Datasets:

jmajkutewicz

/

SHP-binarized

like 0

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am an older lesbian working in higher education admin. Here's my take:its not you responsibility to tank your life o er this situation. Survival is key. If it were me, I would probably tough it out while building a case to submit to the institution and government agency after I left. I mean daily documentation of dates and times and actors and passive observers of each incident in the notes in my phone that I would transcribe to a document. Then the hot second I either found a better environment or finished and left off it would go to both of those entities. I'd also find out how to get representation through the aclu and or glaad or whomever. Then I'd go on about my damn life and let those folks Duke it out. At that point you have essentially provided a dossier and insulated yourself from repercussion. But again. You are under no obligation to take any action which threatens your safety or well being if it goes against who you are to do so.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a \"queer faculty and staff caucus\" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This has a potential to turn into a vector for mob justice. But even ignoring the moral aspect, you're trying to have institutions retaliate against people who haven't been found guilty in a court of law. This is a shitstorm of defamation lawsuits in the making. No institution will open itself to that kind of risk.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Nice way to intensify an already unnecessarily intense shit show. As an early career researcher with a few very lazy PhD students who are both likely to graduate without publications _through no fault of my own_ I can see me being put on a list like this as retaliation when they inevitably find themselves not getting postdocs due to competition with people who have several publications after their seven year American style PhDs.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "We all learned about Nassar not too long ago. Forgive me for not completely trusting institutions to keep people safe while they are busy saving face. There is a database already of public information. Thanks for the other comment or for posting the link here!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’d use a different word than toxic since that can mean things as small as being rude to coworkers or more broadly a competitive, up or out atmosphere, you are clearly interested in different stuff. That said, I don’t know if moving to a trial by the court of public opinion is a great idea long term.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This is a terrible idea. The NIH will not defame PIs who have never been convicted of anything in a court of law. You may as well ask them to make public the names of students who have been found guilty of academic honesty or conduct violations so that PIs know to avoid them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "If they already got fired or forced to retire, then they won’t be making the environment toxic. Am I missing the point? I’m not pro harassment, of course. I just don’t know if this will achieve anything. If any of these cases went to court, you can access the court files and publish the names if you want to. However, if the person was accused but the case never went to court, there are no records and for all practical purposes, the harassment didn’t happen or it’s hearsay.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "uh why/how would the NIH even know this?", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Just sharing this since it is relevant to the post: https://academic-sexual-misconduct-database.org/incidents", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Email the author, get an ILL and look on pubmed central. Anyone who has federal funding has to make the paper open access within a certain time limit. I find it hard to believe that the first 2 don’t work.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "/r/Scholar", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm surprised. sci-hub just works for me when I can't be bothered to go on my uni's VPN. All Elsevier journals should be working. The other option is the #icanhazpdf hashtag on twitter. Tweet the journal article and an email address with the hashtag and someone should be able to provide the pdf.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Do we think it’s actually piracy if an intermediary like Elsevier acts as a mere repository, charges fees for search and retrieval services and not for the research paper, and pays the authors of the papers nothing?", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "/r/Scholar", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "/r/Scholar", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was \"*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*\" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to \"*is it a hoax or not a hoax*\". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think that is definitely the case for a lot of academics. But I would say that it's not exclusively limited to academia. People in all realms of life are super critical and rational in their own line of work but don't apply it to anything else.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I find the opposite - where people over apply the logic of their field to the world around them. Is there a word for reverse anthropormophizing? I first heard this years ago about dog trainers basically being assholes because they treat people like a pack of dogs. It turns out that it's generally true.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "An interesting question as I’ve noticed my level of critical thinking tends to at least be partially “trained” for a specific topic. Cognitively I don’t know why this is, perhaps simply the way that skill development or memory works via association In some areas I tend to be overly critical to the point where I’m reluctant to make any firm conclusions, out of habit, others with the opposite problem. I’d imagine there is some level of general critical skills overlapping, or perhaps what overlaps is the potential to gain the insights necessary to apply those critical thinking skills to each topic, which would correlate with intelligence but probably also requires the cognitive effort be made in that specific area or topic in the first place. Perhaps the effort simply is not ever made by some for some topics, which could explain this narrow minded effect I’d also imagine some people with a certain personality type would seek to put this into practice in all areas and this rule of thumb would not hold for them either, but it would require more intellectual effort", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was \"*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*\" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to \"*is it a hoax or not a hoax*\". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "An interesting question as I’ve noticed my level of critical thinking tends to at least be partially “trained” for a specific topic. Cognitively I don’t know why this is, perhaps simply the way that skill development or memory works via association In some areas I tend to be overly critical to the point where I’m reluctant to make any firm conclusions, out of habit, others with the opposite problem. I’d imagine there is some level of general critical skills overlapping, or perhaps what overlaps is the potential to gain the insights necessary to apply those critical thinking skills to each topic, which would correlate with intelligence but probably also requires the cognitive effort be made in that specific area or topic in the first place. Perhaps the effort simply is not ever made by some for some topics, which could explain this narrow minded effect I’d also imagine some people with a certain personality type would seek to put this into practice in all areas and this rule of thumb would not hold for them either, but it would require more intellectual effort", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "100%. This is an opinion of industrial RnD but the trend probably still applies outside of it. I work at a company with lots of chemistry PhDs but unfortunately (all of these guys tend to be retirement age boomers) a good chunk don’t believe in climate change, even though our company’s entire long term business strategy is structured around climate change.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I see you've met my MIL.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a \"weird thing\" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you find that many people in academia have \"tunnel vision\" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have \"tunnel vision\" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.)", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I see you've met my MIL.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think the easy to get government backed loans (easy to get in comparison to business or personal loans) encourage collages to raise tuition faster than the rest of the economy.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am just going to leave this here. EDIT: Thanks for the cute seal!!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Steadily less state funding in UK and US 2. Ever-increasing administrative strata 3. Increased pay and benefits for executive class 4. Massive infrastructure investment to attract and accommodate ever-increasing intake", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In Texas, one of the primary reasons is a continual reduction of the contribution from the state.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "\\*American college", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "At least in the US, it's usually un(der)funded administrative mandates from federal and state governments. That is, Congress, the Department of Education, or equivalent state bodies will require that universities offer X, Y, and Z services to students in order to operate, but not offer the additional funding required for each university to actually execute them. Universities need to find that money from somewhere.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In Oregon, a huge part of it is that the state schools went from being 90% publicly funded to 10% publicly funded.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A lot of the answers here are good and it's likely that most of them have merits. Colleges are charging more just because they can and administrators know they can squeeze every dime out of students. Student loans are a blank check to them. Not to mention many jobs require a degree even if you don't need one to do the job so there is way more demand than in the past. Colleges offer much more than just an education. Amazing dorms. State of the art gyms. Beautiful buildings. Leisure pools. Decent food. Concerts and events. These things attract students but they also cost money. There are more administrators/non-academic staff and they get paid more than in the past. This is a huge expense. Schools get less money from the government, including state governments. It's my understanding that Gen Z will attend college at a much lower rate than Millennials. I wonder if that and the growth of community colleges will even out the costs.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Coming from a country where university is free, can’t tell you how astonished I was when finding out how messed up the situation is in the US", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why has college become so expensive over the last 40 years? How and why could the price of attending college rise over 5x the rate of inflation- where does all the money go? What’s changed between now and then in the university business model?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "At least in the US, it's usually un(der)funded administrative mandates from federal and state governments. That is, Congress, the Department of Education, or equivalent state bodies will require that universities offer X, Y, and Z services to students in order to operate, but not offer the additional funding required for each university to actually execute them. Universities need to find that money from somewhere.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This resonates with me. I am close to finishing my dissertation. It feels like my parents are unable to recognise me as an expert. My parents graduated high school but never pursued further education. I will hold a PhD. They think they know more than me about topics related to my field. I can absolutely empathise with the feeling. ​ Let me know if you figure it out. I've decided not to speak to them about content related to my field. Our chats are extremely superficial now.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "the ideal would be to communicate this with them... but if they cant seem to be supportive, I feel like not talking about your job with them could be less bad", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I find it very weird that your parents would sign up for your course. It's a recipe for disaster to mix a teaching relationship with a family relationship even if the latter is good, so in your case...", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "the ideal would be to communicate this with them... but if they cant seem to be supportive, I feel like not talking about your job with them could be less bad", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Honestly, your PhD will be extremely time consuming. You don’t need to answer your parents questions or emails because you have the excuse of “hey, I work 80 h a week to earn ~$24K per year to get my degree”. Cutting them out isn’t hard and it makes your life better. I got my PhD in neuroscience and study mental illness/ addiction. My father doesn’t believe depression or addiction exist... the most freeing feeling was just to go no contact. Make your own family and fill your life with people you love and people that love you. Petty parents don’t love you, they just love controlling you.