text:
I know that there is a preselected candidate for a position to be filled at my department. What should I do?
There is a rather attractive position to be filled at my department. The heads of department are already quite sure about who should fill this position. Jobs being filled with preselected candidates are not exactly legal, but common practice in my country. Thus, there legally has to be a job announcement, as everybody has to be given the chance to apply for the job. There further is an equal opportunities office that ensures that all candidates are being judged by the same categories and no one gets preferential treatment.
I never found this practice of preselecting candidates particularly fair or ethical, but let's just say that up until now I had to deal with other challenges. Then I recently stumbled across the list of applicants for that position by accident (was still lying in the printer) and saw that I know one of the applicants who apparently will have no chance against the preselected candidate. It's not that I desperately want this acquaintance ("friend" is too much) to fill the job, but knowing a name on the "you're never gonna get the job"-list made the unfair treatment so much more real. I don't find it acceptable.
Things that speak for me to do nothing:

Most importantly: My contract will be finished soon and I was, am and will be dependent on my boss's willingness to  give me a contract or rather (because there is no funding) her cooperation on further projects.
The head of department is my direct boss and (in my opinion) a very likeable person.
I highly appreciate her concern for her staff, she nevertheless needs to make strategic decisions at some points, which comes with the job and is only professional - I understand.
Furthermore, as much as I know the preselected candidate seems to be a very good, high impact candidate who will fit in the department.

Things that speak for me to do something

Most importantly: It's a unfair/ unethical system and I don't want to stand by and watch
There is no funding for a future contract anyway (although my boss tried)
There may be many other candidates just as good or better than the preselected one

What should I do? I'm not gonna lie: talking to my boss (head of department) scares me quite a bit. But then again I don't want to go to higher levels, be the whistleblower and ruin parts of my boss's career...

[Update]
Based on your answers I did/will do the following:

I talked to a colleague, turns out she had the same impression and wanted to talk to me about it as well. So concerning the question "do you have proof?": at least I have another witness now. But then again, as Anonymous Physicist wrote: up until now, no rule was broken. However, we decided to closely follow the application process in hope that our concerns were exaggerated (which I highly doubt)
"maybe it was just a statement about the quality of the candidate?" It very much exceeded this, as my boss was talking about how important it is that they get the participant through the application process and what possible pitfalls could be. Nevertheless I'll talk to her in order to find out, what her behavior would look like if "someone better" shows up and if that'd be a case of nepotism (see answer of xLeitix).

Any reason to think they're wrong in thinking this candidate would be the best option?

Indeed. I see little wrong to post a job description, invite a number of people who would fit it, and then pick one of them if they really end up being the most qualified one. In fact, every department will do its best to identify suitable candidates and ask them whether they are interested.

What proof do you have that a candidate has been pre-selected?

@HermanToothrot : My boss explicitly said that she wants this person in a conversation with me and others. There is absolutely no doubt about the preselection.

@AzorAhai : As I stated the preselected person may be the best, but there may also be others that are more qualified. The tendency of not giving them a chance seems to be unfair to me.

I know one of the applicants who apparently will have no chance against the preselected candidate --- Regarding only your possible concerns about the candidate wasting his/her time, a high percentage of candidates in a high percentage of academic fields "will have no chance" when applying to any specified position anyway, so unless this is an unusual situation for that applicant, this seems pretty close to a difference that makes no difference, at least for the candidate. Of course, there are other issues too.

As somebody who has been in both candidate side, and on the selection side: the body you need to expose is not your institution or it’s representatives, but your government. Nobody should waste time applying to a job or screening hopeless applicants if a good fit is already available. The pretense of fairness is plain wrong. All it is needed is accountability of the selection committee: cronyism will result in poor performance. Best matches in increased performance. “Fairness” was meant to reduce cronyism, but historically failed. Accountability for new hires is what is needed.

Are there safeguards in place against this kind of things? In my country (and I suspect in most) it is also a frequent occurrence, but it is mandatory that selection committees include external experts. If the institute wants to recruit their candidate, they have to convince those outsiders that they are indeed the best candidate for the job.

As a middle ground, and assuming that it's not against the rules, you might want to let your friend know about this situation. The choice as to whether it is a waste of time would be theirs. Note that just because a candidate is preselected doesn't mean they would actually take the position, so other candidates might still get a chance.

