text:
I am a PhD student and hate it here. How can I warn prospective students during admit weekend without ruining my reputation?
On the one hand, I want to warn students not to come to my program.  On the other hand, I don't want to be "that one," and I also don't want to tarnish the reputation of the specific people I worked with (who I mostly like).
More specifically:
I want to warn students about lack of funding, administration being uncaring towards students, certain PhD requirements being a lot more onerous than they say they are, general departmental atmosphere and culture among the grad students, general culture of the school, poor location, etc etc.
Also my school is the only top school in my field that has a "rotation system" for picking advisors, and that is generally framed as a benefit, and a reason to choose the school.  But I don't think students really realize how much rotations suck until after they've come here.

How would you be warning prospective students?  At something like a visiting weekend?  Or people you know personally?  And do most of the other students in your program agree with your critique?  There's a big difference between a culture that very negative for you specifically versus a culture that is very negative for all students.

The fact that it did not work for you (which we all sympathize here) does not mean it will not work for them too. Thing like "shittiness of location", "culture among grad students" are very subjective and other grads might disagree with you.

@Alexandros: That's true, but nevertheless the OP is entitled to his opinion and to give it to those who ask.  As long as his goal is to make sure the prospectives who ask get his honest opinion rather than to make their decision for them, I see no problem commenting on subjective things.

Keep in mind that if many other grad students agree with you, then the prospective students are likely to pick this up whatever you do.  If most of your fellow grad students disagree with you, then there's nothing wrong with giving your opinion, but you shouldn't be surprised if many of the prospective students disagree as well.

Whether a location is "shitty" is entirely subjective.  My PhD was in an isolated campus in the forest, with 10 PhD students, 30 Master students, and 0 undergraduates.  My postdoc is at a downtown university campus in one of the largest cities in North America.  To me, the former is much preferable over the latter, but I can imagine many people would (strongly) disagree.

You say you don't want to be "that guy".. So don't be that guy! Keep your negativity to yourself and let the prospective students make up their own minds. If your issues are valid and are shared by others then there are better ways to address them.

Your question is about "warning without ruining your reputation". Approach the student covertly, don't give your name, and then tell the student to read your criticisms at a "dummy" social page of your choosing. Again, don't provide your identity or write anything that gives away your identity. Be careful about saying anything illegal. Even with these precautions you could still be "outed".

@user3326185 "not telling them" isn't doing them a favor. They should want to hear as many different opinions as possible.

Why are you still there??

@JeffE - most likely sunk costs and that it's extremely difficult to switch PhD programs in most places.

@JeffE: I really like my advisor, and if I transferred schools I probably wouldn't be able to find someone as good.  It's just the department as a whole that I don't like.

Nice to see someone else at Warwick university in the UK, Coventry W. Midlands

@JeffE: It's often not possible to change advisors, and leaving a PhD means that you'll be permanently stuck writing code, working as an actuary, etc.

Imagine, as a thought experiment, making your points in an argumentative text—a paper*— that should pass peer review by your department (assuming intellectual honesty on their part) — so that you have to be careful that what you write is objective. You have to separate facts, beliefs, anecdotical evidence, etc. Then you have something you can pitch to people (in an informal context) while being professional and objective when describing facts, so it subsumes lots of other advice. (EDIT: lots of other things would be relevant to getting a paper accepted, but I only care about being careful with your opinion).
Moreover, framing things this way might help you expose them to anybody else — from people on this forum, to your advisor, to people who might change things at your school. Many of them will be excellent at arguing their point this way, you have to be better than them to win.

While this is a top school, it has several disadvantages in comparison to other top schools:

funding is inferior to other schools.
in my experience, dealing with the administration was frustrating [evidence]
while other schools allow you to pick your advisor, here you get it assigned through a rotation system. While it has the advantage of ...,  it prevents you from picking the advisor with which you'd work best (something that you probably want to read about if you didn't already).
...

The above isn't very convincing or accurate. Also, I don't have citations appropriate for your field. But hopefully you get the drift.
Also, as others said, if you can, give your opinion in an informal context (as recommended by others). The event should include moments for honest opinions.
*I suspect some would debate to which extent a paper is an argumentative text, because this depends somewhat on the scientific community — at the very least, the importance of some results is not just a fact, but something that (in this information overload era) you need to argue for, if you want to get attention of your readers. In case you haven't been taught this already, somebody might be failing you more than you think.

Unless he wants to write a paper in sociology, "should pass peer review by your department" is a strange piece of advice. A personal opinion has a value, and the prospective student knows that it is a one-person datapoint, rather that a conclusive research-level report. Otherwise I no one could write even a movie review/opinion.

@PiotrMigdal: certainly a personal opinion has a value, also in a paper. "We believe that our technique is more elegant than technique X" is an undeniable fact about the author's opinion, which can be useful in a paper. On the other hand, stating the same opinion as a fact (as in, "Our technique is more elegant than technique X") would be a questionable idea (unless there's clear enough evidence).

Focus on facts, rather than your emotional impressions.
Don't try to overgeneralize. Say what didn't work for you, rather than imply that it does not work for everyone (unless everyone agrees) or it won't work for the prospective student (who knows...).
You could say "I would have chosen differently" (ideally, adding the other possible options) or "overall, I dislike this program" rather than "this program sucks" or going into long rants.

+1 for framing it as "this is why it didn't work for me" -- as you say, "Focus on facts" and let the potential newbies make up their own mind.

@kwah This is one thing. But also but overgeneralizing one becomes less convincing (for a newcomer it's impossible to distinguish if the problem is with the place, or - this student).

lack of funding,

Here I think you can be straightforward. Probably the faculty are just as disappointed as you are.

administration being uncaring towards students,

I don't know exactly what this means; as a grad student I never tried to attract the attention of any administrator. If you have any specific problems you might bring them up.

general departmental atmosphere and culture among the grad students, general culture of the school,

If you're talking with an old friend privately, sure, bring it up. If you're meeting students at some big admit weekend, then you would piss people off by saying anything, and indeed there's not much reason for you to: prospectives will get a chance to observe the atmosphere for themselves.

poor location, etc etc.

Griping about this is pretty common. (Among faculty too!) I don't think it's especially frowned upon to complain about this, at least if your point of view is widely shared or if you are speaking to prospectives in private.
Indeed, I remember one student at one school telling me: "The only positive thing I have to say about the campus or the location is that there is adequate parking."

Also my school is the only top school in my field that has a "rotation system" for picking advisors, and that is generally framed as a benefit, and a reason to choose the school.

Tread a little bit more carefully here. "In retrospect, I believe that I would have fared better without this system; my experience was blah-blah-blah. But this is a system that our school touts, so you might talk to other people too, to get a sense of what would be best for you."
That said, if this were some kind of admit weekend, I'd consider inventing an excuse to be elsewhere for the day. If not many current grad students are willing to show up and talk to prospectives, that will itself serve as the warning you want to offer.

Your second point is strange. I have to come to the administration to do various thing, and if they call me "the little impotent boy", it's not nice. I don't know if this is the exact thing the OP meets, but it's the thing I would summarize as "administration being  towards PhD students". Again, it would use a clear example. In some schools, the administration fills all your journey papers and buys you tickets if you want etc. even when you're a PhD student, in some, they do not. So there can be "administration is careless".

@yo', I can see why you don't like being called "the little impotent boy". Here in the UK that would be considered workplace bullying / sexual harassment. I don't know the norms in Prague, but here it would be an industrial tribunal waiting to happen.

prospectives will get a chance to observe the atmosphere for themselves. — Not, not really, especially if it's a visit weekend, when everyone is wearing their bright and happy faces.

Not showing up will not help either. Prospective students don't know how many are there, and even if they knew, there are many reasons why they wouldn't show up (from administration limiting slots to they went all on a happy fun excursion).

To echo @D.W., please take all extended discussion to [chat].

I personally do not think you can warn perspective students without ruining your reputation at a departmentally sponsored event. If your department asks you, or even just provides an opportunity, to meet with perspective students, the expectation is that you will represent the department in the best possible way, while being honest. That means you should not volunteer things that you do not like. if you are asked a question about something you do not like, you should of course answer it honestly. Using such an event to express your views about the short comings of the department, is unprofessional and I would think less of a student who behaved that way. If a potential student contacts you unofficially, then it is less inappropriate to, but still inappropriate in my opinion, to disparage your department.

StrongBad has a good point. Presumably the goal of the event is to 'sell' potential students on the programme. @bitterstudent, you seem to be asking how you can undermine that goal without the rest of the department noticing. It seems to me that you have nothing to gain and quite a lot to lose from this behaviour. It might be better for you (and it would certainly be better for the department) if you avoid the event entirely. Be sick on the day if necessary. If you have a grudge against the department then I suggest you find a different way to express it which is less likely to backfire.