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hi, I'm experiencing something like your story. I'm about to graduate as an engineer and since then I have noticed a rapid growing trend in my mother who would 'pretend' she is supportive on surface but extremely deceitful when i need any kind of advice. I.e if i did really bad on an exam she will try to extrapolate all my negative emotions and engrain in my head that I am bad at math. Basically trying to put sticks in my wheels because she's bored in life. Some of my 'friends' are trying to play serious mind games as well and trying to use the pandemic to amplify being rude with me if that makes sense. Also I've noticed my landlords who live upstairs have 0 respect for me and wished I'd die. They told me the last guy killed himself and i think they are trying to induce that on me. Anyways, I'm feeling slightly depressed with all of this but will overcome it. I'm tired of how people justify shitty behaviour to other people because of regret. I can't wait to make big money and laugh at all of this. Cheers. :)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Part of growing up is realizing that our parents can be f\\*\\*\\*ing idiots and that there is no way of changing that. Move along and carve your own path. Congrats on starting your Ph.D.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This resonates with me. I am close to finishing my dissertation. It feels like my parents are unable to recognise me as an expert. My parents graduated high school but never pursued further education. I will hold a PhD. They think they know more than me about topics related to my field. I can absolutely empathise with the feeling. ​ Let me know if you figure it out. I've decided not to speak to them about content related to my field. Our chats are extremely superficial now.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Full disclosure, I did have to cut out one of my parents, but for slightly different reasons- although the roots might be the same. I found that some parents are simply jealous tgat their children have surpassed them in intellect and don't know how to handle it. Their actions often become those where they are trying to 'win' at other things and belittle you wherever they can, especially when it is in front of other people and in high-consequence situations. I'm not sure these are conscious decisions, nor that therapy will change anything. It is the sort of thing that might be best handled by limiting the types of interactions and content of discussions you have with them It can be so hard not to share those details, but when it initiates a pissing contest that you have no interest in participating in, it could be worth a shot. Absolutely get them out of your class. If your Dad's intention is to discredit and embarass you, you should report him for misconduct anyway- that is unprofessional for any student to plan such behavior when enrolling in a course.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How do you handle unsupportive parents? Hello! I'm a microbiologist who's about to begin my PhD next fall (yay!). I've had a very successful undergraduate career, including working on science outreach. My parents always act/say that they are ~so proud of me~ but their actions state otherwise. I've had several science-derived arguments with my parents whom are not scientists and don't know even basic biology. Flash forward to the present; I'm putting on a virtual course as a part of my certificate/fellowship that discusses pandemics. My parents both signed up for the course and have helped advertise the class. My aunt recently warned me that my dad said he was studying up so that he could 'call me out' if he didn't agree with anything I said in the course. In the entrance poll, he wrote he was hoping to learn proof that masks don't work. So, obviously his participation in this course is for the purpose of digging at me. I've resolved to the fact that though my parents want to act supportive and I've felt like I've made breakthroughs with them, at the end of the day they don't really care how they make me feel. Nor do they truly believe in or support science, my work, or me. I don't want to spend the emotional labor to truly cut off my parents, but it's exhausting constantly getting picked on by them. Has anyone else dealt with a similar situation? I feel so alone because all of my academic friends' parents are either academics themselves or are so so supportive.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The mask thing sounds really toxic. I would guess your parents are not experts in biology at all (sorry if I missed sth). My mother does the same thing, picking my field and my research projects while she has zero college education, almost no ability to selecting and identifying reliable info, and this behaviour bothered me a lot. The way I dealt with this is just avoiding conversations related with my career. Neither useful professional suggestions nor emotional support can be expected from her, hence don't even try. PhD life is already stressful in some way, don't look for extra pressure for yourself.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Zotero (not exactly a website, but essential all the same)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I would tentatively suggest Litmaps.com. It's been a great service, but they've recently nerfed their free tier and dramatically increased the prices of the Pro ($480/year is a fucking joke, Litmaps, if you're listening).", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Scihub Libgen", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Website about the funding sources. For me it will be US Department of Energy and Basic Energy Science. They will call out key funding directions.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Scihub Libgen", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "ORCID over researchgate. Or, is it only for science and engineering?", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "www.icpsr.umich.edu Data, data, and more data.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I would tentatively suggest Litmaps.com. It's been a great service, but they've recently nerfed their free tier and dramatically increased the prices of the Pro ($480/year is a fucking joke, Litmaps, if you're listening).", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "www.icpsr.umich.edu Data, data, and more data.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What are some websites every researcher should know? I wanted to actually ask how popular and useful are websites like ResearchGate and Academia, but just wondering what are some social websites you recommend every researcher should know. Thanks.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "webofscience.com has been an invaluable site for me This site has been a savior as well: chemsearch.kovsky.net You can pop any DOI in there as well", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Not so much jealous of other people, but sad imagining what else could have been. I had a couple studies I was interested in when graduating highschool, and a number of possible specializations when I headed into my masters. Sometimes when I have a rough day in my own small field or when I read about one of those topics, I miss them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The problem with being \"Passionately curious\" is that everything interests you. I've thought about going back and taking undergrad physics and even going to law school just because those subjects fascinate me. My wife usually talks me down and brings me back to reality (she's smart for someone with only an undergrad!).", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I too am an environmental scientist and I get so annoyed when my university neglects our department while giving our engineering school (which gets most of the funding to begin with) more and more money. The engineers have all new buildings, state of the art equipment, top lecturers, who are paid huge salaries, etc. Meanwhile, the natural resource department has 50+ year old buildings with broken windows (like holes in the glass broken; we tape them up in winter or else there's a bit of a breeze), no equipment, no funding, and lecturers that are overworked, underpaid and often bitter. I am becoming bitter too but, then I try to remember that all of academia is trying to do good, trying to teach and learn, and that our battles and bitterness should only extend to the politics involved in academia and not against our fellow students, researchers, and professors, who have little control over the situation. I overcome the fact that I barely scrape by and have no funding, while my engineering counterparts get free flights and meals and such to do whatever they want, by working with them to try and solve our climate crisis. It's not their fault (funding wise) they are the \"in\" major (which attracts foreign and domestic investment galore). But, I wish I could give a good walloping to the university board, and whoever, votes on funding and actively neglects certain department while worshiping others because of donor and alumni pressure (they too deserve a walloping). We don't need a new engineering quad fountain, and gold plated statues of Lady Godiva; the natural resource department does however humbly request heating in winter and maybe fans to repel summer heat. Oh, and glass in our windows would be nice too. 😥😥", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes! I'm an interpreter for American Sign Language and English and I'm doing my Masters in Interpreting studies. A lot of our books talk about translation studies, which are possible but very much not the same with ASL. I have fanciful visions of sitting at a desk with paper dictionaries and notebooks, translating classic novels or video game scripts, and it just won't happen for me.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm super regretting not studying climate stuff as it's so much more important than what I do. So I'm jealous of you if that makes you feel better.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Of course I wish I knew (and had the time and energy and even intellectual ability to study) more about many topics. Because of curiosity, because of having better chances to do higher impact research if I could combine more techniques and perspectives, and also for the practical \"alternative\" career options. Mainly computer programming and other \"how to make a machine do the boring or physically difficult aspects of my work\" skills.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "We are researcher, we have a natural thirst for knowledge and a high dose of curiosity. We always have questions like \"Why?\" and \"How?\" in mind. We are happy when we grasp a new concept. Etcetera. It's no surprise that we would like to know much more than we do and, possibly, irrationally, everything :)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yesssss! I want to learn everything", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Assistant Prof here. Yes. I feel like I know nothing.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you get jealous of people who study what you don't? I am a doctoral student studying climate change. I know academicians aren't supposed to be experts on all topics out there. Although, I have this constant thought in the back of my head that it's sad that I don't know topics such as machine learning, quantum mechanics etc in detail although I don't have to. Does anybody here feel the same way? That we are missing out on 'cool stuff'?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yep. Becoming an expert in one area necessarily means you can keep up with developments in another, but there will be time to catch up later! This is why it's good to have colleagues from other specialties, other people may actually be interested to hear what the other are working on.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Alternative suggestion, get rid of grades and assessment entirely. Students then go to university solely to learn the material. Employers can decide for themselves if the student has the knowledge they need (for example asking someone about their courses and what they learned in an area the employer is an expert in will quickly show who knows what). After you have a few years of professional experience your degree no longer really matters anyway.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This is an interesting one because this concept doesn't necessarily change when grades are lower. I did my masters in Ireland, and getting a grade above 90% was *really* hard. I only achieved that in one class whereas my undergrad transcript was filled with As. My average in my masters was 76% - which is supposed to be an average grade. However, everyone with an average over 70% was honoured with a \"first class\" diploma, distinguishing you from everyone else. So just because most people didn't get As doesn't mean most people didn't get distinguished as being better in some way. The system is skewed to get people to theoretically do well either way.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Non-dischargeable student loans incentivize this sort of behavior. If you instituted even stricter academic standards, thousands and thousands of academically weak students would fail out of school and be saddled with life long debt. Ultimately, the only solution is to tie college acceptance to much higher academic standards. Of course, this will further entrench class divisions, cause many low ranked institutions to close, and significantly worsen the academic job market.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I wish grades would be just defined as percentiles. Either the grade would *be* a percentile (maybe rounded to 10-point increments), or everyone just agreed that A is top 15%, B is top 25% or whatever, etc. Of course this kind of standardization would take time and effort to coordinate, but everyone has already in the past agreed to a 4-point scale, so surely this is doable.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I have mixed feelings. I teach a small class sometimes and I have clear ideas in my head about what information I want students to learn. My goal is to teach it to them. If all of the students master the material to my satisfaction, isn't that good? Haven't we both succeeded? At the same time, it also means that I can push and challenge the students more, raise my expectations, and cover more material in depth next time I teach the class. I think this is good, but even then my goal is never to have a \"hard class\" from a grades perspective. I want all of my students to get As (that they deserve). I don't see why I would want only a fraction of my class to master the material.