@123happytree The boss says they want this person, does this mean that they will necessarily hire their desired candidate, even if they get better applicants?  To me, it sounds like your boss knows someone who will fit the position well, and is therefore expecting them to be the chosen candidate.  There's a big difference between stating that you want to hire one particular person, assuming that they will be the strongest candidate; and stating that you will hire one person regardless of who the strongest candidate is.

Perhaps I'm misreading the question, but it seems that in this organization, the "preselected candidate" is fairly common knowledge.  The department heads aren't exactly being coy about it.  Is there a possibility the acquaintance knows he/she has little chance and just applied regardless?  There is some value to be gained by putting one's name in the race, regardless of prospects compared to others in the race.

Sometimes management have someone they want to hire, interviews are opened up.... and then someone incredible turns up who gets the position because they're just so much better than the individual they were initially planning to go for.  I've seen that happen.
Which is part of the point of legally requiring those interviews. It's not always as guaranteed as you may think from listening to people.

@JMac : Yes, good point. The candidate is someone who is already working close to our group. My boss was already talking about how she could get the candidate through the application process. That way exceeded the "it's a good, fitting candidate" kind of talk.

Perhaps it would help to list the country you're in?  In the US, it is in my experience quite common to get jobs through personal recommendation.  Most of my own jobs (in software) came from recommendations by professors, or from people reading my thesis or papers and seeking me out.  Offhand, I can only recall one job that I actually got that was an open position with other applicants.

One important consideration that you should take into account is whether there is an actual case of nepotism or not. Nepotism is if the preferred candidate is objectively inferior to at least one other candidate from all the information that is accessible to the selection committee. Or, in other words, if the head of the department is willingly hiring a worse candidate because they like them better, owe a favor to somebody, or have some other invalid reason to give one candidate preferential treatment.
The problem is that many "not really open" open positions aren't actually like that. In practice, what I often see as the main reason why a department or selection committee quickly zeroes in on a specific candidate is that they know much more about one candidate than about the others.
The most typical example is as such: There is an open search procedure, and a number of external candidates apply plus Alice, a candidate that has worked tightly with members of the department before, and which has been explicitly invited to apply. What you now see is a tremendous information asymmetry - the department knows little about the external candidates, but before they even open Alice's application folder they already have a great deal of information about Alice. They know what she can and can't do. Where other candidate's past successes are just a line in a CV to the committee, for Alice they know the full story, how she achieved them, what she has learned from them, and how this would help her be effective in her new position.
Recruitment is always a risky proposition, in academia just as in industry. We all have seen candidates that looked great on paper but turned out unsuitable for reasons that were impossible to glean from an application package. Faculty visits help, but how much can you really learn about a person in one or two days, especially in a somewhat artificial and often strongly rehearsed environment? In this situation, a risk-averse committee (and, realistically, this is basically every committee) has a strong incentive to go with Alice over a candidate that may have a slightly stronger CV, but also a much higher margin of error. As a consequence, a committee may prefer the "known candidate" Alice despite her weaker CV for completely rational reasons (which makes it different to nepotism). In essence, them doing so may be the optimal move for them given the information they have and how much they are willing to risk.

What should I do?

Depending on how close you are to your boss, I would carefully try to find out why they prefer one candidate so much over the others (i.e., talk with them about it). It is completely possible that you may find that their reason is solid given the information that they have. Even if you disagree with their reasoning, understanding it may make the situation easier to accept for you. And if it turns out that there actually is a clear-cut case of nepotism (your boss knows the selected candidate is inferior, but decides to select them anyway), you have a much, much clearer argument for any potential whistleblowing.

This is correct answer, in so far as it describes the dominant practice. However, I want to add that the downside of risk-aversion is that smaller error margin also means less chance of hiring someone outstanding. Most committees forget that.

TL;DR its only unethical if the candidate sucks.

@JaredSmith: Only if they know the candidate sucks. You missed the most crucial point.

And furthermore, the department may have grown to depend on some of Alice's skills that are not necessarily common in the field. For example, she is a biologist that knows how to fix computers.

@Mehrdad point conceded, I was being glib.

@Servaes I’d still call it unfair. But the unfairness is natural and unavoidable rather than engineered. It’s not (necessarily) the hiring committee that’s being unfair.

