text:
Free, open-source substitutes for Mendeley?
Mendeley is (mainly) a proprietary social network to share basic citation data and research papers. see also
Are there any free and open source substitutes for this service?
A technical possibility: users could collect BibTeX data and a hash and share this information.
It would be very useful to have such a free service because every journal provides the citation data in a different format. That includes false field entries, broken files and hidden download buttons on the website.

Related (but not a duplicate): http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/854/1033

related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36/suitable-citation-management-softaware

The opening sentence could be controversial, as much as it is secondary to the context. Maybe you could rephrase it.

The question, as stated, is erroneous and meaningless, because it doesn't make a distinction between a client and a server. Mendeley makes a client which is proprietary, but the content available via API is under a CC-BY license, so anyone can built a open source client.

@WilliamGunn your employer can call it what it wants, but the client software is closed, the server software is closed and the data is only open in the loosest sense of the word. If you want the data to be considered open, provide a nightly push of the entire database that can be downloaded without an API.

I guess I'm confused as to what the question is about. Is the question about open source software that can manage references, or is it about something that does exactly what Mendeley does, but is 100% open source as opposed to only partially composed of open source components, or is it about the catalog, which if you want a nightly dump of 17 TB, be my guest, but available via nightly dump isn't in the definition of open data.

@WilliamGunn to be fair I don't know what open data really means, so I asked over at OpenData.SE.

Jonas, do you only need the software to be open source software? Or do you also need the data to be open data (freely reusable license, such as CC-BY-SA or CC0)? By data I mean everything that is shared between users, presumably citations and "social" information.

@nic, Yes, I do not need social information at all, but the data and the client should be open/free as you described.

The only alternative that comes to my mind is Zotero:

It is open-source,
it comes as a standalone application or as a web-based version with Firefox, Chrome and Safari connectors,
it integrates with Word or OpenOffice,
it syncs with the Zotero server,
it has BibTeX export,
and more.

The Zotero standalone client is cross-platform and open-source (AGPL licence), and it can be run on its own or synchronized with the web version. The web service is free to use up to a fixed storage quota, with paid storage available, and there is an open-source implementation of the dataserver available if you want to roll your own. The local client stores its data in SQLite format so in principle your data is not locked in, but the database is relatively hard to trawl externally; however, since the client is open source there are relatively few future-proofing concerns.

Is it truly free? I think that the client only is; the server is proprietary.

That is true, but Zotero can be used without the server. Your data will never be locked, you can always export it.

It can be used partially without the server. Only a subset of its functions will still work.

What functions don't work without the server? Except syncing to the server, of course?

Well, syncing data among different clients. :) There is really no technical reason why this couldn't be done on a completely FOSS stack. It is only a commercial choice. I don't blame them, that is their business, but it is a fact that Zotero is not 100% open, despite their claims.

You can run a WebDAV server, no sweat: https://github.com/fishburn/phpZoteroWebDAV

@FedericoPoloni I think you are misinterpreting the "free" in free software: Zotero is still developed and distributed under AGPL. That does not mean that the developers may not charge for their server services. Furthermore, there is the possibility to run your own WebDAV server as Tony pointed out.

@non-numeric_argument my claim above is that some of the functionality in Zotero depends on closed-source, commercial server code, and there are functions (such as syncing your files between a desktop and a laptop) that you can obtain only after payment. We may discuss whether this means "free" or not. If I understand correctly, the program that Tony pointed out is an open-source, third-party, non-official replacement for the server code. The only fact that this project exists should support the statement that Zotero is not "free" enough, at least in someone's opinion.

@FedericoPoloni First, Zotero itself provides some sourcecode for running a dataserver. Second, the Freemium storage and syncing service by Zotero Server resembles Mendeley very much. The other reommended open source software BibDesk has no server or sync functionality whatsoever and I do not know of any open source software which is an original desktop reference manager which comes with that funtionality (of course, there are open source web-based reference manager).

@non-numeric_argument thanks for the pointer, I did not know of the existence of this dataserver repository. I haven't checked its functionalities but it seems interesting. On the other point, I agree with you, as far as I know there are no (other) open-source desktop reference managers with that functionality.

See also unofficial info on running the server.

Zotero is unstable and I had many headaches when trying to integrate in Microsoft Word.

zotero organizes my pdfs?

+1 for Zotero as an alternative to Mendeley. It is open source and allows you to take control on how you want to manage your files. In addition, Zotero now supports migrations from Mendeley. Be aware that starting Mendeley v1.19, Mendeley has started encrypting their database making it difficult to migrate away and ensures you're locked into using Mendely. https://www.zotero.org/support/kb/mendeley_import

Docear
Haven't tried it yet but https://www.docear.org/ seems to stand out as one of the leading open-source alternative to mendeley.
Docear is basically a marriage of JabRef and Freeplane. It uses JabRef as a backend for its reference management and Freeplane to organize references, annotations you make in the pdf, and any other information (including images, links and crossreferences) in a mind-map.
As the original author of this answer pointed out it is indeed open-source—licensed under the GNU General Public License.

Isse on JabRef for crafting a new mindmap solution for JabRef: https://github.com/koppor/jabref/issues/433

I have tried any number of reference management programs (from EndNote to Mendeley and back), and have come to the conclusion that the most important criterion is that the reference manager directly, natively writes in .bib, or some other text-based, open-source format.
This has several advantages:

no proprietary or otherwise lock-in
future-proof
fast and robust
if all else fails, you can always fix it "by hand" in a text editor
works well with LaTeX, no "lost in BibTeX-Export" problems
works nicely with versioning software (such as git), which requires text files for meaningful diffs.
especially with git, you have maximum peace of mind about just what exactly is happening with your library.

This leaves a pretty small number of editors:

http://bibdesk.sourceforge.net: OS X only, rock solid, development seems to be done
http://jabref.sourceforge.net for all plattforms (haven't tried it)

I love jabref. Hasn't let me down yet.

I really liked Mendeley's potential but got frustrated with both their pricing model (maybe I just never learned how to use the software correctly) and it consistently butchering imported BibTeX entries.
I've been a pretty happy BibDesk user for a long time, it is true open source software, but unfortunately it has not been ported outside of the OS X environment, so this is only a qualified answer.

BibDesk, indeed, is an excellent tool. It doesn't offer a built in syncing feature across computers, but this can be achieved in other ways such as Dropbox or git. I highly recommend BibDesk!