@AE yes, it it perfectly fine to have a grudge about a department and one can express those views in a professional manner (e.g., a blog post, a letter to the student newspaper, or some departmental events). A recruiting event is not one of those places.

Yes, absolutely. OP's bad feelings about the department/programme may well be entirely merited. But I can only see it harming him/her to express those feelings in the context of an event of this type - and given the evident strength of OP's feelings it might be hard to conceal them - so avoiding the event seems like the safest option, but that doesn't preclude raising the issues elsewhere.

I would have to agree with Chris here, at least to some extent. While I do agree that saying "This school sucks. Don't come here." would be extremely unprofessional, mentioning specific things that you think, shall we say, could use improvement isn't necessarily unprofessional. Giving a laundry list of everything you don't like and coming off as whiney is unprofessional, but honestly talking about the pros and cons of your institution/department isn't necessarily so. As Piotr said, though, focus on facts and let students form their own opinions based on them.

@ChrisWhite I always thought the events were to give the applicants the student perspective and not to give students a place to vent.

Sadly, I have visited departments where "giving the student perspective" meant either  "giving students a place to vent" or "lying".  The former is far more professional than the latter, in my opinion.

I can say that I was, as a last year master student I think, given the opportunity to speak to undergrads exactly in this way. There was a "lurking event", which ended with the "adults" leaving, and senior students openly discussing with juniors. It was very valuable to all I think.

You'll probably end up in conversations with the prospectives about the other schools they're considering.  Then you can highlight differences between your school and the other school without making (too) overt judgements on which you consider to be better.
For instance, with the rotating advisor feature, you could say, “Here advisors are assigned to students on a rotating basis, whereas at Other University you would have the option to choose an advisor that best meets your needs as a young scholar.”
If you don't have information about Other University, you can suggest they research it. “You should look into how graduate students are supported at Other University.  I know that here it's harder than it would seem.”
Or if you want to contrast the locations, say, “I imagine the weather's a lot better near Other University.”
In short, be subtle, and grown-up.

I have to disagree with "be subtle", on the grounds that when I was a prospective grad student, I would not have picked up on subtleties!

I would have to agree with "be subtle".  The task inherently calls for subtle advice rather than overt recommendation.  Students who are less perceptive / less socially adept are not going to get as many clues as other students: okay, that's life.

I agree with Anonymous that prospective grad students can be naïve.  I was, too.  I also agree with Pete.  OP does seem to be seeking a way to be subtle.

Subtle comments can be interpreted the opposite way you intended. Take Oppenheimer's advice to Dyson: "Well, Birmingham has much the best theoretical physicist to work with,
Peierls; Bristol has much the best experimental physicist, Powell; Cam-
bridge has some excellent architecture. You can make your choice." It doesn't picture Cambridge in a very good light, but it looks very similar to your comment on the weather.

@Davidmh: You seem to be making my point.  I would call Oppenheimer's advice subtle.  And I chose weather as a measure of quality of life since all the OP said was that the location was undesirable (to him).

Try to ask the opposite question: what characteristics does someone need to have not to hate this program?
Different people value different things. So to be happy there someone must put a lot of value on the positive points and put little value on the negative points.
You can tell them something along the lines: this place is awesome in X, Y and Z but doesn't work well in R, S, T. If you're gonna like it or not, depends on how much value you put in each of these factors.
You can even factor in your opinion saying: I, for example, put a lot of value in R and the fact that it doesn't work well here really bothers me.

If a school receives more applications than it can accept, it will often be in everybody's interest to have those who would be happier elsewhere, go elsewhere.  Simply saying the school is bad would be unprofessional, but helping those for whom the school would not be a good fit recognize that fact would allow the school to admit more people for whom it would be a good fit.

I really like this answer. I think you should lay low, keep your comments to a minimum, and generally only answer the questions people ask you--but if someone does ask for a broad-based response, say, "You'd be happy here if... [you like quiet old towns/you have money/you really, really don't want the hassle of picking an advisor/you're OK with fulfilling challenging requirements in order to meet a high standard in your field, etc.]"

I may be going against the grain of other faculty, but I want incoming students to have informed consent about our program. Like every other place, we have areas that we are proud about and we have areas that we could do better. Students should weigh the pros and the cons of coming here and make a good choice.
A student who believes they were fooled or conned into a program is not going to be a happy student.
That being said, saying bad things about the program in front of your advisors is bad form. The appropriate venue is for all of the students (current and prospective) to go out for beers/coffee after the department event and for the current students to tell the prospies the real perspective there.
We actively encourage our grad students to host incoming and prospective students in their homes precisely because we want them to have ample opportunity to get a good sense of what our department is like before they make the commitment.
Finally, many places do want the current students to vent their frustrations about the program to us in appropriate and constructive ways. You should look into having ways that you can have more student feedback into department operations. Talk to your chair or your director of graduate studies about creating a student feedback committee or its equivalent.

"I may be going against the grain of other faculty, but I want incoming students to have informed consent about our program."  I agree completely.  I am a little concerned by answers which indicate that the role of a current student when talking to a prospective student is to sell the program even to the point of lack of honesty.  That can't be right, and can it really be what faculty want?  (Is it really faculty who have expressed this opinion?  I'm not convinced.)

"The appropriate venue is for all of the students (current and prospective) to go out for beers..." Consider if there should be some non-liquor-dependent environment for making a connection with other people.

Point taken. Edited.

It would be best to keep your bitterness and negativity to yourself. You won't succeed in convincing anyone, and the only person who will end up looking bad is you.

[citation needed]  OP is just as entitled to express his opinions as anyone else.  Life is not all rainbows and chocolate; pretending otherwise is dishonest and, in the long run, worse for both the prospective students and the department.

I disagree with "You won't succeed in convincing anyone" — unless you come off as whiney. Also, I don't know, but if you're able to sell your research professionally, you should be able to describe the truth. (At least in my field, few results speak for themselves, so a paper is an argumentative text).

Let students discover by themselves that it is not a good program. You can do this by asking questions that send signals to guide them to another program.
By the way, are you sure that this program is actually bad? Maybe this negative point of view is your own perspective and doesn't reflect the reality. I think the most appropriate way to evaluate if the program is not well established is to think about fundamental questions.

What is the impact factor of the research made in your program (especially the papers written by professors)?

What kind of academic events (seminars, workshops etc.) are organized and how often?

Are professors open to interacting with PhD students?

the list can be extended.

The OP wrote that it's a top school and compared it to other top schools, so the answer to your questions are likely to be positive. Yet, the point he raises can also be relevant.

If you have the opportunity to socialize with a few of them in a more private fashion, for instance by going out at night with a small group, then maybe you have a chance to do it inconspicuously.
If you want to do it during the day then you might give an honest opinion about something you particularly dislike but without forcing it too much, otherwise they may start talking with each other and this will eventually reach the ears of colleagues of yours. Try doing it objectively and put in a few things you like as well, in other words mix it in.
There are good and bad things. I feel the administrative staff could be a bit more helpful and the culture isn't what I expect it to be. I think the main thing I dislike is the rotation system to pick your adviser they use here because if you're unlucky you might end up with something which is not a good fit for you. On the other hand I'm lucky in that I'm doing something I enjoy and working with colleagues I like.
Notice on how the paragraph finishes with the good stuff at the end, i.e. you like your work and some of your work colleagues. The part about the rotation system is in the middle of the sentence but I assure that's unlikely to leave their head; the prospect of being forced to work with people you don't like is not a good one. You can also add that sure the university is quite isolated but whether someone likes it or not is a subjective matter.
Now what I feel would be the better option is if you have access to a mailing list with all of them. Create an email account using Tor and send everyone a balanced email with your opinion (e.g. list format). Do not be rude or they'll discard your opinion right away. Be factual and let them draw their own conclusions.
Culture and location are subjective, I wouldn't mind doing a degree in the middle of a forest, in fact sounds like a fun experience (as long as there's proper accommodation, food, work infrastructure and Internet... so basically what I need to get work done).
Finally, I leave you with a question. If it's that bad why are you still there?

Update: Although the anonymous email option leaves no digital trail if done properly, people that know you may still suspect that it was you, for instance because of your writing style. Such suspicion may negatively impact your reputation.

I decided to downvote this. (1) Do not do anonymous reviews when you're not asked for them. This will back you up, the department will likely come to conclusion who it was and it'll be a hell on earth. (2) The last paragraph is IMHO rude. Quitting is not an option for many because of PhD contracts, bonds, money, administration, housing, ongoing projects, whatever. I'm quite sure that the OP has considered this. Moreover, this question is not about that at all, so it's significantly off-topic here.

@yo': "Quitting is not an option for many because of PhD contracts, bonds, money, administration, housing, ongoing projects, whatever." -- There is always an option and leaving is one of them. The OP seems unhappy with his/her current predicament to the point of wanting to drive prospective students away from the institution. As a prospective student/employee, if someone told me X is terrible don't come here, my first question would be then why are you at X?