Definition of nepotism: favoritism (as in appointment to a job) based on kinship from Websters dictionary.  It does not include the candidate being less qualified as part of the definition.  You may infer this, but that is not how the word is defined.

Part of the problem is that it is now so costly to dispose of anyone who does not turn out to be good at a job, hence the cost of taking risks is now much greater.

It seems that you object to rule breaking and want to stop it.  You have two problems here:

The rule has not been broken yet.  It is only broken once the preselected candidate is hired.
It is very difficult to prove the preselection occurred.  As you said, the system ensures all candidates are judged the same way.  Probably the hiring records will show that.

I see no point in whistle blowing until the preselected candidate has been hired.  Even then, I see little point in whistle blowing without clear evidence that someone has committed misconduct.  I do not think you will get that evidence.
The reality is that it is impossible to prevent people from forming opinions before they get all the facts.  As a result, hiring committees will always have preferences before they read the applications.  You just have to hope they are open to changing their minds when they get new facts.
There is nothing you can do to help your acquaintance at this point.  If you are correct, their time has already been wasted and it cannot come back.

@StrongBad I've seen second hires like the ones you mention surpass the first hires and the people that managed all the hiring process in six months. Systems may be corrupt, but if there's any incentive for effectiveness in any point in the hierarchy line, there's a chance for competent people. Even if it's just so their department can just slack off more.

-1 for not whistle-blowing before the hiring. The criterion should be evidentiary basis.

Unfortunately it is common practice in many countries that the advertisement of a position (which is required by law) is the last step of a hiring process instead of the first step. See for example this recent article in Nature “Job vacancies posted after being filled: it’s time to stop wasting everyone’s time”. So you are definitely not alone in this situation and I have by myself applied for several position where I had much better achievements than the pre-selected candidate in pretty much every category and I did not even make it to the interview or the interview (for a permanent positon) was a 15-min joke where I did not even get the chance to present my research ideas (quote “No need – we see this from your written application anyway”).
In your specific situation the question is if you actually have hard evidence:

Did the list you found in the printer contain a written statement
that these candidates are never going to get the position or was it
just a list of name without further comment? If so: is there a
printer log that you can take a photo of showing that this document
actually came from someone on the hiring panel?
“My boss explicitly said that she wants this person in a
conversation with me and others” - Are the other persons willing to
act as witnesses? If it is only you (and your contract will not be
extended) they might just say that you want to take revenge.

Only if you are sure that one of the two options above will absolutely hold then you can consider reporting it. In a second step you can weight your arguments above if you should do it. But the second step is a personal decision of yours then (where other persons cannot really help you) while the first step is purely based on the fact if you have evidence hard enough or not.
One more thing: as stated in the earlier answer you should only report it once the "crime" has been committed i.e. the candidate was officially selected.

For all you know, they want to give the position to "the chosen one", unless someone better shows up.
And it's impossible* to prove otherwise. Even if they end up hiring "the chosen one", no provable ethics violation will have taken place.
If it really bothers you a lot I recommend talking to your boss. If you manage to raise it as a concern instead of an accusation, there should be no repercussions. They'll try to assure you that there will be a fair selection process - If they manage to convince you, you'll have peace of mind, if they fail to convince you, you haven't lost anything.

*If you happen to have legally valid proof of the transgression, the question is entirely different, and my answer is to discuss the proof with a local lawyer, unless such an action exposes yourself to legal liability under the specific circumstances.

What should I do?

1. Reach certainty that the hiring process is/will be subverted
You wrote you the heads of department are "already quite sure" about the candidate they will choose. This is a claim regarding their thoughts/psyche, which you can never have exact and accurate information (essentially). Perhaps it appears they are sure? Perhaps they seem to just be biased in favor of someone they already know? Perhaps they're just assuming there will be no other worthy applicants? What makes you sure they have already decided? Until you yourself are entirely sure they will subvert the process in a meaningful way, obviously - do not take any overt or committed action, and keep other actions, like fishing for evidence, inconspicuous.
2. Consider whether to deter or retaliate/condemn
The approaches to action are either to deter the decision-makers from acting inappropriately, or alternatively to act ex-post-facto again the process and/or the decision makers.
Pros of first option:

A lot less effort.
Much much lower evidentiary standard.
You will not be perceived as vindictive or a trouble-maker, especially since you yourself seem to be a candidate (you haven't clearly indicated whether that is the case)

Pros of second option:

It is usually pretty easy to mask the pre-selection of a candidate; if you tip them off, they'll know what they've missed, address it, and still do the same thing.
Will have a much stronger deterring factor on this problematic culture - if you succeed.
Much higher potential for recruiting "allies", if those exist.