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I was told (at my last position), by the chair and implicitly supported by the dean and a program advisor, to give out 1/3 As, Bs and Cs, with the strong implication not to fail anyone unless it was an extreme case. That being said, it actually seemed as if I would not cause any trouble if I guaranteed no grade lower than a C-. I guess that would permit for some combating of grade inflation.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This is just one piece of data. While I don't doubt there is grade inflation, this data alone does not suggest this, there's many other variables at play. Colleges have all become far more selective, is it also possible that the average student is just more capable of getting better grades. I actually think not, but this is not sufficient to determine otherwise.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I was told (at my last position), by the chair and implicitly supported by the dean and a program advisor, to give out 1/3 As, Bs and Cs, with the strong implication not to fail anyone unless it was an extreme case. That being said, it actually seemed as if I would not cause any trouble if I guaranteed no grade lower than a C-. I guess that would permit for some combating of grade inflation.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Alternative suggestion, get rid of grades and assessment entirely. Students then go to university solely to learn the material. Employers can decide for themselves if the student has the knowledge they need (for example asking someone about their courses and what they learned in an area the employer is an expert in will quickly show who knows what). After you have a few years of professional experience your degree no longer really matters anyway.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "The 'Other' College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money Article link here (Forbes) ​ From the article: \"Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” ​ \"The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation also has studied college grading. The Foundation confirms the alarming findings recited above. It found that in 1969, only 7 percent of students at two- and four-year colleges reported that their grade point average was A-minus or higher. Yet in 2009, 41 percent of students reported as same. During the same period, the percentage of C grades given dropped from 25 to five percent.\" ​ \"Under legislation proposed in the House of Representatives, the Texas “Contextualized Transcript” bill calls for adding to transcripts the average grade given to the entire class for each of the courses on a student’s transcript. This would apply to all Texas public, two-year and four-year colleges and universities.\" ​ ​ I teach a required course with about 15 sections that is loosely coordinated in our college. We are the notorious grade-inflaters, in part due to the nature of the course (i.e., it's not BIO101 or ECON101). We've gotten the very clear, unambiguous message from the dean that our classes are too easy and need to become more rigorous (which of course would reduce inflation). ​ At first I resisted but now I see the point. It's not doing students any favors, and apparently many P&T committees are wary of grade inflation and student evals that are TOO high. ​ What are your universities doing about grade inflation? ​", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I was told (at my last position), by the chair and implicitly supported by the dean and a program advisor, to give out 1/3 As, Bs and Cs, with the strong implication not to fail anyone unless it was an extreme case. That being said, it actually seemed as if I would not cause any trouble if I guaranteed no grade lower than a C-. I guess that would permit for some combating of grade inflation.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "\"The Unsuccessful Treatment of a Case of Writer's Block\" has to be in there somewhere. It's a short read ;) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1311997/", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I read one about Harry Potter FanFiction and the fight against heteronormativity. Made decent arguments🪄🧙‍♂️", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "An In-Depth Analysis of a Piece of Shit Figure 1 and 2 are amazing", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The BMJ’s case report where a guy brings a surprise visitor in his backpack to hospital. Worth the paywall. When patients’ priorities conflict with those of their medical team; a challenging case of a bleeding patient and his dying pet https://casereports.bmj.com/content/14/1/e237942?rss=1", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A bit niche, but: Will any crap we put into graphene increase its electrocatalytic effect? Electrocatalysis goes nuts", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The BMJ’s case report where a guy brings a surprise visitor in his backpack to hospital. Worth the paywall. When patients’ priorities conflict with those of their medical team; a challenging case of a bleeding patient and his dying pet https://casereports.bmj.com/content/14/1/e237942?rss=1", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A bit niche, but: Will any crap we put into graphene increase its electrocatalytic effect? Electrocatalysis goes nuts", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The Parachute Trial (also a BMJ Christmas issue) https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094 The point of the paper is the importance of criticality and context", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hot air https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=bacteria+splatter+ring&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1668669637678&u=%23p%3DSlI0Wds9PIAJ Coughs and sneezes spread diseases, but what about farts? My favourite quotes from this research include \"a volunteer farted onto a petri dish with his trousers down\" and how they analysed the outcome using the terms \"initial impact zone\" and \"splatter ring\". Not to mention the entire project arose because a nurse asked if she was contaminating the operating theatre by cracking them out silently at work.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Which research paper do you think was the funniest you've ever read? I'm just taking a day off of everything.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Survival time of chocolate on hospital wards. Christmas research from BMJ 2013.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Also, this is reddit. People come here to complain. People who are happy with their jobs are, well, happy practicing their jobs. Don’t think reddit provides a full picture.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Interesting, because all the doctors and soliders (I'm a assuming that's what you mean by vet - i dont know any veterinarians) I know also complain about their jobs about as much as academics. People complain about their jobs that's the way it is, also many answers here are directed at students and there an attempt possibly even a responsibility to provide a reality check to them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The issue is actually pretty straightforward. We - on the whole - love our research, and love our teaching. However, we work in a system which is administered by people who don't actually value those two things particularly. The metrics we are gauged against are not good metrics of performance or achievement. The people who manage us are not trying to help us improve in those two things, but to manoeuvre us to increase our ratings on these crappy metrics in more cost efficient and profit-making ways (profit for the organisation, not the people doing the work). The pay structure in academia has stagnated on the academic scales, while senior management pay rises have been ludicrous. There has been a drive toward the casualisation of staff, whereby trying to get contracts to employ colleagues on permanent (US TT) style contracts is ever harder, and instead we expect junior staff to exist on a sequence of fixed-term contracts with limited opportunities to climb the - already deflated - pay spines, and, as a result of their temporary contract status, hinder their ability to even apply for grants which might help them find better positions. In terms of research funding, the amount of funding becoming available has been cut and cut. The methods of allocating funding have become comical. For example, int the UK, the Natural Environment Research Council, who award all government funding for geology, earth sciences, environmental sciences, etc had so many people applying for funding, and so little money to give out that they started requiring universities to filter who was applying., So now to apply to NERC you have to first of all go through an internal review process. And many universities are limited in the number of grants they can submit each round (perhaps as few as 1 or 2). So you can be in a situation where you ahve a department of 10 or 15 people, but only one of you can submit a proposal to NERC each round. Once you get through that filter your success rate at the NERC panel is currently about 7 or 8%. Proposals are graded from 1-10. In the past if you scored a 7 or 8 you had a fighting chance of getting funded. These days if you don't have a 9 you have no chance, and even a 9 just becomes a roll of the dice as to whether you get fuinded. Our work - when we do publish it - gets used by publishers to sustain a toxic model of publishing houses; our grants get squeezed for publication fees, while our university libraries get charged to access the publications that we end up having to pay to publish. The HE sector got co-opted by suits in the 90s and they are milking it to death. That said, there are few other opportunities for me to work in my field, and no other opportunities for me to teach at this level.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I work at a vet school, and the vets complain just as much about hours and pay and the way clients treat them... like academics, just because you complain doesn’t mean you don’t love your job and believe your work makes a difference.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The issue is actually pretty straightforward. We - on the whole - love our research, and love our teaching. However, we work in a system which is administered by people who don't actually value those two things particularly. The metrics we are gauged against are not good metrics of performance or achievement. The people who manage us are not trying to help us improve in those two things, but to manoeuvre us to increase our ratings on these crappy metrics in more cost efficient and profit-making ways (profit for the organisation, not the people doing the work). The pay structure in academia has stagnated on the academic scales, while senior management pay rises have been ludicrous. There has been a drive toward the casualisation of staff, whereby trying to get contracts to employ colleagues on permanent (US TT) style contracts is ever harder, and instead we expect junior staff to exist on a sequence of fixed-term contracts with limited opportunities to climb the - already deflated - pay spines, and, as a result of their temporary contract status, hinder their ability to even apply for grants which might help them find better positions. In terms of research funding, the amount of funding becoming available has been cut and cut. The methods of allocating funding have become comical. For example, int the UK, the Natural Environment Research Council, who award all government funding for geology, earth sciences, environmental sciences, etc had so many people applying for funding, and so little money to give out that they started requiring universities to filter who was applying., So now to apply to NERC you have to first of all go through an internal review process. And many universities are limited in the number of grants they can submit each round (perhaps as few as 1 or 2). So you can be in a situation where you ahve a department of 10 or 15 people, but only one of you can submit a proposal to NERC each round. Once you get through that filter your success rate at the NERC panel is currently about 7 or 8%. Proposals are graded from 1-10. In the past if you scored a 7 or 8 you had a fighting chance of getting funded. These days if you don't have a 9 you have no chance, and even a 9 just becomes a roll of the dice as to whether you get fuinded. Our work - when we do publish it - gets used by publishers to sustain a toxic model of publishing houses; our grants get squeezed for publication fees, while our university libraries get charged to access the publications that we end up having to pay to publish. The HE sector got co-opted by suits in the 90s and they are milking it to death. That said, there are few other opportunities for me to work in my field, and no other opportunities for me to teach at this level.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Reddit gives you a very skewed perspective on the matter. Many people use reddit to vent about the negative aspects of academia. In reality, many people are happy - with their PIs, with their labmates, their projects, their fellow faculty members, etc. Those people aren't posting here. That's not to say negative environments don't exist. Just remember that a lot of people use reddit to vent, and while they deserve a place to vent, they are not representative in general.