We have developed an open source solution, downloadable from GitHub at https://github.com/scientilla/scientilla, that allows users to collaboratively share and refine their scientific bibliographic metadata.
The system relies on a "peer-to-peer" and "open-data" approach as well as on a "clone-and-refine" algorithm. It can import data from external web services.
The more the system is used, the more the information that flows on the network become clean.
Moreover, using Scientilla, any user can obtain the whole metadata shared through the network.

I visited your website. I am just feeling that your website lacks some snapshots of the software you have developed.

link die (domain expired)

Update on link. Domain simply contains a banner indicating that it's been parked ("reserved for a client").

Finally I found I, librarian on http://i-librarian.net/ which is a kind of mixture between Filestorage-Server, JabRef and a personal open source Mendeley server.
Interested users may try the demo account on the website.

In creating such a system, the cost of the software and the expense of running the server(s) to host the data is microscopic compared to the expense of the army of knowledgeable people checking out references, cleaning up the barely legal (and semantically often complete nonsense) BibTeX entries offered by some journals, knit them up from scratch where not even the above is available.
Better create your central database, share it with your research group. Have everybody chip in by adding references to interesting papers found while browsing, whatever they cite in their publications/theses, and perhaps keep another file with publications generated locally (comes handy when asked for "publications of the group last year" or so). Publish guidelines, enforce them, perhaps occasionally organize a refer-thon to clean up entries and fill out missing details. If you ask everybody who reads a paper/document to add a short (3-5 lines) summary/abstract (they'll have to write one anyway for "state of the art"), a URL or other pointer where to find the document, you create an (at least locally) very valuable resource.
If it grows enough, or as a side product of the work, publish it on the webpage of the group. Might even ask for contributions from outside while you are at it.

No, there isn't anything that is an exact copy of Mendeley, the server, the clients, the API, and the content, but all composed of 100% open source software.
For the record, Mendeley does contain some open source and the API is freely available, so if you wanted to build an application of service to the scholarly community, you'd probably be better off building your own open source client but leveraging the messy and difficult bits that we've already solved and make available via API, such as the metadata extraction and impact tracking bits.

The question doesn't ask for an "exact copy," it asks for a substitute.

Nearly all software "does contain some open source", but that is very different from "being open source".

Also, conflicts of interests should be clearly stated! https://expertfile.com/experts/william.gunn


text:
Supervisor keeps "showstopping" defense with nit-picky grammar errors
My supervisor keeps on delaying and postponing my defense date, taking long periods of time between revisions (1 month of "revision" where the document is in his hands).  He has done this 2 times already, so I have been sitting here waiting for a total of 2 months now.  This last "revision" he sent it back to me with six or seven nitpicky grammar errors, (ie places I had left out words such as "the" or "when"), and the content-related comments he had were extremely trivial.
I feel like he keeps on showstopping my defense date due to nitpicky grammar errors, and it is impacting my career (obviously, my Master's degree now has 3 years on it, instead of the expected 2).  At this point I don't care about grammar errors (and I believe we must have found them all already) or clarity of expression or making perfectionist type improvements.  I feel really angry and I feel like writing a letter of complaint to my graduate program director.  Each term I have to stay bleeds more money out of my account, and the situation is making me really upset.
So far, I've been very polite and professional and have not "exploded".  I've hidden my emotions and my anger and not complained about what I feel is getting quite ridiculous.  Should I complain? Should I let him know how I feel?  Or should I just keep on going with it and "grin and bear" until it's over?

Have you tried asking him directly, instead of going over his head directly to the department head.

I have tried to get a defense date since September.  I have followed up weekly every week he has had the document in his hands (to responses of "I'm doing what I can").  He seems to fill his time with everything else but attention to me and helping me graduate.

But anyway, the question is, should I let him know I'm angry or not?  How do you let him know you think the situation has become completely ridiculous (while he seems to be under the impression that everyone has got all the time in the world?)

That's the reason I asked, perhaps he doesn't feel he is doing you damage and that your wallet is getting thinner, and you should try to be sure he at least understands you are in a very thought situation that he could very easily solve by letting you defend.

I feel like you severely lack communication skills. For example, "should I let him know I'm angry or not". Also, "So far, I've ... not exploded ... Or should I keep on... "grin and bear"". It seems like the two options you know of are (i) pretending to be agreeable with what he's doing, (ii) getting angry/expressing anger. Have you considered (iii) Expressing your concerns in healthy dialogue, and discussing where to go from here given that he's now aware of these concerns? I feel like (ii) is the absolute worst thing you could do but it seems like you're seriously considering it.

@Jase I don't really.  I have more or less expressed that I'd like to graduate as soon as possible since September, there are about 7 or 8 messages RE: Graduating in my inbox, and I haven't been shy about my goals

So how does your supervisor respond to those e-mails?

With progress reports and updates, like, "I'm halfway through this chapter", but I find he basically skimmed it when I get it back.

@bobobobo, Are you the only one the supervisor is advising?  If not, then how many students is he or she advising?

The things you call "nitpicky grammar errors" are often (in my experience) symptoms of a deeper problem:
that the student has stopped caring about raising the thesis to a suitably high standard, and has not grasped what "completed" means in the context. An unfinished thesis simply can't be marked.
First, get your own proof-reader, and get help in getting all of these problems fixed - your supervisor is too busy to be a proof-reader, and it's an inefficient use of limited supervisory time.
Why is the grammar sloppy?
For different students, the underlying cause will differ; some won't be writing in their native language; some are careless; some have weak language skills; some haven't grasped the importance of good grammar and spelling to clear communication and to academic publishing. I've no idea which of these is true in your case, or if it's something else - that's between you and your supervisor.
Whose problem is it anyway?
You don't care about your grammar errors. That is your problem, not your supervisor's. You are angry. Again, that's your problem. Trying to make it your supervisor's problem, will make an enemy of someone who you need on your side. You think your supervisor's comments on content are trivial, and that is also your problem, not your supervisor's problem.
And now this post has maybe made you angry too. And that would also be your problem, not my problem.
I say all this, because accepting that they are your problems, is the first step to fixing them.
Collaboration not conflict
The problem that I am trying to help you fix, is that your supervisor is telling you what you need to finish, and you seem to resent doing it.  Supervision has to be a collaborative partnership, not a battle. Now, in theory, it's your supervisor's job to make it such. However, in some cases, in academia as well as in the real world, you often need to manage your manager - and that can mean you taking responsibility for ensuring that it is is a collaborative relationship.
So, find out what incentivises your supervisor, and try to put those incentives in place. Is it publishing papers? Esteem within the department? Conference papers? Get your supervisor on your side.
The worst case
And (take a deep breath): sometimes, when a thesis is genuinely bad, it's not apparent at first. All one sees on the first couple of readings, are a few errors here, and a few errors there; but when they're corrected, new problems appear.
It gets to be like "Star Wars the Phantom Menace" - the East Coast of the US produced one homebrew re-edit of it, to fix some problems; the West Coast produced a different homebrew re-edit, to fix other problems; but in the end, both re-edits and the original are pretty awful films: fixing the most obvious problems just exposed other problems.
I really really hope that's not the case in your case; but as this answer will hopefully be read by many people in your shoes, then at some point, it will be true for one of them. And at that point, that person and their supervisor need to think about a radical rewrite, or walking away from it as a lost cause.
Where to go from here
But for almost all cases, it's just a matter of getting your supervisor onside, getting a definitive list of the problems, and then you doing what your supervisor says is required to fix them. With them, write a checklist, and then return the checklist to them, with a note next to each one, stating how and where you've fixed it, or how you're defending it.
And finally - this post will inevitably contain spelling and grammar errors - it's Muphry's law in action. But that doesn't invalidate the advice in any way. With language, context is everything. This post is not academic scholarship; your thesis is.

