b).

(d) If the existence and availability of certain cultural materials is psychologically harmful, the responsibility falls on society to legislate appropriately. The responsibility does not fall on nonexperts to act on their highly fallible guesses about the empirical facts pertaining to the psychological effects of cultural materials.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: There are several good answers here already, but I would still like to add a humble option: talk to him, without assuming he is disturbed.

"This is a dark topic, and you have obviously spent a lot of time with it. How do you feel, now you're done?"

If you think the work might be a "cry for help", such a discussion will probably help you assess whether there is any cause to worry.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I'm in the process of publishing an article in the Engineering field. The manuscript got a preliminary acceptance, and should be published after few modifications. However, based on one comment I got, I need to evaluate my model's performance based on certain input data. I don't have such data, but such data has been published before in the literature. Is it OK to use the date published by other authors just to evaluate my model?
What am I going to do is to digitize the published figures and use the values. I'm going to cite the papers, but I'm not going to add the figures or the datapoints to my manuscript.<issue_comment>username_1: Yeah, it is fine. If anything, it is how the literature and scientific enterprise is supposed to work. I would just be clear about attribution and that you haven't discovered the relationship (from first paper) but instead used existing info to validate your method.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can almost certainly *use* the data that you find. Copyright restrictions only prevent you from republishing it. But if the originators make it available, they do so so that others can take advantage of it (as well as making verification of their own work possible).

Of course, the original authors may grant a non-restrictive license to the data in any case, in which case you are bound by that.

The same is true if you read something in a copyrighted book. You can use that information for any purpose, but you cannot republish it. But for your work all you really need to do is to cite it properly to avoid any charge of plagiarism.

Given the final comments in your question, you should be fine.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If the data is publicly available, yes, by all means, but don't forget to cite the source of the data (and any associated papers that introduce or describe it).
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to a social sciences journal and it has been accepted. However, the publisher tells me it is going to be printed in the next weeks in the 2016 issue. How to make sense of this? Apparently the issue has been delayed a few years. However it will not mention the year 2019 and it is officially a 2016 paper issue. No digital copy since the journal doesn't have a webpage. Can I still put 2019 in my CV? and if I want to present it in an upcoming conference?

It is an old journal in French that might had issues with their timeframe, collecting papers, printing, and moreover getting the editing work done on ambitious projects. Is it really an issue when the work was done? If this is part of PhD research, want difference does it make if it is possible to indicate in bibliography that the work was submitted and printed in 2019?<issue_comment>username_1: In your CV, I think it would be *proper* to put the official date (2016), but also acceptable to note that it was (will be) "published 2019". For presentation at the conference, I assume you need to submit it first. You can send a note to the program chair explaining the situation.

It will always be a bit anomalous, but it is what it is. Even in a formal citation you can list both dates - 2016 issue, published 2019.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Chances are, the journal is having trouble filling its issues. It doesn't have enough papers, so issues promised to subscribers were never delivered - the journal now "owes" its subscribers the missing issues and your paper was put into one of these issues.

C'est la vie.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?

If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.

Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).
Upvotes: 5