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The issue is actually pretty straightforward. We - on the whole - love our research, and love our teaching. However, we work in a system which is administered by people who don't actually value those two things particularly. The metrics we are gauged against are not good metrics of performance or achievement. The people who manage us are not trying to help us improve in those two things, but to manoeuvre us to increase our ratings on these crappy metrics in more cost efficient and profit-making ways (profit for the organisation, not the people doing the work). The pay structure in academia has stagnated on the academic scales, while senior management pay rises have been ludicrous. There has been a drive toward the casualisation of staff, whereby trying to get contracts to employ colleagues on permanent (US TT) style contracts is ever harder, and instead we expect junior staff to exist on a sequence of fixed-term contracts with limited opportunities to climb the - already deflated - pay spines, and, as a result of their temporary contract status, hinder their ability to even apply for grants which might help them find better positions. In terms of research funding, the amount of funding becoming available has been cut and cut. The methods of allocating funding have become comical. For example, int the UK, the Natural Environment Research Council, who award all government funding for geology, earth sciences, environmental sciences, etc had so many people applying for funding, and so little money to give out that they started requiring universities to filter who was applying., So now to apply to NERC you have to first of all go through an internal review process. And many universities are limited in the number of grants they can submit each round (perhaps as few as 1 or 2). So you can be in a situation where you ahve a department of 10 or 15 people, but only one of you can submit a proposal to NERC each round. Once you get through that filter your success rate at the NERC panel is currently about 7 or 8%. Proposals are graded from 1-10. In the past if you scored a 7 or 8 you had a fighting chance of getting funded. These days if you don't have a 9 you have no chance, and even a 9 just becomes a roll of the dice as to whether you get fuinded. Our work - when we do publish it - gets used by publishers to sustain a toxic model of publishing houses; our grants get squeezed for publication fees, while our university libraries get charged to access the publications that we end up having to pay to publish. The HE sector got co-opted by suits in the 90s and they are milking it to death. That said, there are few other opportunities for me to work in my field, and no other opportunities for me to teach at this level.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Well, I complain because our administration constantly pays lip service to student success and demands faculty do more and more to prevent any student losses, meanwhile systematically slashing any resources that would help this cause by removing teaching assistant funding, increasing class sizes, lowering standards, tightening department budgets, bloating administration salaries and positions, reducing full time faculty, eliminating or \"streamlining\" technical supports (to the point now where you have to log in each time you would like to access the unreliable internet that times out within an hour), funneling money into sports and another new \"virtual reality\" lab that no one will use while the advising office has caseloads of 500+ students for each position, etc. etc. I'm sorry to say that I believe the president of our university almost identically mirrors the president of our country, but in a 5 foot tall woman's body. Higher education is run like the rest of the failing, greedy, capitalist corporations in our country, and it is not a model that is sustainable longterm for the mental health of those involved.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The issue is actually pretty straightforward. We - on the whole - love our research, and love our teaching. However, we work in a system which is administered by people who don't actually value those two things particularly. The metrics we are gauged against are not good metrics of performance or achievement. The people who manage us are not trying to help us improve in those two things, but to manoeuvre us to increase our ratings on these crappy metrics in more cost efficient and profit-making ways (profit for the organisation, not the people doing the work). The pay structure in academia has stagnated on the academic scales, while senior management pay rises have been ludicrous. There has been a drive toward the casualisation of staff, whereby trying to get contracts to employ colleagues on permanent (US TT) style contracts is ever harder, and instead we expect junior staff to exist on a sequence of fixed-term contracts with limited opportunities to climb the - already deflated - pay spines, and, as a result of their temporary contract status, hinder their ability to even apply for grants which might help them find better positions. In terms of research funding, the amount of funding becoming available has been cut and cut. The methods of allocating funding have become comical. For example, int the UK, the Natural Environment Research Council, who award all government funding for geology, earth sciences, environmental sciences, etc had so many people applying for funding, and so little money to give out that they started requiring universities to filter who was applying., So now to apply to NERC you have to first of all go through an internal review process. And many universities are limited in the number of grants they can submit each round (perhaps as few as 1 or 2). So you can be in a situation where you ahve a department of 10 or 15 people, but only one of you can submit a proposal to NERC each round. Once you get through that filter your success rate at the NERC panel is currently about 7 or 8%. Proposals are graded from 1-10. In the past if you scored a 7 or 8 you had a fighting chance of getting funded. These days if you don't have a 9 you have no chance, and even a 9 just becomes a roll of the dice as to whether you get fuinded. Our work - when we do publish it - gets used by publishers to sustain a toxic model of publishing houses; our grants get squeezed for publication fees, while our university libraries get charged to access the publications that we end up having to pay to publish. The HE sector got co-opted by suits in the 90s and they are milking it to death. That said, there are few other opportunities for me to work in my field, and no other opportunities for me to teach at this level.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why is academia such a hated field? I've never seen another field (except law, perhaps) where the people involved despise their own field of work so much. This sub is itself filled with tons of discouraging posts. \"It pays peanuts\", \"work hours are inhuman\", etc. Even profs themselves are like \"Yeah, I'm really lucky to have this job, but...\" Genuinely sorry if I sound rude. Didn't mean to though. It's just that for a student of science who dreams of becoming a prof someday, the negativity gets tiring sometimes. I understand no job is all rosy, but if academia is really as bad as people make it out to be, why is it so saturated? I have doctors and vets in my family. They seem really, really proud of their professions despite all the hardships that come with them. Why don't people in academia feel the same way? Even the general public don't seem to look up to us the way they do to a doctor or a lawyer. They think we are just wasting taxpayers' money. It isn't that we work any less hard or are less \"intelligent\" than those in medicine or the military. Then why isn't our work appreciated? Aren't we the people who are supposed to be charting the course of humanity's future and making this world a better place?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I wouldn't say hated, but it gives you very little in return. Like any intense job, academia has irregular hours, crazy supervisors and toxic competitive colleagues. Like any service job, you deal with customers (students) who can easily leave a bad review for subjective reasons. It does not give you a high salary or job security, at least not for a while. So all you're left with is the expectation of prestige. But to faculty, unless you're very established, you're easily replaceable. To entitled students, they will always want more. Not all students are that way, but there are some that will complain if you take longer than a few hours to respond, or don't give them the highest mark, or have a lecture at 8am.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "For long time, I thought I must read and understand every bit of the paper. It was a kind of idée fix for me. This was utterly devastating, and sometimes I couldn’t finish one paper in a week: it always felt that I didn’t read enough, that I don’t understand it fully, so I reread, start to procrastinate - and... you know the rest. Anyway, I guess, the most efficient way is to read diagonally and try to find the bits that suit tour purpose, not the rest of it. Most usually, I spend now from 15 to 40 minutes for one paper", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The first time one of my papers was cited it had absolutely nothing to do with the paper, or even the sentence it was used as a citation for, other than the patient population was the same (cancer patients).", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Looking at papers that cite mine, there are many where it’s clear they have only read the title and misinterpreted it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It really differs based on the field, even subfield. Some fields you are expected to cite every paper you looked at while writing, others you only cite papers that you take exact quotes from. It also depends what you’re citing it for; if it’s a situation where you’re citing work on an algorithm by someone you’ve previously collaborated with, you’ve probably read the paper in-depth and perhaps even discussed it with the author. If it’s the equivalent of a footnote where you just cite the paper in the introduction as evidence that someone else has looked at a similar topic before, you might have only even read the title. There isn’t really a single answer to this question.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "For long time, I thought I must read and understand every bit of the paper. It was a kind of idée fix for me. This was utterly devastating, and sometimes I couldn’t finish one paper in a week: it always felt that I didn’t read enough, that I don’t understand it fully, so I reread, start to procrastinate - and... you know the rest. Anyway, I guess, the most efficient way is to read diagonally and try to find the bits that suit tour purpose, not the rest of it. Most usually, I spend now from 15 to 40 minutes for one paper", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "depends on the type of paper and the point you are putting across through tge citation. if you are doing a literature review, reading all the papers is essential. however if you are just stating that this theory has been applied to other fields in the recent years, reading and understanding the abstract will do. The primary reason for citing is to show that whatever you are saying is backed up by peer reviewed papers. sometimes i read the abstract, methods and the conclusion of papers if i am in a rush. if the paper is good, figures often explain the results much better than the text.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "For long time, I thought I must read and understand every bit of the paper. It was a kind of idée fix for me. This was utterly devastating, and sometimes I couldn’t finish one paper in a week: it always felt that I didn’t read enough, that I don’t understand it fully, so I reread, start to procrastinate - and... you know the rest. Anyway, I guess, the most efficient way is to read diagonally and try to find the bits that suit tour purpose, not the rest of it. Most usually, I spend now from 15 to 40 minutes for one paper", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It really differs based on the field, even subfield. Some fields you are expected to cite every paper you looked at while writing, others you only cite papers that you take exact quotes from. It also depends what you’re citing it for; if it’s a situation where you’re citing work on an algorithm by someone you’ve previously collaborated with, you’ve probably read the paper in-depth and perhaps even discussed it with the author. If it’s the equivalent of a footnote where you just cite the paper in the introduction as evidence that someone else has looked at a similar topic before, you might have only even read the title. There isn’t really a single answer to this question.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Looking at papers that cite mine, there are many where it’s clear they have only read the title and misinterpreted it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "do people really read all the papers they cite? or do they just read the abstracts? or do they just read someone elses’ literature review and cite what they said about the paper?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I've always wondered about this myself. In my case, what typically ends up happening is that I would have read about 30% of the papers I cite in detail and are closely related to the central points being made in the paper. Another 30% that I have read but not in great detail. This leaves about 40% of the papers where I have only read the \"relevant bits\" and are my attempt to situate my work in a broader setting. If the paper has a large number of authors, then sometimes coauthors cite papers I have never read based on their expertise and I trust that they are relevant and cited appropriately. I'm not saying this is the right/good way and I do worry I somehow screwed up in the citations I did not read in great detail.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Tackling misogyny as a female PhD researcher How to tackle misogyny from senior white male Professors, as a female PhD student who is about to defend her thesis? The comments range from passing crude comments on my nation of origin and criticizing my computational skills on a course (without any feedback where I can improve) and similar. I have mostly tried in my PhD years to stay away and stop most communications with these persons, but now since they are the principal investigator in my PhD project, I need to face them. I see myself as a hard-working person trying to learn and improve, but I cannot work with people who have decided not to work with me because of me being a woman. Field of research: theoretical particle physics, country: Sweden.