I like this answer very much. However, I personally think getting a check list is also the student's responsibility. He should write down everything when the supervisor nit-picks the errors(both contents and grammar) and then either correct them or defend them. This is why defense is called defense. What if somebody else nit-picks those errors in the oral defense? Are you going to say the issues are extremely trivial and ignore them? Do you think you will pass the defense this way?

@scaaahu thanks for the feedback - I've updated the last bit re checklist accordingly

FTR, it's not bad.  It's a master's thesis, he avoids the deep technical parts, and he doesn't seem to understand the meat of it.  New things to nitpick seem to surface all the time, and he takes arbitrarily long to get things done.

@bobobobo Your comment "he doesn't seem to understand the meat of it" does not sound extremely trivial to me at all.

@bobobobo the thesis author is never the best-placed person to judge whether or not it's a bad thesis. I've yet to met an author of a bad thesis who realised of their own accord that it was bad. That lack of insight is one of the things that contributes to a bad thesis. I am not saying that yours is bad: I'm saying that you couldn't be in a position to know it, if it was.

I am going to take a slightly narrower perspective than EnergyNumbers here, and focus on the specific facts of your situation, as you have mentioned them. Note that my conclusions will be derived from this, so if the facts as stated in your question are not correct (either by ellipsis or exaggeration, most likely), my advice would be different.

taking long periods of time between revisions (1 month of "revision" where the document is in his hands). He has done this 2 times already, so I have been sitting here waiting for a total of 2 months now. This last "revision" he sent it back to me with six or seven nitpicky grammar errors, (ie places I had left out words such as "the" or "when"), and the content-related comments he had were extremely trivial.

Note that I can't consider “nitpicky” and “extremely trivial” as facts, but as statements of your opinion on the validity and scope of these comments. Also, I assume that your thesis is somewhere between 50 and 100 pages in length (if it's 10 or 500 pages, the problem is different).

The busy supervisor hypothesis
This assumes that:

you did in fact correct the grammar mistakes pointed out to you (and I'd say that 7 such errors in what I assume is a 50–100 page thesis cannot really be considered sloppy writing);
the content-related comments were few, easily fixed (order of presentation, showing additional data or removing some overly detailed graphs, etc.), and you actually fixed them quickly;
no further comment was made to you on the overall quality or suitability of your thesis.

Then, you should have a calm and professional discussion with your supervisor, highlighting the difficulty of your current situation and the necessity of working together to reach an outcome satisfactory to both of you. Say explicitly that:

you understand that a necessary standard has to be met by your thesis,
you are ready to hear that it is not yet met,
however, you need more specific guidance to reach this goal, since you have fixed in a timely manner everything that was pointed out to you, and yet you can't defend.

Stay courteous, base your questions (and answers) on facts, and ask for him to do the same. Reading a thesis and commenting on it shouldn't take one month, and if the modifications to be made are as you indicated, no further work on it would be necessary once they have been discussed and integrated.
If that doesn't succeed, and your supervisor seems to busy to devote to you the time necessary or simply doesn't care about it now that the scientific part of the work is over (it happens!), go ask the graduate program director for help. Maybe not by a formal written letter at first, just ask for his advice in a given situation. See what comes out of it.

In all cases, whatever you do, stay professional. You should highlight the harshness of the situation for you, whether when talking to your supervisor or to others, without letting your emotions dominate the discussion. (Yes, it can be hard.)

Your goal is to graduate, i.e. to get the masters degree awarded to you.
You have a roadblock which prevents you from reaching the goal - your supervisor keeps on delaying and postponing your defense date. The reason you stated is that he is taking long periods of time between revisions due to nit-picky grammars errors on the draft of your master thesis. You are asking this question on this board to seek advices on what to do. One of your questions is: should you let him know you're angry or not?
I'll answer your questions by asking you a question first, do you think letting him know you're angry will work? Do you think he will sign on your thesis after you tell him you are angry? Or the situation will become even worse after you express your anger?
I think the answer is the latter - the situation will be even worse. The supervisor is responsible for the quality of the student's thesis. You said in one of your comments, "he doesn't seem to understand the meat of it." No supervisor would put his signature on a thesis he does not understand.
After reading your question a couple of times, I think your English writing is not bad. I cannot say how good the writing of your thesis is because I never read it. If there are any grammar errors, it would take you only days to fix them, not months.
So, what is the problem? I think there is obviously a communication issue. You said you sent him many e-mails(in one of your comments). No avail. You think he did not give you enough time. I believe there should be ways to talk to him. For example, make an appointment on his calendar and say you need to talk to him to address your concerns. He is your supervisor after all. He would have to give you some time no matter how busy he is.
However, what are you going to say in that meeting? Are you going to say you want to graduate, your bank account will dry out, you already spent three years for your masters degree, etc.? Those are your personal issues, not his concern. He is not your parent. He does not care how much money is left in your bank. What he does care is the quality of the thesis. I do believe that he will sign off on your thesis once he is convinced that your thesis is of good quality. Now, we are coming back to your question, why he keeps nit-picking the grammar errors? I think there is something between you and him. I, as an outsider, can only guess. A supervisor/advisor is more like a coach. Every coach has his own style. Some would not directly tell you what to do. Instead, he would make you re-read and re-write the thesis to make it more understandable and better. Is he that kind of supervisor? I don't know. What I do believe is, he wants a good thesis. Hope this helps.
Update after seeing OP's comment
The OP put in a comment in response to Jase's question So how does your supervisor respond to those e-mails?, OP says With progress reports and updates, like, "I'm halfway through this chapter", but I find he basically skimmed it when I get it back.
My suggestion is, have a presentation for him. It can be just half hour to an hour long. Pretend you're having a defense. Give him the meat of your thesis. So that he won't need to spend that much time to find them in the thesis draft.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Is it appropriate to include additional materials in an academic job application?
I am applying to teaching jobs at small liberal arts colleges. They typically ask for the standard things: cover letter, CV, research statement and teaching statement. I feel as though a compilation of student comments and data taken from students in my classes (rating my enthusiasm and preparedness in particular) makes my application much stronger. After all, these are the types of things people look for when it comes to tenure review, so why not for a job application? My question is:
Is it inappropriate to include such additional materials in a teaching application?