@yo': "Do not do anonymous reviews when you're not asked for them. This will back you up, the department will likely come to conclusion who it was and it'll be a hell on earth." -- If the institution (or program) is so bad as the OP seems to imply then surely there will be other bitter students around. If bitter student is the only one unhappy then I'd take that as a sign the program is not the problem.

I support the "don't leave anonymous reviews" comment. Unless you are extremely cognizant of the quirks of your writing style, and are excellent at stripping out details of your particular complaints (to the point where they're virtually worthless), someone will be able to identify you. They'll recognize your style, or realize that you have the same complaints as Anonymous, or they'll realize that Anonymous had the exact same lousy advisors that you had, or something. Not proof that you did it, but they'll suspect strongly enough that your reputation will suffer.

Added a note about the possible reputation hit in connection to sending an anonymous email.


text:
How to persuade my advisor to keep working with me even if my grades are poor?
I am an international grad student in ECE in USA, in the field of Wireless Communications, and I am on my second semester of my Master's program.
Last week I learned by advisor was unhappy about the grades I got last semester. More specifically, I took two courses and took B+ and A-. On the first course I thought I had scored A or more but I got a bad score on the final; something I wasn't expecting. On the second one, I had a panic attack during the final and I couldn't think calmly, so I got a score of 60, when having 90+ on midterms. I told this to my advisor, and also said that being away from home also made it harder for me psychologically, the reply was that many people have problems on the first semester, but also that if I don't correct my grades this semester it may mean that I am not suitable for doing research in this field, and that I would need to search for another research group, or leave with a master's and work at industry.
Note that my grades are over the department minimum for PhD entry. So it's my advisor's idea, not a department requirement.
So what should I do? Of course I will try my best to be improve this semester but I think I need to have a plan B in case my grades don't improve too much. What should I do to persuade my advisor?

So what should I do? Study harder or leave. I don't know what else you can do.

B+ and A-...what was the prof expecting? Full A+?

@MathNewb Maybe? There are definitely courses for which I would consider everything but A/A+ as a rather disappointing result for a grad student.

"Study smarter" is usually better than "study harder".

Implicit in your question is that your goal should be to persuade your advisor (that your are a good student? that he should not/cannot get rid of you? that part is not clear). This is taking a too narrow view of your options. Also, there is not enough data in your question. What is your goal? Do you just want an MSc degree? Do you want to work in the academia? Are you interested specifically in the subject your advisor works on? All of these things are important in determining what you should do next.

An advisor-student relation has parallels to a marriage: both sides need to agree to join it. So, if your advisor is not satisfied with your marks, prepare for a different one. He's not the only one.

scaaahu has given the most pragmatic answer in a comment:

Study harder or leave.

If it is very important to your advisor that your grades are better, those seem to me pretty much the options.
That being said, I think most people don't really care so much about grades that they would kick out a perfectly fine grad student for grade's sake alone, even if he is well above the formal requirements. Honestly, I would assume that this is not, or at least not only, about grades.
How is your research going along? Are you progressing at least as well as the majority of the other students in the lab? Is your advisor still enthusiastic about your topic? It is not entirely unlikely that your supervisor is not super-happy with some other part of your work, and just using your suboptimal grades as a simpler, more objectively validatable reason to put pressure on you.

Giving you a +1 for the last three lines. This is an important point. The supervisor may have the feeling that research progress is not sufficient to ensure graduation in the long run. The advisor may be reluctant to discuss this with the student, as it is just too easy to evade the discussion ("this may be your feeling, but I am still confident to eventually make it"). Using some "objective" criterion makes it easier for the advisor. On the other hand, the advisor may simply think that the courses are ridiculously easy to pass, and thus expects A+ from research-quality "material".

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Dealing with late assignments as a teacher assistant
I am a graduate student and I'm T.A. of a graduate course. The professor asked us to give some assignments to the students. I have done so and a homework assignment, which contains an optional part for gaining extra marks, I designed.
Moreover, I have set a policy for late assignment being as follows:

One day: Losing 25%
Two days: Losing 50%
Three days: Losing 75%
Further outlasting ones: 100%

My intention was turning in both mandatory and optional parts together in one single written document. However a couple of students turned in that mandatory part by its due date, and optional parts after the due date.
Now, I am in a dilemma whether should I penalize their assignment or not. Also how about that optional part? Should I award extra marks or not?

I don't understand why you don't just follow your stated policy? Grade the mandatory part normally, grade the optional part with the lateness penalty?

A good tip is to always state very strict rules. It is easier to "bend" rules then for students who might have some personal reason why they are late, such as illness or so.

Yeah, penalize their entire assignment to show them who's boss, maybe even give them a 0 for both parts. They will be in awe of your toughness.

My response to your question would be: Why are you making these decisions and not the instructor? Even if the instructor may have delegated the task of setting the policy, he/she should at the very least vet such decisions. I would expect this discussion to take place between the two of you (plus any other TAs on the team).

Thank you for your answer. However, we cannot consult the professor about this issue. Because he is too busy to respond.

@HiI'mfrogatto That is very disturbing. One of the main reasons for requiring TA work as part of a graduate program is to have the students learn the business of running a course from someone who already knows how to do it.

boy, i'd hate to be a TA at frogatto's school.  is your professor too busy to teach and manage his class?

@robertbristow-johnson Agree with you. I'd also hate! But we're required to be. That's mandatory.

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


text:
PhD supervisor is taking really long to read my thesis
I am at the final point of my pretty satisfying PhD. I like working alone and I did not need constant supervision, and I had a pretty good relationship with my supervisor until now. I noticed in the past that when it was time to proof-read papers, it took EXTREMELY LONG TIME to do it, and almost always waited until the day of the deadline (however, it was always corrected at the end).
Now that it is time for my thesis, though, things are getting difficult. I sent  the first experimental chapter more than one month ago, and it still hasn't been read, every time saying that there has some other deadline. I have been asking three times a week, and every time the the same thing is said. Of course, I don't find any pleasure in keep pressuring my supervisor, and I wish it was understood that it HAS to be done. I am afraid that it he takes 1+ month to check a chapter, it will take a year to read the whole stuff!
In the meantime I have kept working on the thesis and I will finish writing the first draft soon, but it hasn't been corrected yet. I am not sure about the course of action here. How to deal with this situation?
Should I talk with the director of studies? Should I keep pressuring my supervisor? Should I give a deadline?
If I decide to talk with the director of studies, should I tell my supervisor first?
The main point is that until now I have had a good relationship and I don't want to ruin it just now. However, I need to find a way to push to get the supervisor to complete the job.

Edit to add some related details from the comments:

I'm in the UK, and my research is in a field related to psychology.
My second supervisor is not involved in my project, and it wouldn't be appropriate for me to contact them for this question.
My scholarship ended a few months back, and I'm now being paid as a research assistant with my supervisor for a few more months.
All research work has been completed, the analysis are done, and I'm almost finished with writing. Changing departments is not an option.

EDIT: Thank you to everybody for your help. This is the way I proceeded: without mentioning to my supervisor about this chapter again, I just discussed about the timing to complete my PhD, mentioning that I plan to finish writing in around one month. This requires me to complete some bureaucratic paperwork soon, which means that we have to set up some deadlines, find examiners etc., which also means that my thesis will be corrected before a deadline. Since my supervisor works better with deadlines, I think that this method will work. Therefore, I ignored the particular problem about correcting the single chapter, and I used the main topic (finishing my PhD) as a way to get things rolling. Not sure if this is the best solution, but I think it may work for me.
Thank you again, your support has been very appreciated.

What did your supervisor say about the impact on your completion date when you discussed this with him? Is there any reason why you need him to read chapters separately, rather than just reading the whole thing? And is it normal in your department to only have one supervisor?

I have a second supervisor which however I never interacted with. This is normal in my department. We never really discussed a completion date, but I wish to finish this year as I would like to move on with my life, and I expressed this to him many times.
Finally, sending the Chapter separately is the way he asked me to proceed.

In that case, consider transfering departments: your department is failing you. Where is it?

I am sure that @EnergyNumbers didn't mean to ask for that. They are probably asking about U.S. vs Italy, say, which impacts administrative structure, hierarchy, and possible actions taken; or maybe raise the possibility to have a math department person read a CS thesis, or some such. In any case, I find "none of your business" a bit sharp towards someone volunteering to help.

This is a surprisingly common problem.

I didn't mean  to be excessively blunt. My university is in the UK, my supervisor is English, and I work in a field related to Psychology.

Has the chapter already received feedback from others and improvements or is it a first draft? If it is in a rough state (grammar, spelling errors, poor figures), then your supervisor may not be inclined to prioritize it due to the extra work. If it is already basically polished, then that's another situation.

@ChrisK this first Chapter is basically polished, and I am trying to give him "almost complete" draft so that his work is minimum.

On the day my thesis was due my supervisor told me he hadn't had a chance to read it and would do so by next week.