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am a PI in Sweden. I have to say that I am surprised by this situation; not so much for racist comments (I have heard and complained *a lot* for such comments), but on gender discrimination. There are plenty of incentives and training tackling gender inequality within academia, so they should know much better. Then again, one should expect this sort of thing from certain full professors whose view of the world was informed 30-40 years ago, i.e. the last time they held a position outside their own country. In any case, I am sorry that this has happened to you. First, I wouldn’t worry about your viva. That is out of their hands. I know that this is easier said than done, but due to your ISP documents, there is not much they can do. Second, the best course of action is to talk to your union. As a PhD student, you should access both student and employee (e.g. SULF) unions. If you are not a member, become. In Sweden, unions hold a great deal of power, there is no stigma being a member of (over 90% of employees are), and, in my experience, are great at giving confidential advise to their members. They should be able to make any necessary enquiries and actions on your behalf —including talking to your prefect. Third, there is an equality officer in your department. It may worth speaking to them, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. You must speak to your reference person (one of the best things in the Swedish doctoral system). It is good to get them aboard. If they are part of the same ‘gang’, then go to the DoS or any member of your department’s Doctoral Studies Committee (if you have one, smaller departments may not). Document things in your ISP. We don’t really advertise it, but actually, it is easier for you to switch supervisors than for them to ‘fire you’ (technically, none can fire you from the PhD position). If the worst comes to be, you can switch supervisors. To be honest, the lack of feedback on the computational skills course might be due to the Swedish system. Particularly at grad level, it is a matter of ‘pass/fail’ more than anything for assignments. When I started giving out feedback on a grad-level course, students were surprised (I hate the idea of assignments at doctoral level, but if there are any, we may as well do them right). Avoid such examples when you speak to people, as you don’t want to ‘dilute’ the core message. Unless, of course, other participants got comments, and you were denied them. If so, you should, of course, document it. It is important when people complain about something to keep it simple and to the point. Otherwise, things become easier to be dismissed.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Tackling misogyny as a female PhD researcher How to tackle misogyny from senior white male Professors, as a female PhD student who is about to defend her thesis? The comments range from passing crude comments on my nation of origin and criticizing my computational skills on a course (without any feedback where I can improve) and similar. I have mostly tried in my PhD years to stay away and stop most communications with these persons, but now since they are the principal investigator in my PhD project, I need to face them. I see myself as a hard-working person trying to learn and improve, but I cannot work with people who have decided not to work with me because of me being a woman. Field of research: theoretical particle physics, country: Sweden.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hello, I have been the victim of misogyny and harassment in academia, and sexual harassment in the industry. I am also working in STEM, in Europe. In my experience, you need to speak out and reach out somebody who is higher-up than them. The reasoning is the following... If you are lucky enough and you tell them directly to stop with the help of a **male coworker**, they will. The male coworker part is important, because if a man is involved on your side, they will listen. (I hate that it works like this; but it does). If you are less lucky, this does not work. Then, you need to reach out someone with power. A man or woman, both work. Explain, provide proof(s), show that you have done your very best to handle the situation in a peaceful manner, but now, you need support. For your PhD project, can you reach RH about this? Or the people providing the money? Or any other person that has more power than them? Good luck. You are strong; you can make it. You have the right to report unsafe or unpleasant situations. You have the right like anybody else to a safe, trustworthy and healthy workplace. Those are your feelings; and nobody can tell you how to feel differently. In my experience too, reporting those behavior is always scary because of the consequences. But, I am so proud I did! Even if I had to change of job twice because of that, I gained friends and respect when telling those stories. I feel like I can stand for a healthier workplace because I have been there; I can put limits so much more easily.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Tackling misogyny as a female PhD researcher How to tackle misogyny from senior white male Professors, as a female PhD student who is about to defend her thesis? The comments range from passing crude comments on my nation of origin and criticizing my computational skills on a course (without any feedback where I can improve) and similar. I have mostly tried in my PhD years to stay away and stop most communications with these persons, but now since they are the principal investigator in my PhD project, I need to face them. I see myself as a hard-working person trying to learn and improve, but I cannot work with people who have decided not to work with me because of me being a woman. Field of research: theoretical particle physics, country: Sweden.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This would not be my advice in general, but in this particular case, and thinking only of your personal well being and achievements, if you are \"about to defend [your] thesis\" then I'm inclined to say keep your head down and get through the defence. I would hate to think that your attempt to confront their behaviour could result in them failing you in retaliation. That isn't to say that that has to be the end of the story. Document every instance of bigotry and inappropriate behaviour that you can (if you have any of this in written form, e.g. emails they've sent where they make these crude comments, all the better), and once your PhD is secure make that available to whoever at your university oversees conduct (if your department/uni has an equality and diversity officer then they'd be a great resource). This definitely needs to be addressed, but there is a great power imbalance here, and you are in a very vulnerable position with respect to obtaining your PhD, so I think it would be better to wait until you're less vulnerable, and get the help of someone with more power in your institution. I want these people to face consequences for their actions, but I don't want *you* to suffer consequences for their actions.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Tackling misogyny as a female PhD researcher How to tackle misogyny from senior white male Professors, as a female PhD student who is about to defend her thesis? The comments range from passing crude comments on my nation of origin and criticizing my computational skills on a course (without any feedback where I can improve) and similar. I have mostly tried in my PhD years to stay away and stop most communications with these persons, but now since they are the principal investigator in my PhD project, I need to face them. I see myself as a hard-working person trying to learn and improve, but I cannot work with people who have decided not to work with me because of me being a woman. Field of research: theoretical particle physics, country: Sweden.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hello, I have been the victim of misogyny and harassment in academia, and sexual harassment in the industry. I am also working in STEM, in Europe. In my experience, you need to speak out and reach out somebody who is higher-up than them. The reasoning is the following... If you are lucky enough and you tell them directly to stop with the help of a **male coworker**, they will. The male coworker part is important, because if a man is involved on your side, they will listen. (I hate that it works like this; but it does). If you are less lucky, this does not work. Then, you need to reach out someone with power. A man or woman, both work. Explain, provide proof(s), show that you have done your very best to handle the situation in a peaceful manner, but now, you need support. For your PhD project, can you reach RH about this? Or the people providing the money? Or any other person that has more power than them? Good luck. You are strong; you can make it. You have the right to report unsafe or unpleasant situations. You have the right like anybody else to a safe, trustworthy and healthy workplace. Those are your feelings; and nobody can tell you how to feel differently. In my experience too, reporting those behavior is always scary because of the consequences. But, I am so proud I did! Even if I had to change of job twice because of that, I gained friends and respect when telling those stories. I feel like I can stand for a healthier workplace because I have been there; I can put limits so much more easily.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Tackling misogyny as a female PhD researcher How to tackle misogyny from senior white male Professors, as a female PhD student who is about to defend her thesis? The comments range from passing crude comments on my nation of origin and criticizing my computational skills on a course (without any feedback where I can improve) and similar. I have mostly tried in my PhD years to stay away and stop most communications with these persons, but now since they are the principal investigator in my PhD project, I need to face them. I see myself as a hard-working person trying to learn and improve, but I cannot work with people who have decided not to work with me because of me being a woman. Field of research: theoretical particle physics, country: Sweden.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "> crude comments on my nation of origin What does this have to do with being a woman > criticizing my computational skills on a course What does this have to do with being a woman", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Tackling misogyny as a female PhD researcher How to tackle misogyny from senior white male Professors, as a female PhD student who is about to defend her thesis? The comments range from passing crude comments on my nation of origin and criticizing my computational skills on a course (without any feedback where I can improve) and similar. I have mostly tried in my PhD years to stay away and stop most communications with these persons, but now since they are the principal investigator in my PhD project, I need to face them. I see myself as a hard-working person trying to learn and improve, but I cannot work with people who have decided not to work with me because of me being a woman. Field of research: theoretical particle physics, country: Sweden.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You are the expert. You are the expert. Don't let them you think otherwise. You are the expert. You put in the work. You are the expert. It's your research. You could talk about it in your sleep. Focus on the research and the work. I'm rootng for you. If I could I'd be in the audience cheering you on. Remember....you...are...the...expert.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Et al. I enjoy telling my students that it translates into \"and friends\".", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The best name for a term I've seen yet is 'The Oracle Inequality' in machine learning. It's the property that means a model collapses to choosing the (most) correct inputs when faced with too many variables. (i.e it chooses p* when p>n)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Et al. I enjoy telling my students that it translates into \"and friends\".", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "my computer science advisor always ask me to \"ping\" someone he's trying to reach out", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "\"I'm going to push back on that\" - as a non-confrontational way to disagree", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "my computer science advisor always ask me to \"ping\" someone he's trying to reach out", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Et al. I enjoy telling my students that it translates into \"and friends\".", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "(re)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Something along the lines of \"We would like to thank reviewer 2 for their insightful and constructive comments, which we feel have improved the manuscript\" is a lovely example of academic jargon that means: \"We resent reviewer 2 and their inane comments, but we have grudgingly made some token changes that they asked for in the hope that it satisfies their ego enough to accept the resubmission of this paper, which was already perfectly good without us adding a sentence reference the suggested citation, which was almost certainly written by reviewer 2.\"", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What is your 'favorite' academic jargon? From my grad advisor years back: 'Not to be pedantic' then followed by something that is either common knowledge or incredibly obscure. Field specific jargon that even most people that have been researching the topic for decades don't even know.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The best name for a term I've seen yet is 'The Oracle Inequality' in machine learning. It's the property that means a model collapses to choosing the (most) correct inputs when faced with too many variables. (i.e it chooses p* when p>n)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "He contributes to the great physics tradition of dumping on disciplines he doesn't know anything about, e.g. philosophy, and generally speaking on anything (including far afield from physics) as if being a physicist qualified him to have a worthwhile opinion on any of it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Here’s my take on it: he’s become dogmatic about science. Kind of like religious folk who proselytize their viewpoint and have no room for the understandings of life from different shoes. Unwilling to listen and respect, rather just talking at you, self-assured of their righteous beliefs. I see Neil DeGrasee Tyson like this and that’s why I can’t bear to listen to him anymore. I think I agree with the majority of what he says, but to listen to his condescending tone puts me off.