3. Collect evidence
Don't hack into people's computers or break into anywhere; and don't start chatting people up if you can't trust them to be discrete, but definitely consider going as far as taping your conversations on your mobile phone (but you might want to check local laws about doing so).
I don't know what evidence you do have so I can't really counsel you on getting more. Just remember that you want both quantity and quality; and that evidence is worth very little if it requires interpretation by your view of things or even your knowledge and experience. Thus, also consider locating evidence for facts/circumstances which are obvious to you but would not be obvious to an outsider (e.g. in court).
4. Find allies
Talk to:

Other candidates which you are close with and can trust despite your partially-conflicting interests here
Colleagues who are close friends and/or known for being both discreet and highly concerned with fairness.
Your union representative, and possibly more central, assertive/active figures in your union at the university level.

The conversations could be about the basic dilemma of whether to act; for sharing evidence; and possibly even for collaborating actions or acting together as a group. With your union, you might stronger recourse both to formal procedures to prevent/undo a hire, or to informal but collective action. It is very much in the union's interest - and in that of the members - to fight the ability of university management overall and department heads in particular to be able to skew hiring procedures. That is not just bad in itself, it weakens the collective ability to fight for other issues.
5. Continue based on previous phases
This is too speculative for me to say anything specific about. But actions could involve any or some of:

A formal challenge to the hiring process
Disciplinary complaints
Public letters
Private/Group/Union meetings with the department heads
Organizing a public meeting of faculty at your department
Getting in contact with all candidates about the matter
The threat, or actual filing, of a lawsuit
A labor dispute between your union and the university

But it could also be "nothing" (especially considering phase 1.)

Your distress at this situation is understandable: it's certainly not fair to other candidates to put in equal effort for an interview they do not have an equal chance of gaining a position out of. But I would question your conclusion that this means the situation is unethical, based on the information provided. The hiring process is unfair by nature because it cannot take into account individual life situations. If you are currently homeless, you will find it an added challenge to appear as presentable as a candidate with a private bed and bathroom. If you bear primary responsibility for children in your family, you will not be able to agree to the same conditions as someone who can work whatever hours they choose. There are many things employers do not know and cannot know about the people they interview. That can be a disadvantage on both sides.
In this case, one candidate has the advantage that quite a lot is known about them already. Even you know they would be a good fit for the position. That is likely to lead to their being the successful candidate unless someone else comes across as absolutely amazing. That's common sense: employers want to minimise risk and get someone who is likely to fit in well and be an asset. If one of the candidates came with a recommendation from an existing employee who is respected and trusted, they would have an advantage over all the other candidates who performed as well in the interview but didn't have a good contact within the organisation. Not fair, but not considered unethical in any situations I've observed.
If I were you I would be questioning my insistence that something unethical is taking place here, and would stay very far away from this unless there becomes reason to believe interviewers felt another candidate was a better fit for the position and they went with the internal candidate for personal/political reasons. Expressing a desire to take on someone already known and liked is not good evidence; it's just a given. There is no way even hinting that you think your boss is doing or allowing something unethical will play out well for you: it is likely to be an end to any good relationship with her and anyone else who gets to hear about this. As for going higher, I would consider that utterly inappropriate unless you brought legitimate evidence to your boss and received an unsatisfactory response. It's certainly not an option to consider because you feel awkward about addressing the situation with your boss. At best I would expect the relevant higher-ups to tell you to stop bothering them with unfounded gossip.
The person who is getting forgotten in your consideration of what to do is the preselected candidate, who based on your account doesn't have any part in this other than perhaps being interested in the position. By virtue of being part of the organisation already they probably are the best candidate, and that shouldn't be something held against them. Getting caught up in this will be at the least upsetting for them and may be career-damaging. Will it be fair if this individual ends up feeling obliged to leave altogether? Once you start any sort of proceedings, you cannot know for sure how things will play out. Rumours and gossip can and do damage lives.
You are clearly motivated here by your desire to do the right thing, but sometimes the answer to the question of 'what is the right thing' is murky. Rather than a why/why not list, I would suggest you consider what you might achieve by speaking up, as someone very far down the food chain with no compelling evidence, against the harm you might cause, to yourself and to your colleagues who you appear to think are very nice and capable people.