@EnergyNumbers, all my research portion is finished, the analysis are done and most of my Chapter are written by now. This is my 3rd+ year, and I consider myself in the final stage. Sorry, but changing supervisor/department now is not an option

A friend of mine in grad school took a creative approach to this problem. He asked to make an appointment in a free block on his advisor's schedule. They agreed: We'll meet on Thursday at 3 o'clock. The appointed time rolled around, and they met. My friend said: "So, you have nothing going on for the next hour?" Advisor: "Yes, that's true." Student: "Okay, then, please read my paper. I'll wait." You need to have a very good relationship with your advisor to pull off a stunt like that, but it worked in that one case.

this question is quite old but it keeps receiving some positive feedback. I am happy to say that last in September 2016, as expected, my supervisor read my whole thesis and I graduated in January 2017 :) The "forced deadline" method actually worked.

While dan1111's answer is good, I have a different perspective.

First, calm down.  Asking him 3 times a week about something is way too often.  To calm down, see the points below.
Second, it sounds like you didn't agree on any timeline for the thesis writing process and feedback, but you're concerned about it so you should have this discussion.
Third, it's perhaps not a big deal if your advisor doesn't give you critical feedback during the initial writing process, and I don't know that this is so common.  Possibly when you write later chapters that you will realize some ways you want to revise your earlier chapters anyway.  Your advisor and committee will give feedback before or at your defense, and maybe your advisor should provide feedback once or twice before you arrange the defense just to make sure the thesis is reasonable (this should be discussed in your conversation about the timeline).  I don't think I gave my advisor drafts of my thesis chapter by chapter, but just a full draft when I was done (though he had given me feedback on paper write-ups beforehand).

"3 times a week about something is way too often." It depends on the person.  Some faculty do not remember yesterday.  Others may have gotten fifty other requests since yesterday.

The point is that my supervisor office is two steps from my office, so we meet continuosly during the day, and I do not miss chance to remind him about my work. I know that if I don't do it, he will completely forget about this. Apparently, even if I remind him, he still doesn't care. For now, my plan is to keep writing my thesis and when it'll be more or less finished I'll have a more serious talk with him about deadlines.

@dan1111 Ah, I missed that comment.  (I think it wasn't there when I originally read the question.)

@Vaaal Does he really forget and not care or is he just really busy?  I would not be happy to get constant reminders---it shows a lack of trust and patience and it's unclear to me if this is warranted.  (I would also hope to make the timeline clear to the student as an advisor, and perhaps your advisor is not doing that.  OTOH, many times I think I explain something to students very clearly, they come away with a rather different impression than I do.)

@Kimball I think he really is busy, but I also believe that if he wanted, he could make time for reading it. And yes, we never agreed on the timeline, which is a problem. Maybe I should address this first...

I concur with Kimball's first suggestion: calm down. My second observation is that it appears you feel entitled to have your supervisor help you: "I wish he just understood that he HAS to do it" and "I need to find a way to push him to do his job." These statements have a very egotistical tone to them. Your supervisor doesn't have to do anything. His taking you on as a student is adding more to his workload so you should be gracious he took you on in the first place. I think a lot of PhD students misunderstand this (I know I did). Editing your drafts is a small part of his job, just remember that.
My suggestion, go and meet with your supervisor and explain your concerns. If you want to be done by a certain date, let him know. I met with my advisor once and we had this exact conversation about when I was going to graduate and we set some tentative deadlines. My advisor was ridiculously slow at getting back to me with written feedback but he eventually did and all was fine. Now that I'm on the other side, I know why he was slow and I have no problem with it.
The bottom line, talk with him and do not go above his head. If you go above him without telling him first, depending on how spiteful (and tenured) he is, you may have to find yourself another supervisor. He may have a lot of work just pop up and might not have time to have you as a student anymore or the work you are doing is no longer good enough to earn a PhD. Probably won't happen but why take the chance of potentially angering your supervisor.

"Editing your drafts is a small part of his job" - but it IS part of his job. I think your answer is a bit too kind on the supervisor. Of course, diplomacy is key, and it's rarely good to act all entitled. But taking on a PhD student is a commitment, not just doing a favour.

"His taking you on as a student is" ... a formal agreement, and yes, he does have an obligation to hold up his end of the bargain.

As other people said, I do not agree with this answer. I do think that my supervisor has some obligation towards me. I am sorry if I seemed like a annoying student continuosly sending mails to my supervisor, but this is not the case, as I have been really independent throught my PhD. However, I know that if I don't pressure him he is not going to give me feedback. And he has to give me some feedback, as this is also part of his job.

I fear the veil of "tuition" vs. the normal act of simply paying for a service gives people reason to claim that the service provider (in this case, professor) and somehow not obligated to perform the service that their client (the student) is paying for. But, to me, this is the same as when, say, the cable company sends a "contractor" to perform the work that I've paid to have done; the contractor is responsible for doing the work properly, and the company that employs him/her is responsible for making sure he's able to do so (and that he does so, and making things right if he doesn't).

Your story is from your perspective... what about the supervisor's perspective? I'm looking at this from a tenure-track professors perspective in the US. Other institutions/locations may differ. What is your supervisors workload now? Does he have an extra class this semester? Does he have several other students to supervise? Is he on several committees? Is he writing a grant to pay for research assistantships? Was funding recently cut and he no longer has as many teaching assistants? He is also a person with a life outside of academia. Tell the whole story, then maybe I'll be more sympathic.

If I decide to talk with the director of studies, should I tell him
  first?

Never do this with PhD supervisors unless you want to change the supervisor. I don't think you want to change the supervisor at this stage.
You can take a different route to pressure him. Ask him about requesting an extension for the PhD as it takes a long time for him to review. You can say, it will take you X number of weeks/months to refine once you get his comments. Usually this will pressure him to priorities your review.

exactly, I think that my work is really mature for finishing it in a few month, and I don't wish to an extension. As my supervisor is slightly lazy and take things slowly, he may actually accept my suggestion.

I didn't mean to get an extension, just to pressure your supervisor indirectly. Usually they have to provide a reason for the extension, so he has not real reason for the extension. So, he may prioritised your review.

Do you feel satisfied with your work and your writeup? If the advisor doesn't want to read it (yet?), you might try bouncing individual chapters off other students in the group (in exchange for looking over their work, obviously). If it is an almost finished version, you could try the second advisor instead.

I recommend this approach but only as a first pass before the supervisor.  You will get feedback on writing quality and crucially on things like clarity; your supervisor will avoid having to get bogged down in typos and be able to turn chapters round quickly.


text:
Is there a name for the inverse of the impostor syndrome?
Question: The impostor syndrome seems to be common in academia and there are quite a few questions about it. I wonder if there is something like the inverse impostor syndrome.
I'm not referring to the Dunning–Kruger effect, I don't feel particularly superior to anyone. That's not it. Metaphorically: I don't feel like I have a greater slice of cake because I don't see any cake, even though everybody speaks about how big, moist and delicious their slices are and how knowledgeable they are about cakes.
To me, everybody feels like an impostor. (And everything feels like a lie)
Is there a name for this feeling? I deeply and seriously wonder about how accurate and shared it may be, if it has a name then most likely I'm not alone in this and therefore maybe I would not be completely mistaken.
End of the question.
Examples (in case you need them, I work in computer science):

Head of the department speaking about "big data" for an excel file of several megabytes.
Planning setting the deadlines looking exclusively at the calendar (and not the work).
Gantt where activity A ends before activity B starts. A requires B.
Becoming an expert on a topic overnight because it's trendy and a buzzword.
Correcting English grammar and paper structure, for the worse.
Paper reporting evaluation results before any code has been written.
Paper reporting evaluation results when the code does a different thing.
Coauthoring a paper, without even laying their eyes on it.
Directing a thesis, not checking the formulas, only the "easy" parts.
A researcher makes the GUI, gets all the credit.
Constant meetings with no agendas or minutes (or effects)
Micromanaging without actual managing
Powerpoint before actual research or Powerpoint instead any research
Re-selling old ideas with new labels and minor cosmetic changes that are for the worse
Most of the tweets with the tag #overlyhonestmethods. However that's being sloppy, I mean being an impostor, focusing solely on how things look because:

Doing some research formally (writing proofs) and empirically (developing a system and testing it with a benchmark, creating a benchmark!) and writing about it on a paper takes much longer than
Writing some fiction on a paper, which anyway takes much longer than
Subliminally collaborating on a paper and putting your name in it.

BTW: one of the problems why there are so many impostors (as I see it) is that open source code is not requested.

Powerpoint before actual research or Powerpoint instead any research — If I had a nickel ...

I honestly didn't know whether I should flag this as too broad, off-topic or primarily opinion-based. In the end, I went with too broad.

Welcome to earth.  There are humans here.  Many of them live with their flaws and foibles.  Some of them might call you autistic or anal-retentive.  Whether they're right or not, continue to live life according to your values.  If you have boundless energy and resources, you can attempt conversion of them.