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Its funny until this post I thought my feelings about Neil were uncommon. He comes off as a complete narcissist which is doubly bad when he is (frequently) talking about shit he doesn't understand. My favorite example is when he mentioned to Joe Rogan that there are multiple sizes of infinity which is technically correct. Then he went on to \"explain\" several examples of this, each of which was completely wrong and/or utter nonsense.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Here’s my take on it: he’s become dogmatic about science. Kind of like religious folk who proselytize their viewpoint and have no room for the understandings of life from different shoes. Unwilling to listen and respect, rather just talking at you, self-assured of their righteous beliefs. I see Neil DeGrasee Tyson like this and that’s why I can’t bear to listen to him anymore. I think I agree with the majority of what he says, but to listen to his condescending tone puts me off.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "He contributes to the great physics tradition of dumping on disciplines he doesn't know anything about, e.g. philosophy, and generally speaking on anything (including far afield from physics) as if being a physicist qualified him to have a worthwhile opinion on any of it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I remember he spoke about Columbus's discovery of America on the JRE as if it were a positive for the the Native Americans employing some strange pseudo scientific logic. That the indigenous people's DNA was too limited, and they needed to be put back in contact with the rest of humanity or some nonsense. I think that he is neither an expert on genetics, nor the history of New World colonization. So I wonder he felt so comfortable in taking on such a polemical topic in such a flippant manner.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Its funny until this post I thought my feelings about Neil were uncommon. He comes off as a complete narcissist which is doubly bad when he is (frequently) talking about shit he doesn't understand. My favorite example is when he mentioned to Joe Rogan that there are multiple sizes of infinity which is technically correct. Then he went on to \"explain\" several examples of this, each of which was completely wrong and/or utter nonsense.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I lost all respect for him after paying 85$ to see one of his 'talks'and all he did was show us pictures of space-patterned dresses and funny pictures from 9gag, I shit you not", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Its funny until this post I thought my feelings about Neil were uncommon. He comes off as a complete narcissist which is doubly bad when he is (frequently) talking about shit he doesn't understand. My favorite example is when he mentioned to Joe Rogan that there are multiple sizes of infinity which is technically correct. Then he went on to \"explain\" several examples of this, each of which was completely wrong and/or utter nonsense.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What do you all think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? This is a super random question but was just curious what other people in academia thought. Lately it seems like he goes on Twitter and tries to rain on everybody's parade with science. While I can understand having this attitude to pseudo-sciency things, he appears to speak about things he can't possibly be that extensively experienced in as if he's an expert of all things science. I really appreciate what he's done in his career and he's extremely gifted when it comes to outreach and making science interesting to the general public. However, from what I can tell he has a somewhat average record in research (although he was able to get into some top schools which is a feat in and of itself). I guess people just make him out to be a genius but to me it seems like there are probably thousands of less famous people out there who are equally accomplished?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I remember he spoke about Columbus's discovery of America on the JRE as if it were a positive for the the Native Americans employing some strange pseudo scientific logic. That the indigenous people's DNA was too limited, and they needed to be put back in contact with the rest of humanity or some nonsense. I think that he is neither an expert on genetics, nor the history of New World colonization. So I wonder he felt so comfortable in taking on such a polemical topic in such a flippant manner.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In many underdeveloped countries, it's the only way people can have access to new research. So... good, I guess", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As I see it, the best thing in the academic world.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "From my perspective as a researcher working in a non-rich country and with underfunded scientific system, I have to say that not only Sci-Hub is great, it is absolutely NECESSARY. Any initiative that diminishes inequalities is good, imagine one as impactful as Sci-Hub. There are only two possibilities for someone to think that Sci-Hub is a bad thing: (1) you are a situated in a rich country and already has access to all publications that you might need (plus you have no class consciousness) or (2) you are involved with publishers. Personally, I think it is absolutely disgraceful for any scientist not to admire Alexandra Elbakyan.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A good thing. Copyright doesn’t protect scholars or artists, it protects the wallets of big corporations exploiting our labor for profit without sharing a penny with us.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It is literally the best thing ever.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Good - the article processing charges associated with open access are exorbitant, making it unavailable for many researchers. Buying subscriptions to journals is also expensive - without a subscription, accessing a single article may cost up to 40$. I was writing a case report recently and tried to access an orthopedics article published in the early 1990s and it was still behind a paywall.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In many underdeveloped countries, it's the only way people can have access to new research. So... good, I guess", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Good - the article processing charges associated with open access are exorbitant, making it unavailable for many researchers. Buying subscriptions to journals is also expensive - without a subscription, accessing a single article may cost up to 40$. I was writing a case report recently and tried to access an orthopedics article published in the early 1990s and it was still behind a paywall.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "There are not many things I have extremely strong opinions on, but I absolutely support SciHub. Long live free and open article access!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is SciHub a good thing or a bad thing? It's blocked at my university and I was just wondering what the general consensus is about this website. Happy Saturday.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think it’s amazing. I found it very helpful in undergrad.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I finished my PhD in 2017 and have been an Assistant Professor since but I still have imposter syndrome. I’m not even comfortable when people call me Dr. ... It will take time but keep doing your best", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It's not 'you vs curriculum' anymore, it's 'you vs god'. We're all unqualified. Finishing your degree isnt about not feeling this way, it's about doing exactly what you're doing. Pushing forward despite the emotional trauma. As for speaking, if you've done something someone else hasnt done, then you have something to say. There may or may not be pushback, but saying stuff to other smart people is the job. No one is gonna beat you up afterwards, so just do the best job you can, sit down, feel like shit, second guess, and repeat until you graduate. I hate to put it this way, but fuck your feelings. They're a shit barometer of how you're actually doing. Unless you get fired, you're doing fine.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Just in case it helps to hear about others' experiences, check out this article: Common Academic Experiences", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It helped me when I realised that my professors didn't know everything. Even when they seemed to have an answer for everything, eventually I realised just how often they were bluffing a bit. Made me feel like it's OK not to know everything, or that there's strength in admitting \"I'm not sure, but I can look it up/ ask someone who would know/ point you in the right direction\"", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Two things I learned in school and the workforce really helped me out. 1.) A professor telling me to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. 2.) A supervisor telling me that science is a process, and a team effort, and that I needed to accept that I would make mistakes, and my team would help me fix them. I've learned that just accepting that I may not be comfortable doing something, whether because I don't think I can do it, or am qualified to do it, leads to me learning far more than only doing that which I know I can do well. Or, as Ms. Frizzle would say, \"Take chances, make mistakes, get messy!\"", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am a master's student and have 3 publications yet I feel dumb on a daily basis especially when I foolishly try something in the lab that doesn't work which my supervisors already told me wouldn't work, or pretend to understand X-Ray crystallography data when I don't and tbh, it is difficult even for experienced people especially when dealing with something they haven't seen before. To some extent I believe it has to do with the power dynamic working in research groups. A hierarchy exists and there will always be much more smarter people in your group and much more experienced. Every stupid idea that one may come up with will have been thrown to the trash by the much more experienced people in the group and sharing ideas feels a big deal in group meetings as you fear being coming out as utter dumb in front of the biggies. So it is natural to doubt your own abilities. But as someone else also commented, you know your work better than anyone. Own it. I always find it easy to convey my work as a story. You may not recognize but always coming out as perfect is not the most ideal way rather research is about learning and storytelling is crucial when presenting your work. The parts you struggled with, how you overcame those, a bit of humor here and there always helps. Of course you need to know about your work but never let that get to your head as if that's the only thing that matters. One great thing about discussing your work with others is that may point out something very trivial that you may have missed and help you channelize your work better.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This letter written by Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman is always my go-to when trying to combat imposture syndrome myself. All these MDs at your conference are people, too. They are not omnipotent beings! Plus, from what I gather about MDs, many of them are somewhat out-of-touch with cutting edge research (particularly outside their specialty). In other words, in the eyes of many of the MDs there, *you* will be the expert, even if you don't feel like it. If that makes you uncomfortable, personally, I fall back on what I know and try not to speculate on what I do not. One of the most eye-opening experiences I have had in grad school was at a conference outside of my major domain of study. I went with my advisor and two other faculty--each are very respected in their domains. During a particular session, I felt like an idiot because I just could NOT understand what was being presented. After the session, all four of us got together and they all felt the same way. The moral of the story being that it's okay not to know everything and everything, there is *always* more to learn. The main purpose for virtually all conferences is to share your knowledge with others. If we already knew everything going it, these conferences would just be an expensive, multi-day happy hour.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Fake it til you make it. The beauty of science is that you're often doing things people haven't done before and it's acceptable to say you don't know if you don't know something or you need to look it up.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Good news - it's not going away! I just got tenure and I still feel it. For me a big issue is perfectionism - if it wasn't for deadlines I would constantly revise everything I do. Impostor syndrome feeds on your thoughts of how improvements could be made. It can be a very useful self-editing tool, but balancing self-confidence and impostor syndrome is one of the nuances of being a young woman in academia* *source: personal experience, part of which makes me feel as though I should cite all definitive statements", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "imposter syndrome is a blast Can we talk about imposter syndrome and navigating academia in STEM as a young woman? I feel drastically under-qualified doing nearly everything my mentors encourage me to do. I do the things anyway, but the discomfort doesn't seem to dissipate the further I get. ​ But also, I am a second year grad student, highest degree BA, presenting at a medical conference in November, presenting among all other MDs. How the fuck am I supposed to feel about this D:", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am a master's student and have 3 publications yet I feel dumb on a daily basis especially when I foolishly try something in the lab that doesn't work which my supervisors already told me wouldn't work, or pretend to understand X-Ray crystallography data when I don't and tbh, it is difficult even for experienced people especially when dealing with something they haven't seen before. To some extent I believe it has to do with the power dynamic working in research groups. A hierarchy exists and there will always be much more smarter people in your group and much more experienced. Every stupid idea that one may come up with will have been thrown to the trash by the much more experienced people in the group and sharing ideas feels a big deal in group meetings as you fear being coming out as utter dumb in front of the biggies. So it is natural to doubt your own abilities. But as someone else also commented, you know your work better than anyone. Own it. I always find it easy to convey my work as a story. You may not recognize but always coming out as perfect is not the most ideal way rather research is about learning and storytelling is crucial when presenting your work. The parts you struggled with, how you overcame those, a bit of humor here and there always helps. Of course you need to know about your work but never let that get to your head as if that's the only thing that matters. One great thing about discussing your work with others is that may point out something very trivial that you may have missed and help you channelize your work better.