Unless the call clearly states that nothing more must be included you should do so. As you correctly identified such information provides insights into you success in teaching. An option could be to simply include a summary in the CV or make it part of the teaching statement, as support that your teaching ideas produce good results. In short, add the material but make sure it is condensed and clearly structured. I have added such material to applications (for promotion in my case) and had someone sign off that the summary reflects the material on which it is based.

This would be appropriate as long as the call does not clearly discourage supplementary information (e.g. by saying that you should only include reseach and teaching statements + CV), and could strengthen your application, especially when applying to a teaching position. However, only include summary scores (such as %-students satisfied or student test results), and maybe one or two student comments. However, I would be hesitant to include comments altogether, since it is obvious that these might have been cherry-picked. A quantitative summary is much more informative. Do not include lengthy appendicies of raw evaluation data (which I've seen in applications), since this will only add clutter and make your application appear less professional.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
What do I do if someone studied the same topic before, but did so inadequately?
I am planning to research on topic for masters by research course. Googling, I found that a "micro-research" study on a similar topic (some objectives matching) has been done by somebody as a part of coursework master’s thesis (project) work. But there is nothing online except some initial pages of thesis (as a blog post on the student's website), so I am unable to read the whole thesis and understand  what has been done. It has not been published in a peer-reviewed forum, and it looks like it was done in around 4 months with a small sample size for coursework thesis. Moreover, it seems to be in a different field of study.
From the available pages it looks like research has tried to touch most of the things but at a very superficial level: three pages of data analysis and one page of findings also make me question how in-depth the analysis was.
I am writing a research proposal and really confused how I should include it. Especially in previous works, do I need to validate or justify each of my objectives against its objectives? (or show the difference)
I am thinking of expanding the scope, objectives of research and planning to use different data analysis methods. What should I do?

Have you tried to contact the author(s) of that coursework master’s thesis (project) work?

Yes but the problem is not only getting the thesis's missing pages but also quality of the work that has been done. Table of contents is available and first and final chapter(around 20 content pages out of total 64 pages are available as blog post). Some objectives seem to be matching. Now do I start writing how my research is going to be different(on scope,process,addressing shortcomings) in proposal based on that?

In  my opinion, you should get the full paper(thesis) and then assess its value and determine how to reference (use) it.

Thanks but I have doubt on its value that's why i am asking this question. I agree on all its point obviously,another research on same or similar topic would not have been necessary. The two researches will be totally different on scale,methods,efforts,time frame but problem is on objectives it looks similar. So,that's the problem. Rather than trying to extend that study I am trying to look things from new angle and in more depth.

problem is on objectives it looks similar. I am afraid you will need to reference that paper when you write yours. This is my opinion, though

From your description, I understand that the thesis (fragment) essentially looks into something you want to look into yourself, but you feel it does so in an inadequately small scale. Is it an option to simply call things by their name then and point out that results from a small-scale study in a thesis suggest -whatever you hope to find-, and you would like to investigate into the same direction, but much more thoroughly, using additional techniques of evaluation, etc.? But like that, the existence of that master thesis might even be beneficial for you, as a first "proof of concept".

The obvious choose would be to reference this paper ("Johnson, J. (2014) 'bla bla bla', unpublished thesis, University of What Ever, http://blog access date: april 8th 2015" Reference software such as Endnote have an unpublished manuscript category) in the literature review part of your thesis.

@Mapper Spot on.Thanks for suggestions. Well research is on "specific issues of specific industry in specific country' or kind of case study of a country.Now my proposal already includes detail literature review of around 9 Phd studies on that industry and on that issue(2.5 pages).If i refute that thesis I may have to devote another page for it. I started it but the paper seems to have many problems or is not qualitative(even doesn't have proper referencing for vital claims),so I  am in dilemma either I should  do it or not. My proposal is already 10 pages so don't want to make it too long.

@Maarten Thanks.Well can i call it 'unpublished'? or is there any other better terms? . The proposal was never meant to be published i guess reading at its abstract.Rather it was just trying to fulfill the partial requirement of a subject or coursework master's degree and just submitted to College. The research mentions that analysis is not in depth as thesis has to be submitted by 4 months as degree requirement.

You should keep in mind the  possibility  that the author of the thesis you found is continuing to work on the subject, possibly improving the deficiencies you noted. This would be another very good reason to contact them and try to learn the current state of their work - if your proposed work closely matches what they are doing now, you are at risk of being scooped.

I agree with @scaaahu that you need to get the paper (if you can) and evaluate it. After that, you should discuss this with your adviser.

But there is nothing online except some initial pages of thesis (as a blog post on the student's website [...]. It has not been published in a peer-reviewed forum, and it looks like it was done in around 4 months with a small sample size for coursework thesis. Moreover, it seems to be in a different field of study.
From the available pages it looks like research has tried to touch most of the things but at a very superficial level: three pages of data analysis and one page of findings also make me question how in-depth the analysis was.

None of this indicates that the previous study was 'inadequate'!
You should definitly mention this study in your proposal, but use better arguments than 'three pages of data analysis and one page of findings' to describe its limitations!