The hiring process is unfair by nature -- perhaps, but still some processes are more unfair than others.

On thinking about it, I would say - you can't do much. But you can ensure those affected can do something. Which is right and proper as they are the ones affected.
A common answer to hidden dubious conduct, in some situations, is to call it out. Put these two together, I'd handle it like this:

Do this only if you trust the employee concerned.
Tell the employee who "doesn't have a chance" exactly what you found. Do this jointly with your other friend, 2 people with a concern are more convincing than 1. Give them at least one direct quote or comment from it (as best you can remember anything) in case it's denied.
Tell the employee to raise it directly in the interview. It's a bit risky but not that risky.

He/she should wait until they ask if there are any questions, then ask directly - "I had expected that candidates are assessed by merit without preconception.  But a number of employees - who I'd rather not name - have told me directly that there is a document that effectively concludes that X is the predetermined candidate, and implies other candidates don't have much of a chance. I've been directly told this by those who saw it. Is that true?"
Expect shock, fumbling, embarrassment, and await interesting outcome. It makes it hard for them to do other than a truly merit based choice, as they know the scrutiny that will exist. If denied, state what the document said - any quote or paraphrase or comment from it, so they know you did speak to someone who saw it. Being caught in an untrue denial would be harder to counter if it happens.
Of course it may not be appreciated. Or the dubious conduct may be legitimate after all. But it's actually a fair question, so they are less likely to be penalised for it.

This would be a transparent measure, thanks for suggesting. However I think there are several problems. (1) If my "friend", refers to a source from inside the department, it will heavily influence the atmosphere in the department in  a negative way. My boss probably doesn't feel like she could trust us any more and that's not something I want to provoke. (2) If my "friend" says he knows that there is a preselected candidate in front of the committee, the entire application process wil be canceled and nobody gets the job and the position will not be offered at all: everbody loses

And in future they'll probably be aware of the possibility of suspicion, and maybe be fairer? Or is that a Pipedream? I'd be willing to expose the malfeasance that way and take a chance if the job is withdrawn - if it is, it probably wasn't really needed anyway so no loss?


text:
Would my paper be published if I missed the conference due to visa-related problems?
I have two accepted papers in one conference . The problem is that until I have not gotten an original invitation letter, a must to get a visa. I've sent over ten emails to the email addresses listed on the conference website to the organizers and chairperson asking for this letter; no response. I do not have anyone else who can present in my place. If I failed to attend the conference because of this, would my papers be published in the conference proceedings?

The OP is more patient than I would be. Long before the tenth e-mail, I would be working my network - find someone I know who knows someone involved in organizing the conference and ask them to push.

I only see one e-mail address listed at the website, under "Contact", an address of the type "info@...". Maybe there is an issue with this address. As an alternative, you can google the institution e-mail addresses of the involved persons, specifically, the general chair and the conference coordinators.

Generally, if you are doing research in the area of a conference, you will personally know some of the people working in that area, who will know people involved in the conference. Most academic research communities are "small worlds". People serve on the same program committees. They go to the same conferences. They hire each other's former students. Look for a personal connection, and use that to find out what is going on.

@lighthousekeeper  I will try to contact the Chair institution , hopefully there as an enough time to find a solution . Thank you very much.

@Paulo: You're welcome! Hope that can sort out the issues. Just to clarify, my comment mentions three different persons/e-mail addresses: the general chair, and the two conference coordinators (see "Programme Committees" at the website). Each address may be found at the website of the person's home institution.

Duplicate of "If a paper is accepted as a poster, must you attend the conference?" or What to do if I can't get a visa to attend a conference that accepted my paper? which in turn references http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13943/etiquette-when-unable-to-attend-a-conference . Please start closing as duplicates, everyone.

I removed many of the comments and incorporated that info into the question.