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "YAYAYYAAYAYAYAYAY Happy for you. Go on and kick ass in thine science, and if you get into a position of power yourself, pay it forward.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Congratulations! You got what you deserved. This made my day", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "/r/wholesomeacademia", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Congratulations! You got what you deserved. This made my day", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "/r/wholesomeacademia", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Thank you for sharing this experience, and it's fantastic that things worked out for you!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "/r/wholesomeacademia", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Left off of author list UPDATE] [Original comment In my last post I told a little tale of being left off of a publication recently that involved several years of my life during the beginning of my PhD. People offered a variety of perspectives and opinions about how to proceed, which was super helpful and thank you all for taking the time. Here's a quick update - The committee member who left me off of the author list reached out to me to inform me that the paper had been published. I didn't immediately respond, and instead I consulted with a few folks involved in the paper to determine if I was somehow missing something that I had done or not done and it seemed like they were more or less sympathetic and on my side. And of course, I posted on reddit, because why not get the opinion of internet strangers - most people had suggested keeping things diplomatic and investigating authorship corrections with the journal. A week or so passes before the committee member reaches out to me again to see if I want to chat (I think spurred by my primary advisor) and we end up finding each other in the hallway. We chat for about half an hour outside where I lay out my reaction and she promises it was an honest mistake and that there was absolutely no malice or politics involved. She was working as hard as I was to keep things diplomatic and to keep bridges unburned, there was a hug involved, which I appreciate, so I took what she said at face value. She apologizes and accepts blame, which is heartening except that she views the additional steps to be limited (basically, \"move on and sorry!\"). I bring up that author corrections are a thing (thanks for the suggestion AskAca!!) and she seems very doubtful, but willing to explore the possibility... the least she can do to make things up is to have my back in exploring the idea. Fast-forward a month or two and she has reached out to the other lab group and the main author has taken the lead on contacting the journal to initiate a correction. Every author eventually agrees in writing and now things are 100% copacetic, I'm on the author list! So basically long story short, things turned out well after a few hard conversations. Just wanted to write a quick update and thank everyone for offering some opinions and perspectives. I'm honestly shocked and disappointed that not a single person in my department thought that author corrections were possible, so now I can tell my advisor that my reddit addiction has had a tangible positive impact on my career.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "YAYAYYAAYAYAYAYAY Happy for you. Go on and kick ass in thine science, and if you get into a position of power yourself, pay it forward.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "No Comment any media questions, make department head and hierachy aware and let them handle communication with legal, compliance, I assume it'd be escalated to the top. If the police want to question me then ask university legal if they can offer support. If I were in a union that might support this kind of thing maybe make them aware of the situation. Don't proactively mention to students or at-level staff unless it becomes a generally known thing where gossip needs to be quietened, even then be discreet, maybe acknowledge something but not comment on it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I have no advisor experience but to give my opinion, I think our current society tends to equate accused with guilty. It's easy to completely shut down someone's life over just accusations. Being arrested in this case will likely lead to a very long trial process. I don't know the logistics behind putting a hold on a PhD process for months if not years. It may be ultimately the only option you have to cut ties, and it may not be your decision but the school's. My personal opinion is to provide every option reasonably possible to give the accused person their fair day in court. If they are found not guilty then you/the school have essentially ruined this person's academic career due to an unproven accusation if ties are cut.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I mean, personally would: - Talk to the department head, the Union Rep and HR ASAP, get an idea of how each organisation is perceiving the situation. -Create a file with all communications I’ve had with the student -Put all the work they’ve sent onto three different hard drives to make the backups. That way you have the files ready to go if they get subpoenaed as evidence, and you still have the data in case they are in a position to resume their studies. -Set up automatic handling and reply for any emails from the student- new emails go straight into the file, auto reply says “until such time as the legal actions which impact your enrolment here are resolved, I will not be receiving or responding to any correspondence. -arrange a meeting with a therapist, even if just to vent. I hope the supervisor is getting the support they need- this situation sucks on so many levels.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'd talk to the university and get some advice.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Very cynical viewpoint here, but this question feels like a Murdoch journo fishing. If it's not, honest apologies. Personally, I would refer or let the whole thing slide into the uni's legal/compliance/,code of conduct area and keep working.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "None of my PhD students have been accused of murder, as far as I know, but I would definitely ask the higher-ups for \"advice\" (i.e. unload the responsibility onto those who are paid to carry it). My own reflex would be to keep advising.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Slight tangent, but a guy in Norway recently completed a PhD while in prison for murder. The topic was his own crime, that part did stir up some controversy, but studying and completing a degree while in prison in itself didn’t cause any outrage. (Couldn’t find any news about it English (although I didn’t try very hard), and the dissertation was written in Norwegian, unfortunately, but the guy’s name is Andreas Ribe-Nyhus if anyone’s curious and wants to spend more that three seconds looking for something in English)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I have no advisor experience but to give my opinion, I think our current society tends to equate accused with guilty. It's easy to completely shut down someone's life over just accusations. Being arrested in this case will likely lead to a very long trial process. I don't know the logistics behind putting a hold on a PhD process for months if not years. It may be ultimately the only option you have to cut ties, and it may not be your decision but the school's. My personal opinion is to provide every option reasonably possible to give the accused person their fair day in court. If they are found not guilty then you/the school have essentially ruined this person's academic career due to an unproven accusation if ties are cut.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I know of a PhD student who was arrested (and then convicted) of some similarly shocking crimes. Their papers still exist, but their old research group has essentially expunged all other records of their association with them. The only way I ever learned about this was from the news, it seems to be taboo to even mention them now.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You're the advisor to a PhD student who has been arrested on 4 counts of 1st degree murder. What do you do? I'm obviously referring to the suspect that has been arrested on felony charges in the Idaho murders, while a PhD student in criminology. Was thinking about his advisor and what do you do in such cases, innocent until proven guilty and all that.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I suspect the authorities would want to talk to you as they piece together a profile on this person. You should call them. \\*Waves from Eastern Oregon\\*", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Absolutely normal and makes me happy to know people are reading", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes do it. You're not expected to pay for it. Authors will often send it to you", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Not rude, do it. What would be even better is if you could give some context as to who you are. So don't be some random person asking for an article, but identify your university/advisor etc, so the author knows who is interested in their work.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes do it. You're not expected to pay for it. Authors will often send it to you", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes that’s fine and the thing you can do next time is use Interlibrary loan. You’ll find it in your online library interface or talk to your academic librarian. It’s free and in the long run a better option, for multiple reasons, than just asking an author each time.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You can often request articles for free through interlibrary loan at your institution’s library.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yep - college librarian here", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes do it. You're not expected to pay for it. Authors will often send it to you", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "People asking for PDFs articles of mine makes my day - it's honestly the opposite of rude but do be patient. You'll either get a reply immediately or in three weeks.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it OK to email the author of a journal article to ask for the article? I'm doing a literature review and am very interested in her article. However, my institution doesn't have a subscription to the publisher of her article. Is it considered rude to ask for the article for free and it's expected that I pay for the article on my own (I'm only an undergrad, so I have very little money at my disposal)? Thank you!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Not rude at all and very common. None of the (ridiculously huge) money you pay for the article goes to the author. Also try searching for the article title in quotes on both Google and Google Scholar. There might already be a free PDF available on the Web.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "My PhD is directly related to my job so definitely. As for life experience, my defense was so brutal that no human can hurt my feelings any more.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm about to be able to answer this. I'm trying to make the switch to \"industry\" (whatever that means for my field) to prioritize living with my partner, and I'm constantly plagued by comments I hear that people would rather employ someone without a PhD than with one. I'm starting to regret it a little because I was under the impression that I would come out *equally* employable to when I just had a Master's, not *less* employable, and I feel betrayed. But doing the PhD was an excellent experience for personal growth, whether that is ever reflected by anything external to my own thoughts or not.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm two years out of an English PhD. Since then I've worked in market intelligence research (1.5 years) and currently I work for a policy institute doing research and communications. My current position is funded by a postdoc, but at this point I've left my original field entirely and there's no chance I'll ever be a professor. I love policy and hope to stay in this field. Career wise, there are definitely more direct paths I could have taken to end up in my current field (a masters in economics or public policy), but this career path didn't even cross my radar until late in the PhD, and only because I was paying attention to where other grad students were getting jobs. As a life experience, the PhD was definitely worth it for me! The experience of moving to a new city by myself (I did my undergrad and master's relatively close to home) was something I needed at the time, even though I'm back in my home town now. Now that COVID has us grounded for the foreseeable future, I'm soooo glad I used the opportunity to travel a bunch during my PhD. My school had really generous conference funding, so I was able to leverage that into some longer trips. As an English PhD, I had no lab commitments, and I had a fsirly distant relationship with my adviser, so once I finished coursework I'd just skip town for months at a time without telling anybody lol. I still finished the PhD in four years despite spending a cumulative 5-6 months backpacking overseas during that time! I think the travelling actually kept me motivated to be more productive when I was home. My dissertation topic was really fun. There were definitely challenging points early in the research process, but once I got going with the writing I was able to keep up the momentum. I only published one article based on the diss but it's gotten a decent amount of engagement and I'm happy with that. Overall, I'm glad I did the PhD, but I think a big part of it was the timing. I finished at 28 and I'm a bit immature for my age so it just felt like I was continuing to \"self-discovery\" phase you're expected to have during undergrad.