Yup. Thanks and that is what i did.I listed limitations of that research and were around 1 page long.I am trying to make it bit shorter(just really difficult). No references for data-stats-many claims,data analysis and findings all based on just mean,mode analysis to name few.Any ways thanks I have included it. It just looks like it was done for the thesis requirement of the course.


text:
Is it acceptable to propose the same PhD research plan to two universities?
Well I have proposed a research(starting next year) and accepted by supervisor and university (formally applied and accepted by university). I have a conditional offer letter. But I need funding for it so I have applied for an external scholarship(good chances but not 100% sure) but the decision of scholarship will be made only after 3-4 months. If I don’t get scholarship or funding, I think, I won’t be able to pursue the research or study.
And, there is another university (but 2nd preference) with some very good internal scholarship options and I have very good chances looking at their criteria. I also have a supervisor, whom I know academically, who is ready to supervise the research from that university. But off course he cannot make decision on scholarships. I am thinking of applying to that university as a backup so that I don’t lose one year waiting next year’s scholarship round if I don’t get the first scholarship. And also, after 3 months there won't be any scholarships deadline left for this year.
So, is it good thing to apply for same research project in two different universities? (Off course, ideally, it is not but in my case what should I do?).
And are we allowed to do so? Is it normal? (Off course, finally I will have to select one between two).
I am afraid that after all the hassle and correspondence with both the future supervisors, how I may be able to deny one, if I am selected for the both.
And also if I say to second university’s supervisor that I have already applied in another university as well and only applying as backup, firstly it may be rude (who knows, may have ego problems later) , secondly, that may even diminish my chances in 2nd university as well(admission and scholarship).
So, I am in dilemma what I should do? Please suggest.

Your question is unclear on a crucial point: have you already accepted the offer of the first university?

I mean my application has been accepted by university.I have a conditional offer letter but I have not accepted the offer yet.I have told them clearly that I can accept offer financially only if I get the external scholarship I have applied for(whose result is due in next 3-4 months).So,I want to have something as backup.

No answers,really confused what to do.


text:
How to ask summer research advisor for publication?
I'm an undergraduate currently doing summer research with an REU program. I feel that the research we've done this summer is publishable (although what do I know), and I'd like to do that, especially with grad school applications coming up. Is there a polite, yet direct way (or is it uncouth) to ask my advisor if we are going to publish this paper?

Just ask him in the next meeting if you think the results are promising?

I would think just asking your advisor if it is worthy of publication, and if so, if there are intentions to actually publish it is the way to go.

Thanks, @Olorun and @Cameron! I just wasn't sure if the appropriate thing to do is wait for him to bring it up.

And don't be discouraged if it isn't publishable. A summer REU isn't very long, and they don't often result in publications (at least not in my field).

Related: Is it acceptable for an undergraduate researcher to ask to work on a project that will yield publishable results?

Hi, do you think we can get my work so far published as an article?

If the answer is no:

So, what else do you think we would have to do to get it publishable?

Professors and supervisors are human beings. They won't eat you if you make the wrong question, or use a slightly unproper tone. Don't worry specially when you are in a very low risk situation, and you know each other.
(Once you get the go, don't forget to clarify and define authorship).

This. The broader lesson here is that communication that is both professional and concise is always a good approach.


text:
How should university employees address student breakups (and drama in general)?
As I was writing and revising my personal statements, I overheared what was a rather nasty breakup outside of the window shortly after midnight.
I know that personal relationships are not my business in general, and in this case, my involvement was a brief but stern question to the young couple if everything was okay and if they wanted to discuss their issues inside the lobby of the building I worked at instead of the freezing cold outside. I also offered hot coffee or tea. The ulterior intention was to insure that there was no violence in what was an emotionally charged argument.
The result was that he flipped me off and she declined. I replied if she was sure; she said yes and they went off into the night.
With this said, my questions are:

Were my actions appropriate as a staff member of the university (who was basically about the same age as the presumed undergraduate couple ranging from 18–22 and myself at 23)?
Would my actions be appropriate as a graduate student and TA in general regardless of circumstance (affiliation in my group, unknown student in general)?
Would the same actions be appropriate for a professor?

How about "Call security and stay out of it" ? One they won't have the opportunity to be rude to you and two, if it does get heated / violent security are most probably trained to deal with the situation.

In general I would say it isn't your responsibility as a professor/TA any more than it would be as a normal member of the public witnessing a potentially violent altercation.
If you supervise one of the students you could ask them, at another time, whether everything is okay, giving them them the opportunity to talk if they wish. Avoid getting too involved, you're there to assist the students with their studies and risking effecting the relationship - if your interference has embarrassed or upset the student they would be less likely to approach you for help with their studies (your primary purpose).

Couldn't it be argued that a person's emotional state would directly affect their studies? If so, what role would a TA or professor have in that capacity? Would we act as listeners, but ultimately not able (nor qualified) to give advice, or refer them to counseling?

@FrankFYC Of course their emotional state effects their studies, this doesn't mean you can fix it though. If your role involves supervising or pastoral care then you can ask if they're okay then they have the opportunity to talk. You can give advice if you like but only if they ask for it. Primarily your purpose (as far as students are concerned) is to help them with the content they are studying. At the end of the day you getting involved could make things worse for them and make them less likely to approach you about course content.

Getting involved could make things worse, but it could also make things better. Your action will have consequences, for sure, but so will not acting. In this example it probably made things better: most likely the couple will respect your comments and like the way you dealt with the situation. Well done.


text:
Drinking and writing
This may be a sensitive subject given the subject matter.
But I have currently experiencing significant writers’ block when it comes to writing my statement of purpose and personal statement for graduate school applications. As part of my research (procrastination) on how to resolve this issue, I came across some material that suggested that a minor intake of alcohol would allow the process to flow more freely.
Not enough to inhibit writing, but enough such that the usual inhibitions are removed.
I wanted to confer the advice and wisdom from the academia community on this subject matter, the pros and cons, the potential ramifications of such an action.
What are the effects/results of drinking and writing?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

Write drunk; edit sober ~ Hemingway

Anecdotally, it worked for me in middle school. But I also reiterate, as others have said, it's "have a glass of wine with dinner", not "get smashing drunk and have trouble hitting the right keys"...

I don't see why this is closed: it seems generally applicable to academics everywhere, and an interesting question about one potential method of writing more effectively.

Massimo's comment reminded me of the old adage, "drink when you want to, not when you need to", and I think those are useful words to remember.
However, I also agree with what rnrstopstraffic said, and if you have no general problem with consuming alcohol, try it and see what happens.
I don't suggest going out with your friends, drinking 6 pints of beer and 3 shots of tequila before stumbling home at 2am and scribbling nonsense, however. One glass of wine or beer with dinner would, I expect, be enough to get the creative juices flowing (if alcohol is going to get them flowing at all). I also recommend that you wait until the following day to edit and submit.
I've personally never written academic work after drinking alcohol, but I have written fiction after doing so. For me, it definitely doesn't improve the quality of my writing, but it does help me put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) and just write. As Inkblot says, it's a lot easier to rewrite and edit when you have something on the page, even if it is total garbage.

Surely there is a sweet spot between rambling and reduced inhibitions?

@Frank that depends on your alcohol tolerance

After having a few drinks it may be better for the OP to voice his thoughts into a recorder of some sort and the next day decipher any (coherent) interesting ideas and put them onto paper.