That question comes suspiciously close to a rant, but I think the actual question ("how is it called if I think everybody is just making shit up?") is interesting.

Do you feel like you are doing the best work you are capable of? I try to refrain from armchair psychology, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few years of internalized guilt lead to strong cynical feelings.

@xLeitix: But that question is rather more about psychology, and hasn't really got anything to do with academia.

This question appears to be off-topic because it is about psychology.

@NateEldredge "Hasn't got anything to do with academia" is too strong a statement. I would really want to keep this question around, I think it is much too important.

I don't see how this has anything to do with the imposter syndrome, or the inverse thereof.

+1 because to me, almost everybody feels like an imposter.

While the question is pretty opinionated the share number of answers and comments show it touches a real, existing problem in academia. Good examples, by the way.

Can your second paragraph be summarized, "the cake is a lie?" :)

I'm curious, do you really mean everyone seems like an impostor?  It would help if you could clarify that.  I certainly share your disappointment frequently, and your laundry list is spot on-- on the other hand there are people and actions I've seen that inspire me greatly and give me hope that we can do better.  Do you share that perception at all?

I propose a name for it: outposter syndrome

Congratulations: you have just discovered that your department is a microcosm of American politics. Virtually every flaw on your bulleted list (and the overarching disillusionment) seems applicable to our government in some way.

I call it "drinking the kool-aid".  If I have time I'll write about the phenomenon in an answer.

The list of bad behavior doesn't sound like everybody 'feels' like an impostor. You are saying that you think everybody is an impostor.

@Jigg I think many things but here I wanted to focus on what I perceive. I perceive a lot of talking, very little making and strong discrepancies between what is said to be done and what is actually done, i.e. pretending. Moreover, I perceive greater success and success opportunities based mostly on pretending, as opposed to real merit. Of course I can be completely mistaken.

Research used to be a calling (or an expensive hobby for aristocrats) now it's a career like any other. The goal is to secure your position, make cash, and access to higher social status. As the whole thing is mostly state-funded, it's inevitable that the system is political/corrupt/etc. I'm blessed to be in a research group where the actual science is the primary objective, but I know not everyone is...

'success and success opportunities based mostly on pretending, as opposed to real merit' what was a real relief to me is that in fact, if you have actual merit, you can be successful as well.

Not relevant to your actual question, but the inverse of the impostor syndrome is probably technically the Capgras syndrome where you mistakenly believe someone else is an impostor.

Common naïve youth, before self-realization? The naivety being that you don't (yet) realize your own shortcomings and weaknesses because you are still conditioned by a educational system that focuses on so heavily on promoting success and unending competition. Potentially dysthymia if not school specific. Or merely your coming of age as a curmudgeon.

Have you forwarded this to The Professor is In?    In other words, welcome to academia.

Isn't this just becoming skeptical of people?

What does this have to do with academics?

@bmargulies the impostor syndrome is usual among academics, both the original and the "inverse" in this question may be related with the peer review, academics are mostly judged only by other academics, which may lead to some Emperor's New Clothes effect and ad verecundiam fallacies, among others. I guess academicians would hope something better from research but given how everything is structured maybe we should not expect nothing much better (except for coincidences).

Walk away. If what you describe is as common in your department as you think it is, you should seriously consider changing departments, or changing fields, or leaving academia entirely. It really is not this bad everywhere.

@JeffE I'm on it.

have you read the book "Catcher in the Rye"?

@J.Roibal nope, do you think that there is something to highlight from it?

@Trylks what you are describing (a feeling that most people are full of BS) is a feeling shared by the protagonist of the group, 'Holden Caulfield'. It may benefit you to read the book, if for no other reason, than to be able to relate to a character who is experiencing a similar point of view. Here is a link to the wikipedia article about Catcher in the Rye: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Catcher_in_the_Rye

I have on occasion felt the same myself (sometimes still do), and know of many disillusioned PhD students who felt exactly like that. There are dark moments in the night, when you are wondering whether funding for CS will be cut down entirely eventually, when funding agencies also get to the conclusion that CS is one big science of imposters.
However, what you need to realize is that this is in fact impostor syndrome - only that you are not comparing yourself to your peers, but rather you and your peers to e.g., other sciences. However, the reason why it happens are the same: you have unrealistically high expectations of the research community, which it cannot possibly live up to in reality. You know the shortcomings of your community all too well, but do not have enough insight to see that other research communities or professions are also far from perfect. Yes, all the crap you mention happens on occasion, but guess what? We are all human, so it is simply unrealistic to assume that every professor will always be a good manager (or even a decent human being), that every dean will always still be an active and good researcher, or that every paper is always published with the most noble intentions.
I should also mention that your conclusion that, if you are not alone in this feeling, you surely need to be right, is fundamentally flawed. History has shown all over again that many people can be wrong in the same way at the same time.
Edit:
By the way, I think your question title is wrong. The opposite of the impostor syndrome is, as you say, more or less the Dunning–Kruger effect. What you are referring to is not the opposite.

+1 for pointing out that this is still imposter syndrome, but just at a different scale (collective, rather than individual, and perhaps not applying to all memebers of the collection).

I fully agree with the "you're not referring to the opposite of IS" part

Brilliant observation that it can be framed as impostor syndrome on a larger scale... on the other hand, the difference between "impostor syndrome" and "observation that I/we/many-of-us are impostors" is a judgement call posing in something that sounds like a clinical diagnosis, so that seems like a bit of posturing in itself.  You seem to believe it's impostor syndrome in this case (you say the OP has "unrealistically high expectations"); I'm not so sure.  A possible alternate point of view is that we can, and should aspire to, do better. Even if all the other departments are doing it too.

@DonHatch I fully agree. "Clinical diagnosis" was not my intention, just trying to provide a different point of view. Also, by no means, did I intend to suggest that we should not strive to do better.

I don't think imposter syndrome is a clinical diagnosis anyway. If it's not listed in the manuals with definitive diagnostic criteria, then I think you're free to treat it like an English word and call it how you see it. Granted, psychologists may or may not concur with your generalisation from individuals to groups :-)

"unrealistically high expectations of the research community" It's not really a matter of expectations. We have a community of people that are doing good and bad work to some extent (different in expectations and reality), the problem arises when bad work provides better career opportunities than good work. It seems to be an optimization problem, trying to pretend the most (get impact, stats, projects…) with the least (time and effort) investment on actual research (that someone else will do and nobody will notice). The classical talkers and doers. (I continue)

The whole thing seems to be designed for pretenders to rule over exploited researchers. But again, if I am right in my perceptions then the problem is not how things are (as compared with expectations), but the direction in which the area will evolve, the forces that drive it and, in short, the optimisation performed by the fitness function, disregarding real merit and promoting pretenders. It doesn't help if other areas of research or aspects of humanity are equally doomed, this is not about comparing, hence it's not the impostor syndrome at a greater scale, IMHO. (I continue)

Finally, for a small clarification, I have noticed some concern about this question being a rant or psychology based, I think it's relevant in the community 1, 2 and I can guarantee this is not a rant, I'm not angry at all, I'm disappointed and I'm very concerned (quite worried in fact) about how something as important as research seems to be evolving into lots of useless slides. Maybe we need a war, I don't know about the solutions (and that one is probably stupid), I only wanted to know how "real" the problem may be.

@Trylks It is an interesting discussion item whether the current incentive model in CS academic research works or not. 5 years ago I would have said it is horribly broken. Now, after a number of quite positive experiences, I am not sure anymore how fundamentally broken things are.

@xLeitix I'd not say it's fundamentally broken, I'd say it's easily corruptible and somewhat corrupted, to a greater or lesser extent depending on the area. Transparency (e.g. open source), as in politics, is not a complete solution but it helps a big deal to keep corruption to a limit, however I don't see it being enforced. You point to positive experiences, I'm having many negative experiences lately and I'm preparing to leave academia. I don't think I'll get much more positive experiences outside, but at least I'll get properly paid (I won't leave otherwise). Point: compare w/ industry.

I'm not sure I buy this argument.  According to this interpretation, anyone who thinks that anything is not good is suffering from "impostor syndrome by proxy".  If I believe the hamburger place down the street serves bad hamburgers, is that impostor syndrome because I'm comparing it to other hamburgers I've eaten elsewhere that were better?  Your answer really applies only if the issue was specifically that the OP believed his own field was bad compared to other fields, but what he's describing seems more general than that.  It's more like "existential angst" or "lack of faith in humanity".

I agree with BrenBarn. And also, I don't think Impostor syndrome really has anything to do with this. Impostor syndrome is the false belief that you are not as good as you are made out to be. (If it wasn't false, it'd just be an accurate observation). It sounds here as though OP's colleagues truly pretend to be better than they are. If so - then they are impostors. There's no syndrome, they are simply good old fashioned impostors.

Is there a name for this feeling?