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Enjoyable, but, no, not worth it in terms of opportunity cost.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "My PhD is directly related to my job so definitely. As for life experience, my defense was so brutal that no human can hurt my feelings any more.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I dont like this thread. - someone 6 months from finishing who wants to stay out of academia.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm two years out of an English PhD. Since then I've worked in market intelligence research (1.5 years) and currently I work for a policy institute doing research and communications. My current position is funded by a postdoc, but at this point I've left my original field entirely and there's no chance I'll ever be a professor. I love policy and hope to stay in this field. Career wise, there are definitely more direct paths I could have taken to end up in my current field (a masters in economics or public policy), but this career path didn't even cross my radar until late in the PhD, and only because I was paying attention to where other grad students were getting jobs. As a life experience, the PhD was definitely worth it for me! The experience of moving to a new city by myself (I did my undergrad and master's relatively close to home) was something I needed at the time, even though I'm back in my home town now. Now that COVID has us grounded for the foreseeable future, I'm soooo glad I used the opportunity to travel a bunch during my PhD. My school had really generous conference funding, so I was able to leverage that into some longer trips. As an English PhD, I had no lab commitments, and I had a fsirly distant relationship with my adviser, so once I finished coursework I'd just skip town for months at a time without telling anybody lol. I still finished the PhD in four years despite spending a cumulative 5-6 months backpacking overseas during that time! I think the travelling actually kept me motivated to be more productive when I was home. My dissertation topic was really fun. There were definitely challenging points early in the research process, but once I got going with the writing I was able to keep up the momentum. I only published one article based on the diss but it's gotten a decent amount of engagement and I'm happy with that. Overall, I'm glad I did the PhD, but I think a big part of it was the timing. I finished at 28 and I'm a bit immature for my age so it just felt like I was continuing to \"self-discovery\" phase you're expected to have during undergrad.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Life experience: neutral. I did my PhD part-time while working in a related career so it sort of felt just like an extension of my day job. Career-wise: no. I don't have much more of an advantage over non-PhDs. Industry experience and professional networks is what really counts when it comes to climbing the ladder. Finance-wise: absolutely not. I was lucky in that my PhD was sponsored by my employer so I was earning a relatively substantial salary. Some of my peers sacrificed 5-7 years of good earnings and, most notably, all-important early career pension contributions through doing a PhD. The effects of compounding interest means they were setback quite substantially in this regard.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm two years out of an English PhD. Since then I've worked in market intelligence research (1.5 years) and currently I work for a policy institute doing research and communications. My current position is funded by a postdoc, but at this point I've left my original field entirely and there's no chance I'll ever be a professor. I love policy and hope to stay in this field. Career wise, there are definitely more direct paths I could have taken to end up in my current field (a masters in economics or public policy), but this career path didn't even cross my radar until late in the PhD, and only because I was paying attention to where other grad students were getting jobs. As a life experience, the PhD was definitely worth it for me! The experience of moving to a new city by myself (I did my undergrad and master's relatively close to home) was something I needed at the time, even though I'm back in my home town now. Now that COVID has us grounded for the foreseeable future, I'm soooo glad I used the opportunity to travel a bunch during my PhD. My school had really generous conference funding, so I was able to leverage that into some longer trips. As an English PhD, I had no lab commitments, and I had a fsirly distant relationship with my adviser, so once I finished coursework I'd just skip town for months at a time without telling anybody lol. I still finished the PhD in four years despite spending a cumulative 5-6 months backpacking overseas during that time! I think the travelling actually kept me motivated to be more productive when I was home. My dissertation topic was really fun. There were definitely challenging points early in the research process, but once I got going with the writing I was able to keep up the momentum. I only published one article based on the diss but it's gotten a decent amount of engagement and I'm happy with that. Overall, I'm glad I did the PhD, but I think a big part of it was the timing. I finished at 28 and I'm a bit immature for my age so it just felt like I was continuing to \"self-discovery\" phase you're expected to have during undergrad.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "For those of you who didn't end up in academia after your PhD, do you think your PhD experience was still worth it? Not just career-wise, but overall as a life experience?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I went to government after my PhD. Hated it so much. I was hired as a statistician and had to use excel as my main analytical tool. Most of my analyses were silly simple things and fact-checks. Losing that intellectual stimulation was pretty demoralising. I moved country and got back into academia, first as a research assistant and then postdoc. Academia is precarious and it may not be a permanent gig, but I love being back. EDIT: re-read the question and remembered why I wanted to answer. For government, there was absolutely no reason to have a PhD. Those years felt wasted. But there were many others like me who were burned out after their studies.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Every time I publish with Elsevier a small part of me dies I now have three papers in various Elsevier journals. Through publication of each of these I have grown to dispise Elsevier more and more. I hate they way that they are providing less and less at each stage of the publication process. For example I wrote the paper, my colleagues peer-reviewed it, and then now I even have to do the type setting myself. It makes me question what exactly Elsevier are providing besides a shell to conduct peer review and a hosting platform afterwards? Although there are many issues generally with the publication process, it is the authors doing type setting that actually bugs me the most. For those of you that have not used the Elsevier type setting online tool, this is an interactive document editor where you generate your own proofs. All content is editable and therefore undermining the peer review process. For example, at this stage for key points could be changed or countless self citations added. After this you hit submit and it's done. Now they will claim that this process has some editorial oversight but in my experience it does not. It's a joke. Also I hate the way they refer to us as customers. Working with a publisher should be a collaborative process. I am planning to avoid Elsevier journals in the future when I have a say in where a paper goes.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I love it. They've absolutely cracked it. We make the produce; pay them to take it; they don't pay us to review it; they sell it back to us. Fucking brilliant, genuinely hilarious. They've even managed to make us think they're doing us a favour by offering Gold open access at about 5 grand. I love that they push that we're paying for quality copywriting, then you see articles published with notes from the author in the paper. I saw one a month or two ago where the title of the paper was 'Dr. \\...\\] has no conflicts of interest to declare'. The title! How the hell did that get past anyone with a pair of eyes. Hilarious and awful in equal measure. There was a good talk by an ex-editor of the BMJ who was saying that the profits \\*there\\* were fuckin' eye-watering, so God only knows what [NEJM etc. make, or at least that they disclose. It is the swindle of the century. I read a piece recently that academic publishing is second to \\*tobacco\\* in terms of profits. Bravo to them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Every time I publish with Elsevier a small part of me dies I now have three papers in various Elsevier journals. Through publication of each of these I have grown to dispise Elsevier more and more. I hate they way that they are providing less and less at each stage of the publication process. For example I wrote the paper, my colleagues peer-reviewed it, and then now I even have to do the type setting myself. It makes me question what exactly Elsevier are providing besides a shell to conduct peer review and a hosting platform afterwards? Although there are many issues generally with the publication process, it is the authors doing type setting that actually bugs me the most. For those of you that have not used the Elsevier type setting online tool, this is an interactive document editor where you generate your own proofs. All content is editable and therefore undermining the peer review process. For example, at this stage for key points could be changed or countless self citations added. After this you hit submit and it's done. Now they will claim that this process has some editorial oversight but in my experience it does not. It's a joke. Also I hate the way they refer to us as customers. Working with a publisher should be a collaborative process. I am planning to avoid Elsevier journals in the future when I have a say in where a paper goes.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Agreed. I thought they where one of the best out there, and instead they are just old and famous. So many younger publishers are more competitive, offering better services and a better smoother experience for everyone. Elsevier truly only cares about profits. There are many other publishers, and we as \"costumers\" can do a lot. For instance push your libraries to boicott elsevier, include other publishers that use different models, just spread the word!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Every time I publish with Elsevier a small part of me dies I now have three papers in various Elsevier journals. Through publication of each of these I have grown to dispise Elsevier more and more. I hate they way that they are providing less and less at each stage of the publication process. For example I wrote the paper, my colleagues peer-reviewed it, and then now I even have to do the type setting myself. It makes me question what exactly Elsevier are providing besides a shell to conduct peer review and a hosting platform afterwards? Although there are many issues generally with the publication process, it is the authors doing type setting that actually bugs me the most. For those of you that have not used the Elsevier type setting online tool, this is an interactive document editor where you generate your own proofs. All content is editable and therefore undermining the peer review process. For example, at this stage for key points could be changed or countless self citations added. After this you hit submit and it's done. Now they will claim that this process has some editorial oversight but in my experience it does not. It's a joke. Also I hate the way they refer to us as customers. Working with a publisher should be a collaborative process. I am planning to avoid Elsevier journals in the future when I have a say in where a paper goes.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I don't understand why every discipline just doesn't have something like https://arxiv.org/. That would cut the legs out from under these parasites.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Every time I publish with Elsevier a small part of me dies I now have three papers in various Elsevier journals. Through publication of each of these I have grown to dispise Elsevier more and more. I hate they way that they are providing less and less at each stage of the publication process. For example I wrote the paper, my colleagues peer-reviewed it, and then now I even have to do the type setting myself. It makes me question what exactly Elsevier are providing besides a shell to conduct peer review and a hosting platform afterwards? Although there are many issues generally with the publication process, it is the authors doing type setting that actually bugs me the most. For those of you that have not used the Elsevier type setting online tool, this is an interactive document editor where you generate your own proofs. All content is editable and therefore undermining the peer review process. For example, at this stage for key points could be changed or countless self citations added. After this you hit submit and it's done. Now they will claim that this process has some editorial oversight but in my experience it does not. It's a joke. Also I hate the way they refer to us as customers. Working with a publisher should be a collaborative process. I am planning to avoid Elsevier journals in the future when I have a say in where a paper goes.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Journals *are* just a shell to conduct peer review and provide permanent hosting.", "role": "assistant" } ]