@FrankFYC I'm afraid the Ballmer Peak is entirely fictional...

@Sanchises but it’s got charts, and numbers, and red lines!

In computer programing there exists the Term "Balmers Peak" which describes the positive effects of moderate alcohol consumption on your coding skills as these requiere a certain degree of creativity. If this effect is real and what "moderate" means is disscussed here
https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/2795
which Im just going to link as I could not write it out in such detail by myself.
Wether this effect also applies to academic writing is not disscussed there but I can imagine so as both acitivities seem very similar. They both requiere creative thinking and logical thinking (thats why you should stay at very moderate levels of alcohol consumption as your logical capabilities will suffer otherwise).
Also alcohol will help with just "getting it out" which you mention as one of your problems. Just dont forget to edit it later while sober.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
How does it look if I finish my PhD in five years instead of four?
I’m doing my PhD in computer science in Germany and next year would be my 4th (last) year. I can wrap it up until then, but I really like to have an extension to the 5th year. There are still 2–3 ideas that I have investigated but couldn’t finish because of the time frame, so I would like to do a bit more.
I have two publications so far and hopefully can have one more during the coming year, but I would like to have more publications, especially in better conferences. Also I think that I do not have yet enough expertise on the topic I’m working on.
Anyway, my supervisor prefers that I finish my PhD in four years, although I haven’t talked to him seriously about it yet. Also the funding would be available outside of his grant budget so he won’t be worried about it.
I’ve heard of many other students who finished in five or even six years, but I’m not sure in practice how important it could be especially if I can have good publications by extending my PhD.

Just a comment: if next year will be your 4th this means you are now on your 3rd. Can't you wrap up in the next full year? 1 Year is usually enough if you are full time dedicated on research.

i need around 3 months for writing the dissertation and another 3 months waiting for reviewers to read it along with the disputation event. Also if next year is the last, then i need to start hunting for job or post-doc positions from now. So not much left to do new stuff, or to complete unfinished stuff. Just enough to wrap up what i've already done. That's my impression!

I am not sure I agree completely. The last year is, in most cases, the most productive even if at the same time you are awaiting for bureaucratic stuff like these you mention. One does not exclude the other.

I felt sheepish about taking 7.5 years to earn my MS/PhD when my husband only took 5, until we went to register for our marriage license. I asked the clerk what to put for "last grade completed" for a PhD; she said to just list the number of years of education, which gave me a higher total than my husband. If you stats about women more educated than their husbands, that includes me. :-)

Short answer: Nobody cares.

In the job market for academia, it is usually important to measure your publication record after the completion of your PhD. So papers after your degree are better than papers you did while doing your degree (specially if thye do not include your supervisor, which shows independence).

If you're going into the private sector, it's hard to imagine anyone caring.  The bigger issue is your career progression; you're giving up a year of career development and income to finish up whatever you're after in grad school.

It's relevant if you are in a field where you could continue your research with just time (math) or if you need equipment.

Honestly, as a fellow German academic, I don't have the slightest idea how long any one of my colleagues took. IMHO, @Superbest is right. At worst expect a question during your first PostDoc interview, but I would say even that is unlikely. 4 to 5 years isn't terribly long (in fact, the usual 3 year funding period is rather short; from my experience only a minority actually hands in their thesis within three years).

Some people extend their PhD studies just to have an additional year of research without any serious responsibilities or teaching load.

Only 5 years? Wow!!

A certain Dr. Brian May took 37 years to complete his thesis in Astrophysics. However, he did have rather a long sabbatical to pursue his other interests.

Oh my God! You're taking FIVE WHOLE YEARS! Just to complete a PhD?!?!? Get real - nobody will notice, or care. However, if there's no money for you to hang around for another year while padding your resume' I suggest you bow to reality and plan to finish in four.

Be aware: For sure there will be more than 2-3 unfinished ideas after the extension!

Why not? Enjoy it while it lasts

What do they call a guy who took five years to complete his PhD: Doctor

It looks like you have finished it in 5 years!

Andrew wiles also took 5 years.

The quality of your thesis overshadows the length/duration of your PhD.
Having said that, it depends on your goals. If you clearly think (and your adviser as well) that another year would make a big impact on the quality of your thesis and, consequently, on your CV, and is not too risky to pursue extra work (i.e., the questions you want to tackle are not too ambitious and you have a good possibility of enhancing your CV) then go for it. Otherwise, I am not sure you would want to stay at PhD while you could be looking for your next (PostDoc or industry) jobs.

i like the answer however i'm still in the dilemma of choosing between starting post-doc ASAP or completing PhD with better outcomes!

@Bob As I said, it really depends. If you think your current status can secure a good post-doc then go for it!

It also depends on your funding. If your advisor is not behind the idea of extending the timeframe, he might not be behind continuing to fund you either. I have heard of cases (in computer science in Germany), where advisors offered the student to keep the office, server use and whatever material they use on a day to day basis, but no TV-L salary. So a stipend or nothing it was.

@skymningen true, but I took it as a given, from the OP's question, that funding is not a problem.

Finishing your PhD doesn't stop you from continuing in your field and creating additional publications. It is more likely people will look at your individual publications that at the contents of your thesis - but they will see that it took you five years.
If your department has funding to keep you after your defense, get the thesis wrapped up and keep publishing. It will look better.

+1 for mentioning the value of continuing to publish, although I disagree that people care how many years it took you to finish.

@EllenSpertus I didn't actually say that people cared. I said that they will see it... Some people may care - not everyone will. If you finish in four years, that is a non-issue; and it doesn't need to affect your over all academic output that you finish "on time".

Unfortunately, My supervisor doesn't have that funding for my post-doc position so i have to go somewhere else and it'd a far chance that i can directly continue my PhD topic.

@Bob You mean fortunately. Staying for PostDoc at the same place where you finished your PhD is not highly advisable.

There are two separate questions that could be asked here:

Is it better or worse (or the same) to do a PhD in 5 years instead of 4?
How does it look to others viewing the CV of a person who does a PhD in 5 years instead of 4?

The first question is a perfectly reasonable question, and we can all imagine the cost/benefit factors that might go into answering it (it depends on a lot of factors).
But since the actual question being asked is #2, I'll ignore all of that cost/benefit analysis and say: basically, they look almost identical to others. In my experience, when people are being evaluated for the purposes of hiring (or promotion or awards), almost always the chronological datum that is used is "years since completion of the PhD". In that case, the number of years it takes to complete a PhD is (axiomatically) irrelevant.
Even if there is some tiny difference for the very first round of hiring, the quality of the letters of recommendation is far more important than the historical data on the CV.