If there was a name for this feeling, that would imply that this interpretation was just a feeling and wasn't real (and that impostors are not the norm in your field).
You don't believe that your feeling is wrong? Do you?
The actual term you're looking for is probably cargo cult worshipers and that's not the feeling you have, but the label you'd use to describe the impostors in your field. Richard Feynman even coined the term "cargo cult science", which would imply that he found the majority in such a science to be negligent and most of them potential impostors.
See this entry in Wikipedia on cargo cult:

The metaphorical use of "cargo cult" was popularized by physicist
  Richard Feynman at a 1974 Caltech commencement speech, which later
  became a chapter in his book Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!, where
  he coined the phrase "cargo cult science" to describe activity that
  had some of the trappings of real science (such as publication in
  scientific journals) but lacked a basis in honest experimentation.

See his explanation:

Following is an excerpt from speech (taken from the book).
In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they
  saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same
  thing to happen now. So they've arranged to imitate things like
  runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden
  hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like
  headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas--he's the
  controller--and they wait for the airplanes to land. They're doing
  everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it
  looked before. But it doesn't work. No airplanes land. So I call these
  things cargo cult science, because they follow all the apparent
  precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they're missing
  something essential, because the planes don't land.

I suppose that term "cargo cult" could be used as a qualifier for many different areas. For instance, if one was so inclined, one could say "cargo cult academia", or "cargo cult business", and so on...

There actually specific terms/descriptions for what you are experiencing. A few of them are "becoming jaded", "cynical", or - depending on what connotation you'd prefer - "being a realist". This isn't rare, and in general is a side effect of increasing knowledge and experience.
The impostor syndrome and Dunning-Kruger effect is all about a false, biased impression of reality. If you have simply become a cynic, this can become a bias where you come to just assume - and automatically perceive - everyone to be full of it, regardless of whether or not they are.
I have found as I get older and learn more about the world I have to actively fight this bias and assumption that everyone else is full of it, for a simple and all too common reason: people are in fact very often full of it. But let's look at why:
1) As humans we usually do not know what we do not know.
2) Being wrong actually feels exactly like being right, all the way to the very instant we realize our wrongness.
3) There is so much to know about the world that even the most brilliant of us can know only a tiny fraction of what there is to know.
4) The world is complicated and difficult to predict.
5) We have very limited knowledge and ability to predict things, yet we must try to be the masters of our fate and make decisions anyway.
6) Our very physical bodily makeup causes us to be drawn to confidence, and it is often easier to be confident when one knows little. In the words of Bertrand Russel, "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."
7) Bluffing can be a highly effective real-world strategy ("faking it" is often a highly profitable strategy).
...and more.
One of the "treatments" for this bias, if you will, is to remind yourself that while all the above is true, it is just as true of ourselves as it is of others. Most material in the world might very well be chaff, but sometimes you find something of great value, and it isn't good to just plug one's ears and believe nothing or to believe everything.
In other words, work towards a healthy skepticism instead of biased cynicism.
Another issue, dealing with #3 above, is as one learns one quickly develops knowledge that is greater in that specific area then the vast majority of living people. As a simple example, a basic undergraduate course in statistics can give you greater understanding of stats and probability than over 95%+ of all people in the entire world (if you pay attention and think about the material, anyway). With such training you almost immediately notice that nearly every use of statistics in mass media (to say nothing of politics) is wrong, biased, an outright lie, and is at least fundamentally unreliable.
This applies to all of your bullet examples. If we assume most human skills and traits are normally distributed, it suddenly becomes no surprise that most people (managers or otherwise) aren't very good leaders, aren't remarkably honest, tend to exaggerate or make stuff up, and so on.
However, this is all very much the reason why we have science in the first place: to err is human, and oh how oft we err. If we weren't so prone to such errors, we wouldn't need specially developed methods refined over many, many years to help us move towards correctness.
I personally feel that much of the reason for doing science is precisely this realization that most of what we know and believe is probably wrong - and if we are right about anything, it's mostly an accident. And anyone who pretends otherwise is full of it, whether they know it or not - and that includes me, too.

"it is just as true of ourselves […]". No! I refuse to join this game. I may do research, but I will focus on the quality of the systems I build and not on the venues where I publish the results, actually I may simply publish everything on GitHub. It may be cynicism or the engineer in me pulling back, but as I grow older I am less and less interested in my h-index and the papers, and more on the systems I build. It's not about being famous, wrong or right for me, but about building something that actually works and changes the world or just speaking about some fiction. (Now this is a rant)

A literal answer to a literal form of the question ("is there a name for this?") is "jumping on a bandwagon". :)
CompSci obviously has the blessing/burden of the internet. Probably the only other things equally over-hyped (!?!) are gambling, porn, and various fraud possibilities. The only "completely legal" one of these four is CompSci... but the pressures to fudge are amazingly great.
A comparable bandwagon-corruption (at least in the U.S.) was/is "basic science", esp. math and physics, after WWII, where the "bandwagon" was that this would "save us from the commies" (because building The Bomb had ended WWII... crypto was still secret). So then we had the NSF (National Science Foundation) throwing money at people in math and physics for a while... so NSF funding became a test of credibility, and often at R1 universities nowadays it's impossible to get tenure if y're not vetted by the NSF. But there's not enough money to go around, etc. Unsurprisingly, the NSF has evolved into (pardon my saying-so...) an intensely bureaucratic entity, decisions made in ever-deteriorating fashion.
Similarly, not everyone can successfully author a video-game or internet-app or ... "Market saturation" is another very-relevant descriptor in such situations.
"People tend to jump on(to) band-wagons."

I agree that the current popularity of CS (both, with students and funding agencies) is a blessing and a curse at the same time.

My two cents: Academia is a very competitive field. Many smart people have to compete for a small number of opportunities, such as (but not limited to) funding, grants, positions, publications on prestigious journals etc. In such a highly competitive environment it is partially necessary to oversell yourself (and your team's) abilities and the importance of your research, otherwise better "salesmen" might easily steal your "spotlight", even when their research might be less significant (according to who is another question) than yours. Of course the more important your research is and the more prestigious your position is and the more weight you carry in the scientific community, allows you not always having to oversell yourself and your abilities. But for the most of us who do not belong to those chosen few, networking, connections and advertising our work is certainly necessary in most of the cases.
In this scenario, how much each one of us oversells himself is a question of personal ethics, upbringing and aspirations. Many go overboard and might fit the negative scenarios you describe. But this type of behavior is not Academia specific and the world is full of such people in any profession. This is a fact of life and you have to "deal with it". In some cases, it is useful that such people actually exist for you to realize what not to become and who you really want to be.
But as a friendly advice, you also need to to calm and vent down. Focus on the positive aspects of life and your work and make your own rules on how you play the game. If your working environment is toxic, minimize its effects by living a full, meaningful life outside Academia. Our work is only a part of who we are and in the long run and there are many more important things in life.

The specific question seems to be "is there a name for this", which this answer doesn't actually address as far as I can tell.

False humility.

deprecating one's own sanctity, gifts, talents, and accomplishments
  for the sake of receiving praise or adulation from others - Wikipedia on Humility

The "impostor" doesn't realize how awesome they are, and downplays themselves. When you see that you are smarter and more aware than those around you, but choose to not see this, that is exactly what impostor syndrome is.
From Wikipedia:

The impostor syndrome (also spelled imposter syndrome), sometimes
  called impostor phenomenon or fraud syndrome, is a psychological
  phenomenon in which people are unable to internalize their
  accomplishments. Despite external evidence of their competence, those
  with the syndrome remain convinced that they are frauds and do not
  deserve the success they have achieved. Proof of success is dismissed
  as luck, timing, or as a result of deceiving others into thinking they
  are more intelligent and competent than they believe themselves to
  be.

In your case, you go on to consider that the others around you should know better. And because you don't accept and represent your true nature that is "smarter"/"more aware" than those around you, you become an impostor like them.
In effect, it is two sides of the same coin. You're looking at those around you as being on one side of the coin, and you on another. The truth is that you're both the same coin.
We are brought up to believe that it is "good" or "right" to be humble. And to an extent, this is truth. I'm not arguing that. However, it seems that you've taken this point to the extreme where you're now falsely humble.
It is false humility that is the impostor you are looking for.

Beautiful unexpected answer, though I'm not sure it's the one I want to settle on / internalize.  "Seeing I'm smarter and more aware than those around me" seems like a dangerous point of view (particularly the "smarter" part), as it can put up a barrier to being able to convince people of anything or change anything.

As long as you're "trying" to change the others, you'll be running into a wall. If you and them both are suffering from "impostor syndrome" (although on opposite sides of it), then you can lead them out of it by changing it in yourself. When you are no longer an impostor, they will want to stop being impostors as well. Whether it is "dangerous" or not is irrelevant. What is the truth? Test it. Find out for yourself if it's true or not.