This is true up to a point.  There's a joke that goes: How many graduate students does it take to change a light bulb?  One, but it takes him nine years.  (I did know someone who took nine years, without any interruptions or particular mishaps.  He was just plain slooow.)  But I do agree there's no functional difference (setting aside funding considerations) between average length of PhD and average + 1.

I'm going to agree but disagree. I agree that the datum which is used is almost always "years since completion of Ph. D." Therefore, if you are going to produce the same amount of research in the optional year either way, you should remain in grad school longer, so you will be viewed as a person with that much research k years after Ph. D rather than the same amount k+1 years after Ph. D.

Q: What do you call someone who finished their Ph.D. after five years instead of four?
A: A Ph.D.

Enough said.

It depends on your next goal.
If you want to stay in academia
If you want to stay in academia, do it. The quality of your papers and your dissertation are very important, and an additional year with good results might certainly be worth it.
If you want to get a job in the industry
If you want to get a job in the industry, don't do it. The additional year is going to hurt your CV and delay the moment until you get a proper income even more.

Your claim that 5 rather than 4 years of PhD time hurts your CV is, in my experience and that of people I know, quite unfounded.

@einpoklum: the point is for purposes of working in industry, your CV after 4 years PhD and 1 year working will be much better than your CV after 5 years and 0 years working.

@TomChurch: Well, your CV after a 3-year PhD and 2 years in industry would be even better... more seriously, though, if the answer said "for working in industry, additional publications in an extra year of a PhD are not nearly as useful on a CV than a year of work experience", that would be something else altogether (Although for getting that 1-year position you still have to make do with the PhD-only CV, so it's not really a fair comparison).

@einpoklum The student will be one year older with no 'real' work experience. Being a year younger and not having to explain why he needed an extra year for his phd at the interview is a bonus, while people most likely won't care about the 'great papers' done in the additional year.

@Wilbert: (1) You're making the wrong comparison. We're talking about a PhD with no industry experience in both cases; the difference is 4 or 5 years to finish. (2) You're assuming what you're trying to demonstrate, which is that a 5-year PhD is something problematic which needs explanation. Again, from my experience and that of more than a few freinds and acquaintance of mine - it does not.

@einpoklum (1) All things equal industry people would pick the younger candidate with the shorter phd against someone with identical credentials but older + longer phd (2) I'm not assuming it, I had to a) explain the duration of my own phd in my job interviews, and b) I have asked candidates with longer phds for an explanation when they interviewed for positions with me. I just cannot agree that one more year doesn't matter. It does, since you are competing with lots and lots of other people.

@Wilbert: (1) You keep making the same assertion again and again. It's not true. Or at least, it's not true in my surroundings, and I believe your example is the exception rather than the rule. Not to mention the fact that the company doesn't even know how old you are. (2) The fact that this happened to you doesn't mean it's universal or even very common. No PhD, or interviewer I know has ever asked or been asked that question. I think that's the general rule - although, to be frank, I don't have any statistics or anything to back up this impression, just anecdotal evidence.

@einpoklum Both of our personal experiences are just 'anecdotal evidence'. So lets focus on the lost year. At least here in europe, you won't even get invited to an interview for a good job if you don't have your complete cv (including dob and everything). So the company knows very well how old you are, and will use that as a criteria. And one year more for the same credentials (PhD) is a negative.

Perhaps this might look a way "special" for some people and they can end up with some (probably wrong) assumptions about you if your education/research years happen to deviate from what is considered the common norm.
But I'd recommend to just opt-out of being a part of the world of stereotypes, prejudice and "magical thinking" kind of judgement and take (if offered) as much time as you need to make the research you want with adequate quality and with a fair amount of joy.
I believe that whoever whose opinion is going to be relevant to your further career will probably bother finding out the reason of the deviation (if interested at all) and respect the decision to take somewhat more time for a better job over choosing mediocrity just to fit in the common time frame (if the reason for the delay is something other than above-average quality (or a serious sickness or something like that) though, I'd recommend to invest some effort and make it at least somewhat above-average however).
Under "quality" I mean all the things that evaluate a research paper: how interesting, important, unexplored and hard-to-explore the subject is, how comprehensive your research is, how well-defined, well-verified and easily-applicable your result are, how well-written the actual paper is etc.

If you're planning to continue your life in academia (become a professor or a senior scientist), then it doesn't matter, because you'll seek a postdoc job next, which will only be different by contract type and the money you get (I assume you get 50%, or at best 75%, of a position now? that's the average to best in Germany... I've been there).
If you're planning to go to industry and leave academia, then I don't know how much to emphasize that you should finish as soon as possible. A company mostly doesn't give a damn about your PhD thesis or publications as much as that you have a PhD title from a university. All that a company cares about is your skills and age. Other than your skills, primarily, nothing matters! It's very unlikely that you'll gain new production relevant skills by staying another year (you may become a better researcher though). So I would recommend that you get out and start your serious career (again, in case you don't want to continue in academia).

I finished my PhD in five years instead of four. I knew I would leave academics afterwards and my fifth year was combined with my first year in industry. It was tough but did not impact the slightest my future career (in the sense that it was 5y and not 4). A fellow of mine did the same thing.
I then hired over the years a few PhD in the company I was working in and I never checked how long it took them to get the grade. The fact that they had it was rather an indication of character/orientation than ability/fitness for work.
Finally, you mention that your PhD is in Germany. I do not know if you intend to stay there afterwards but a PhD is immensely positive (prestigious) and, by all means, get it (even if it not of that much use afterwards - like in my case).

authors: Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні


text:
Is the status of conference publications in Computer Science really absolutely unique?
It has been discussed and explained many times that in (at least some subdisciplines of) Computer Science, conference publications have a special status compared to many other fields - where in other fields, journals are the only way of publication, in Computer Science, many conferences allow publications with a comparable peer-review process as a journal, and consequently, reputable conferences in some subfields have a similar standing as reputable journals.
Some exemplary resources that outline this peculiarity:

Why are conference papers so important in computer science (CS)?
Journal vs conference publications when looking for a job in in computer science
Difference between conference paper and journal paper
What's the expected level of paper for top conferences in Computer Science
Editor's Letter: Conferences vs. Journals in Computing Research
Choosing a venue: conference or journal?
Journal publication and acceptance to competitive conferences
Should computer science indexing sites be considered in rating research?
What constitutes a “publication” in Computer Science?
Why conferences are the main venue for CS research?