You seem to be suggesting that the only way to effect change is to be a role model.  While I agree that can be an effective tool, I disagree with your assertion that trying to effect change by other means, e.g. pointing out problems and incongruities, is doomed;  I have seen those be effective tools as well.  In any case, my point is that with any of these tools, coming at it with the attitude "I'm smarter than them/you" tends to sabatoge the effort, in my belief/experience, and omitting such words opens doors. Thus my resistence to incorporating such words into my model of what's going on.

Yeah. I'm pretty jaded. I guess I don't care if I come across poorly anymore, and accept that some will write me off simply when I know I'm smarter than them. shrug

It is called realistic worldview or healthy criticism. Once one has a sufficient impressive publication list and good political sense, academia can be a very nurturing place for laud incompetence. A friend of mine called it "Stephen Hawking syndrome" referring said authors competence in philosophy.
One problem is the hero worship: "If someone is smart / talented than she/he is competent in anything". At a (or more like beyond) career point most people in academia really believe this and applies to themselves as well as other people judged.


text:
Should I publish as sole author and do everything or invite coauthors so that I mostly just do the programming and benchmarking?
Consider the concept of opportunity cost.
There are two possible situations:

I program everything, do the evaluation with a benchmark, tell nobody, write everything and publish alone.
I program everything, do the evaluation with a benchmark, write something and publish with four other authors, that mostly write the paper.

What should I do?
To answer your possible questions:

They are not going to program, no matter what, so that doesn't help to save any time.
Publishing without telling them anything may be perceived in a suspicious way, specially by external reviewers and considering there may be past papers in which I wasn't alone.
It may also be perceived as if I'm not a good team player, which worries me, as finding a new job may be harder due to this.
The order of the authors is alphabetical, and I'm not lucky in that sense.
They are more reputed than me.

PD: the original idea for the paper either comes from me or it comes from someone else. The implementation is always my task. At this very moment I could refine one of those ideas and improve it (the previous version is submitted but not reviewed). I'm very confused about how to proceed.
PD: I am a postdoc now but I am a PhD in a different institution (I haven't defended my thesis, it's nearly finished).

In your field, does the author ordering count, i.e. is it commonly understood that the first author typically did most of the work? Why would you have 4 coauthors, that seems like an awful lot if you indeed do "everything"? What were their scientific contributions? I am sure that the more reputable scientists can help you write a better paper and focus on what is important, and as such it would help you. Also if the idea was pitched to you by someone else and you take it and publish an implementation without the other person, that is somewhat nasty. Especially if you work in the same group.

@amlrg in general the author ordering is by contribution, but in this research group (and I guess some others) the tradition is using alphabetical order. In my previous research group this was the case for an associated subgroup and it changed 5 years ago (it's hard to explain). Their scientific contributions vary with the paper, in some cases formal proofs, in some cases writing and structure, in some cases the original idea, or a combination of the previous. Nothing that I couldn't do on my own. Everything (even put together) is less time consuming than programming, IMHO.

@amlrg They have suggestions about how to write things better, but their style contradicts in some points the one of my previous supervisor; I think I've already learned the basics and I'd like to have my own style writing. About ideas pitched, it's not taking the idea from the person, but from a previous publication (once it's published) and doing the new version and its publication alone. I guess it's still nasty but it's less nasty than what you said.

Related note, Emanuel Derman wrote "He was a much better known (and a better) physicist than I was, and with his name on the paper, it would have been more widely read, and perhaps have led to further collaboration. But my pride stood in the way. Later that year, when another physicist carried out a similar analysis and received broader attention, Chris pointed out to me that I would have been better off if I had written the article with him. He was right. Years later, working on financial models at Goldman Sachs, I became much less compulsive about such strict authorial cost accounting."

To be fair, though, my previous comment is about the research scene of the old, before internet, and perhaps also with less of the "publish or perish" mentality. Nevertheless, I think both approaches have their pros and cons. I'd personally probably include the others as coauthors, certainly if they have had any input (some consider funding as entitlement to authorship, but I think that is acknowledgements-stuff). Is it common in the journals of your field to write who did what on the article (eg PNAS does this)? Not that this would appear in your CV where you just list publications.

My answer is straight foward.
If the original idea was from somebody else and the implementation is yours, publish the paper with the people who had the original idea. Of course, you'll be one of the authors.
If both the idea and the implementation are yours, publish the paper as you are the sole author. Pure and simple.

The problem with this is that they could claim the idea was theirs but you decided to go on your own and do everything without them. It's the word of one person against another, in a situation where one person has a tenured position and a reputed career, while the other one has a contract that finishes in a few months and a thesis defense pending. I agree it's pure and simple, but this could lead to horrible consequences.

@Trylks The intention of this answer is to make things pure and simple. If you have dispute with "them" about who had the original idea, you need to resolve it with them before you publish the paper. If you believe you have the original idea, publish it yourself. Please note the word "original" I use in my answer and this comment.

Well, I have an idea about how to improve something that is already done, I haven't shared it with anyone and nobody has commented anything on this, they are happy with the current version and have another idea for the improvement that will not work at all, IMHO. Therefore there is no possible dispute, however I can foresee at least raised eyebrows if I publish alone with no prior notice. In the worst case scenario I'd be considered as non-collaborative, I'd be isolated from everything but programming and my contract would not be renewed. No recommendation letters for me either...

@Trylks I think the issue is to what extent the improvement is. If the improvement is not too far away from the original idea, they should be on the author list. Again, I think the key is who had the original idea. IMHO, you should not worry about the consequence if you do everything right and ethical.

I don't think the closeness to the original idea is an issue (with the agreement from the reviewers) if the original idea has already been published with the full author list, and is (of course) cited. But I'm worried that things don't seem to be as they should in many cases.

@Trylks If the original idea has been published with the full author list, I don't see anything you need to worry about as long as you cite the original idea paper when you write your own paper with your own improvement. You have your right to publish your idea, don't you? You do need to worry about one thing, though. What if your improvement is a bad one and no journal/conference would accept it?

I can relate to your question. I've also works in projects where I'm the person doing all the programming/implementation. Actually, in some of those cases the people in question don't even want to work on the paper, so I guess you are doing better with your people.
I think that one issue to keep in mind is that an active collaboration, assuming the other people are in there with you, is helpful, because it helps keep one focused. I don't know if you have experience working on a project alone, but it can get pretty lonely. And working on an applied research project which requires both writing a paper and an implementation is a lot of work, usually over a long period of time, and it can be hard to keep focus. If you have actual reasonable collaborators (even if they don't do programming) as opposed to people who just want to put their name on your paper, they can definitely help to keep you focused, so in theory in can be an easier, faster, more pleasant process.
I do think that if both (a) much of the ideas come from you, and (b) you are doing the entire implementation, then you should be first/main author, so you should try to find some way to be recognized as such. Some journals now require a section where the author contributions are listed. Even if they don't require it, perhaps you could add one? Just a thought. This could help to emphasize that the bulk of the work is yours, if that is indeed the case.

Thank you for your suggestions. I have been working alone during my whole PhD and I'm used to that, actually I like it. But I don't want to close opportunities to working with other people, I want to be a good team player. If I could I would like to be good at everything (perfect), so I do my best.

@Trylks Well, maybe you like it for now, but I predict you will grow tired of working alone. Also, it is simply difficult to succeed in modern academia without good collaborators, especially in applied areas, which yours seems to be. Or putting it differently, it helps greatly to have good collaborators. In the long term it is not healthy to be isolated in research, as in life.

I agree good collaborators are important. But bad collaborators may have a negative impact and being alone may be better (or less bad) than this bad collaboration. I agree that being alone is not good, and one of the reasons why I moved here was exactly that. I like loneliness for the freedom, I don't like that you have to be the expert in everything, any mistake will only be detected by the reviewers and specially I have to implement everything, but I got used to that. Now I still have to implement everything, but 4 authors appear out of nowhere, thus I think I'd better move somewhere else.

I short, collaborators may as well be a help as an hindrance.

@Trylks: Yes, you seem to have a good handle on the situation. Remember that working alone is much slower unless you are super-efficient and super-motivated, and in the long term you will not be able to keep up with everyone else without help. But yes, bad collaborators are useless. In some ways they may be worse than useless, because they will expect to be consulted about things despite not doing any work. Ridiculous, but it has happened to me.

BTW, you write "any mistake will only be detected by the reviewers". That has commonly been my experience too, but it is, at least in theory, possible to get feedback from people who you are neither working with and who are not reviewers. I've never had much luck myself with finding such people to get feedback from, but it is worth keeping in mind as a possibility.

Well, in particular I spent 2 hours last Friday explaining what I did just because one collaborator couldn't understand it. The feedback I got was a small mistake (nearly a typo, in code) that I'd have probably detected when I had checked the very drafty version that I could produce so far...