While the perception of a special treatment of conferences in Computer Science appears to be evident, there are sometimes hints this can actually be observed in a few other fields, as well:
Daniel Standage writes in his question:

(...) whereas some of the more quantitative and technical fields (comp sci and engineering especially) seem to be focused on getting accepted to high-profile conferences with low acceptance rate (...)

Fomite responds:

(...) CS and related fields very heavily weight conference presentations and proceedings papers (...)

badroit cites from the Department of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Minnesota: Criteria for Promotion and Tenure:

A 1994 NRC Committee on Academic Careers for Experimental Computer Science stated “The requirements for good research and engineering in experimental computer science and engineering (ECSE) are different from those of many other academic disciplines” and then added “Because conferences are the vehicle of choice in ECSE for the dissemination of research, well-refereed conference proceedings (as well as work published in refereed private journals) should be given as much weight as archival journal articles

On the other hand, there is also the contrary claim, that Computer Science is an absolute exception with this. For instance, aeismail remarks in one of his answers:

(...) I would argue that the weighting of conference papers seems to be restricted to computer science (...)

Likewise, Lance Fortnow starts his article Viewpoint: Time for computer science to grow up by stating:

Unlike every other academic field, computer science uses conferences rather than journals as the main publication venue.

As it is notable that a rather unspecific "engineering" is consistently mentioned in the examples that imply a few other fields use conferences the same way as CS, I have tried to track down those fields, but could not come to any useful conclusions. In particular, I am not even sure what to look for, because "engineering" might mean various things:

It might mean all of engineering, which I find improbable (that would probably mean peer-reviewed conference publications are not as unheard of in other fields as some CS people suggest).
It might mean a few subfields in engineering. To find more information, knowing which subfields those are would probably be helpful.
It might actually be a pleonasm for computer science, in a way that a department for "engineering and computer science" wants to highlight it does not only deal with theoretical aspects, but also investigates "technical", "practical" sides of computer science.

Thus, my question is: Are there any other fields beside Computer Science that use peer-reviewed conferences for publication, where such conference publications have a similar standing as journal publications? If so, what are some examples of such other fields?
Note: I consider this an answerable question, not an indefinite list question. One or a few verifiable examples for other fields that use conferences as described - or a sufficiently convincing statement or reference that shows there are no such other fields at all - are completely sufficient, I am not looking for an exhaustive list of fields.

Perhaps most of engineering is similar to what I've experienced in the integrated circuit design sub-field of electrical engineering. There are several prestigious conferences that essentially have similar "stature" as traditional journal publication venues. For example, the IEEE ISSCC is seen as one such conference. But, those who publish at ISSCC typically have expanded papers published in similarly-prestigious journal venues such as IEEE JSSC. So a conference paper is not seen so much as a "replacement" as it is a supplement. Maybe CS is this way as well(?), not sure.

@MadJack: As a short summary of what is also said in the linked resources: Yes, the concept of extended papers in journals based on conference papers exists in CS, though from what I have seen, by far not every CS conference paper gets an extended journal version (or is ever intended to have one). The extended version is sometimes used to present updated or more complete information, not necessarily new results and findings, but sometimes just more elaborate explanations, examples, or lists of supported features.

@MadJack: Many of the most successful CS conference papers are never published in any extended form in a journal. I have published many CS conference papers in the best conferences in my CS sub-field and have never published anything based off those papers elsewhere.

@BenjaminMakoHill and OP: Interesting. Well, I, too, would be curious to know if there are other disciplines similar to CS in this regard.

"It might mean a few subfields in engineering." - There are many subfields of engineering where people working in those fields are commonly found in both CS and engineering departments (EE for example.) For example: computer networks, signal processing, information theory. Are you categorizing those as CS or engineering?

I have recently written a note about this issue, with some interesting data from the UK REF 2014 and GSM, that may be of interest.
"Again, the role of conference publications in Computer Science and Informatics"
Abstract: It is often claimed that in the Computer Science and Informatics many top tier conferences are high profile venues, with journal-equivalent status or even higher.
The goal of this note is to highlight further evidence, based on recent publicly available indicators from the UK REF 2014 evaluation exercise and Google Scholar Metrics, of the special nature and purpose of conference venues in CS and related fields, not shared by most conference venues in other fields of science and engineering. We believe that our analysis is particularly interesting for anyone involved in research evaluation at large, but not necessarily familiar with the CS field.
In particular, we focus on the comparison between the status of conferences and journals in different science and engineering fields, and discuss the status and role of conference and journal papers within the CS field itself.
LC

Engineering would most probably be "electrical engineering" and examples of venues where conference proceedings are published would include:
* IEEEXplore (BTW, IEEE stands for "...Electrical and Electronics Engineers"
* LNEE series published by Springer: http://www.springer.com/series/7818
You can also check http://www.springer.com/series/11156 at Springer, which publishes a lot of conference proceedings.
I have recently did several author workshops for researchers in medicine, and they have told that in their field it is also common to have proceedings (of full papers, not a book of abstracts) of a conference. However, I do not have any evidence for that.

Interesting, though are publications in such proceedings in electrical engineering and medicine regarded anywhere near journal publications in terms of reputation, reliability, and (possible) significance, as is the case in (some subfields of) computer science?

I once participated in the proceedings of a conference that was somewhat interdisciplinary but mostly medicine and while it contained full papers, there was no classical peer review, papers were rather of the stuff-we-did-not-bother-publishing-elsewhere type and some people did not participate because it was adding too little to their CV. I cannot say to what extent this observation can be generalised to the whole discipline, however.

As I mentioned above, there are conferences where EEs publish that have high reputation and significance. I suspect, though, that, since most of the designs that folks publish about in these conferences are highly complex structures, an additional paper in a journal is needed to cover those design details that cannot fit in the proceedings paper due to space limitations.

Although maybe not a main field, Robotics as a field is a bit similar to highly regarded conferences.  The two largest are ICRA and IROS.  Not that it is the best method, but you can see the importance of ICRA as being top ranked in googles metrics.  I think you can see a few of these trends within the google rankings as very few disciplines have a conference ranked in their top 20.  Of course, the computer science fields do.  Using what I believe is the same methodology SCImago(h-index), an older (2010) blog post discussed some of the robotics journal rankings as well, which also produced ICRA as top.

I would call robotics clearly a sub-discipline of computer science, given its history.

@jakebeal , although robotics includes mechanical engineering and electrical engineering.

Of course: that's why I specifically called out the history of robotics.  Culturally, it is a child of computer science, no matter where it has broadened in its multidisciplinary nature now.

@jakebeal the link with the subsection you called out was history of 'autonomous robotics', if you read the first paragraph of your link 'history of robotics', it started much before the 'computer science' field was interested in conferences vs journals.