A possibility to get feedback may be workshops, other possibilities include SE sites (e.g. cstheory, for specific questions) and mailing lists, I'd suggest using some service to proof authorship before sharing some things in the wild (just in case). I personally like journals where the reviews are public, the quality of the reviews (specially wrt feedback) is in these cases much better, IMHO. In any case, best of luck, Faheem.

Hi @Trylks. I thought I was supposed to be advising you. :-) I don't know about workshops, but online methods to get feedback don't work well at all in my experience. In particular, reducing  research related issues into pieces that are small enough to fit in a SE question is quite hard, and when I have tried, I have never received any useful information. I think possibly conference/workshops where one can meet other researchers might be a possibility, though again that has not worked well for me.

Or I suppose one could email people who you think might be interested in ones work with a copy of the draft. I've not tried that, though.

Well, one thing that you have to consider is what do they get from providing that feedback, everybody is busy as hell, what's the priority?. The Internet may work well if what you share is insulting-wrong, according to the Cunningham's Law. Another point to consider is what do they get from citing you. If you publish something that supports their research that's great, but if it doesn't you can be ignored by the scientific community, as if you were wrong or irrelevant. This would lead to ostracism and lack of impact, to virtually not exist.

The model for research, publishing and citing from a game theoretical perspective is very complex. I still have much to learn. I think that in some way supervisors are meant to introduce students in the community so that they can be known, absorb the zeitgeist and be part of the community, collaborating according to the interests of the community as a swarm-mind. There may be discrepancies and disagreement inside, but among groups, a single person can easily be ignored unless the time investment is rewarding in some way. Sure there is much altruism, but finding it in the busy agendas is hard.

@Trylks interesting discussion. Do you feel like chatting about it in chat?

sure, but better next week, I'm procrastinating too much today. I do also use the same nickname in twitter in case I'm easier to find there (I don't check it regularly but I can easily be found there).

Ok, well, the academia chat room is mostly dead, so I don't keep that tab open much. You could ping me in the unix.sx chatroom if you want, I generally have that open. Or you could leave a comment here. I don't use Twitter. Incidentally, I disagree with the "much altruism" bit.


text:
Does a bibliography-only citation count like a regular citation for the author?
There is a very nice open source toolbox for Matlab which I have used for proof of concept. However, the real implementations in my field are almost always done in C++. I really like to give credit to those behind aforementioned toolbox and I have two of ways of doing so.
One is to add a sentence in the paper similar to:

one can achieve this using toolbox Foo (Foosmith 2015)

I’m not really fond of this approach because not only does it occupy valuable space, but also somehow states the very obvious (somehow an insult to the intelligence of the readers).
My second approach is not to cite them in the paper but add them in the bibliography (can be done with \nocite{} in LaTeX). My question is, if I follow this path, would it count as a citation for the creator of this toolbox? If it matters, my paper is to be submitted to an IEEE conference.

@Matinking: What instructions? Also, I am pretty certain this is about citations as an academic currency, not about pleasing the package authors by mere appreciation.

@Wrzlprmft, I'm not really sure if I can agree with the work currency, nor can I agree with @Matinking. Their work has been helpful for my research and I just want to acknowledge their work (acknowledge not in the sense of that section of paper).

@Pouya: I am confused: If this is just about being nice, why are you focussing on whether the citation “counts”? You obviously do acknowledge; what possible difference do you think your alternatives would make?

@Wrzlprmft, I want to them to be acknowledge in a way that is good for them, i.e., increase their citations. The word currency gave me this sensation that I also would benefit from this which is not the case. I don't care if they know that I have cited them or not. I just want to increase their citations. Hope this clarifies the situation.

@Pouya: Okay, that’s exactly what I meant by currency.

I doubt that it's an insult to the intelligence of the readers. If they weren't previously aware of the package Foo then it's a very useful thing to say in the paper. There's no harm saying it, and many journals and conferences (including IEEE I believe) require you to have in-text citations for every item in the bibliography, so I'd say just leave that comment in.

somehow an insult to the intelligence of the readers — Nonsense.  At least some of your readers are beginning students, who will really appreciate the explicit pointer to resources that everyone around them assumes they already know about.  Others are decades into the future, when current common knowledge about standard software packages will have faded from memory.

If the paper is being professionally copy-edited, the copy-editor should notice any references in the bibliography that are not cited in the text, and will ask that they either be deleted or cited.

In the main text, you could also mention the authors by explicitly stating what their tool helped you with, for example:

Our approach was projected/tested/verified using toolbox Foo (Foosmith 2015) and later ported to C++ for performance measurements.

Apart from thanking the authors, this could also be interesting for the reader.
As the other answers mentioned, a bibliography-only citation counts the same as a regular citation, but such a citation is quite unusual and generally not recommended.

You could cite them in the acknowledgements.

Thanks to Foo et al. (2042) for their toolbox which helped the authors to study migratory patterns in unicorns.

I don't think it would be an insult to the intelligence of anybody.  Although papers are not a chronological description of everything you tried, if something helped you but did not make it into the final paper, it can go in the acknowledgements.
Adding an item to the bibliography without a corresponding citation is something I have not seen before (nor have I checked) and it would not surprise me if many journals would have policies against it.  At least one family of journals I know has backreferences, i.e. links from bibliography entries to the places in the main text where the citation occurs, so in this case it would be immediately obvious.

If the OP is concerned about the short sentence shown in the question occupying (too much) valuable space, I am not convinced your longer sentence helps in this respect, let alone that there is an acknowledgments section to start with.

Concerning the last paragraph, I think this (IMHO nonsensical) restriction to add items to the bibliography only if there is a corresponding citation in the text was discussed elsewhere on this site; I'll try to find the respective question again. In any case, how can you be sure you "have not seen [\nocited bibliography items] before", unless you have, for all papers you have ever read, checked one by one whether each bibliography item is mentioned somewhere in the text?

@O.R.Mapper: you may be thinking of this question, which is indeed pertinent.

@O.R.Mapper I have not checked it, which is a major reason why I haven't seen it (edited for clarification).

@gerrit: Fair enough ;)

Generally, all items in the Bibliography  (references) section are considered cited. But the fact that you mentioned IEEE means that all items in the bibliography ought to be cited in the main matter and presented in the order of citation.

Well, you have no option but to cite all bibliographic items in the text. This is the standard in most journals/styles, and it is for a reason: How does the reader know to which part is the cited article relevant? Actually, \nocite{} should never be needed in an article. But if you push your \nocite{} through, the bibliographic item will get indexed by the databases and the authors will get the citation.
What shall you do? Well, whatever you wish, as long as the citation appears at the right place. It's common to see the parenthesized/bracketed citation just after the authors' names in text, it's common to see them put at the end of sentences etc., some people write also things like: The authors of (Foosmith 2015) showed that...


text:
Is it a bad idea to express my personal feelings about the subject when writing email to a professor for PhD application?
I'm looking for PhD positions and I just recently came across an option in Germany. This team is working on a subject that is very really truly interesting for me. I want to write to the head of the team to express my interest and ask if there is a chance for me to do my PhD in their team.
Now here is the issue: Should I mention the fact that what they are doing is my dream? In all honesty, I like my current field and what they are doing is where my field and my dream intersect. But should I express this fact?
I'm afraid if I mention that this program is my dream PhD it will be interpreted as a gesture of hypocrisy, while at the same time I think it is important to emphasis on my passion for the subject.
If adding my feelings regarding the field of research is not a bad practice, how far should go with it? It would be great if you support your answers with some examples.

P.S. To add to the dilemma, they have just won a very big grant and this increases the fear of wrong interpretation of my statements.

To express that you are motivated is  a good thing. The difficulty is getting the "tone" right. This is in part a cultural problem. If you are not German and you happen to know someone who is, then you could ask her or him to read your letter and see if you get the right message across. It would be even better if that person is also from the same discipline, as cultures also tend to differ between disciplines.
In general I would keep this part short and to the point. If you have a specific reason why this is your dream (and it is not too personal) than it might help to mention that.

Just having strong interest in a specific topic wouldn't justify your application in Germany. It is a norm in Germany that one's interest in a specific field is judged by his/her previous achievements in that particular field.
My sincere suggestion is that don't waste your precious space in the application letter/email, by boasting about the interest. Rather, try to sell your previous achievements.

Keep it short and to the point (following advice in similar questions on this site). In particular, since you want to move into a different (sub-)field, state the work you did in your current field (especially published work, if any), and point toward key courses you have taken that would be advantageous.
Say you did computer vision with a published paper, state that, but also state that you have taken courses in biology if you want to do a PhD in bioinformatics.
I wouldn't care that it is your 'dream', I suppose that every potential student is strongly motivated to do their PhD. So don't 'waste' precious space stating it.
(The last line is my personal opinion, obviously, but at least I'm german ;-) )

It may be good to express positive personal feelings, just keep it short and do not make the main argument why would they need you in their team.
It is better to avoid negative feelings of any kind in applications (about your current position, etc).