I am not sure the real question is a duplicate. It turns out there is a complete lack of communication between the OP and the conference. That is the cause of the visa issue, but is also a potential blocker for any of the prior solutions such as video presentation.

Then shouldn't the title reflect the underlying question "Conference organizer is failing to send me invitation letter which I need to get visa to attend; how to proceed; will my paper not be published?"

@PatriciaShanahan: you may be right. However we're swimming in duplicates. As you said really the OP's question should have been been raised months earlier and should have been ""Conference organizer is failing to send me invitation letter which I need to get visa to attend; how to proceed?". Better to prevent the problem, than incur the problem. But apparently it's too late now, for this OP.

Yes , I am too late now, till now after I contacted them again( by phone calls), they haven't sent the invitation letter yet.  I think I am going to lose the publication, my money, and I will have many problems with my supervisor , because of the coordinators' ignorance .

To be part of the proceedings, the paper needs to be presented at the conference.
I have seen two cases where the paper was presented despite physical absence of the authors. In the first case, the paper was presented by one of the authors via a Skype call. In the second case, a befriended researcher of the authors gave the presentation.

I have seen a similar case, where they played back a video the author sent beforehand (it was for a spotlight talk, so no questions from the audience).

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is paper refering on pop science books less value?
I have a paper in linguistic which was written when I was in high school. I would like to mention it in my SOP. When I ask if I should mention it, xLeitix has raise this question:

What is the hypothesis that you proposed?

The hypothesis I proposed is in sociology, which I had when reading the book The Human Zoo. The problem is, it is a pop science book, and the hypothesis only bases on this reference (number of total references is 7). However, since the author is reputable (he is listed as a notable English-language popularizers of science by Wiki), I think I have cited a reliable source. More importantly, if the PhD committees are interested in the ability of research, does this paper satiate them because I made it when I was in high school without any guidance? Does citing on pop science books make my paper less value in the eyes of:

linguists?
biologists?
other scientists?

"The hypothesis in linguistics I proposed..." Is your hypothesis (and the necessary experiments, proofs etc) accepted in a good, peer-reviewed journal? If not, it is simply your idea(and as someone else suggested ideas are dime-a-dozen). PHD committees are not interested in your ideas that came to your mind but in your ability to do research. In this sense, it is better to keep those ideas to yourself, until you prove that those ideas have a scientific value. If you have published such an idea, if you referenced a pop science book will be irrelevant.

If the phd committees are interested in the ability of research, will this paper satiate them because I made it when I was in high school without any guidance?

There are really two entirely separate questions tangled together here:

Should a mature scientific writer cite a "pop science" book?
Does citing a "pop science" book degrade the value of a work produced in high school?

Let me start with the second, since I think that's the one you really want an answer to.  I think that citing a pop science book will have little effect on an admission committee's evaluation of your high school work.  You are not expected to have been doing well-supervised scientific research in high school.  If your paper is actually published in a (credible) peer-reviewed venue, then that's a major mark in your favor, and clearly the peers had no objection to the citation.  If your paper hasn't been published, then it's going to weigh much less in any case, and again the nature of one citation won't make a significant difference.
Turning back now to the first question, citing a pop science book can sometimes be appropriate, even for a mature scientific writer.  Something that is not often well acknowledged is that scientists are effectively just other members of the general public when it comes to evaluating material far outside of their domain.  From a scientific perspective, then, it is best to think of a pop science book as a large survey paper that is written for very broad accessibility.  Thus, a high-quality pop science book can be entirely appropriate to cite, if a broad survey paper is what is needed.  Survey papers are always secondary sources, and yet they are quite scientifically valuable and highly cited (to the degree that they are often a focus of gaming in publication statistics).
Some popular science books are very highly cited in just this way; to take a few recent examples, at the time of this writing, Google Scholar shows "Guns, Germs, and Steel" having 7000+ citations, "The black swan" has 4000+ citations, and "A Random Walk down Wall Street" has 2000+.  Your example of "The Human Zoo" has about 300, so it has clearly been well appreciated, even if it is now quite old.
The real distinction is this: if you want to refer to aspects of the synthesis constructed in the survey paper, you should cite the survey paper (or pop science book).  If you want to refer to a specific fact or conclusion repeated in the survey paper from elsewhere, then you should find, verify, and cite the primary source that they survey paper drew from instead.  Be sure to verify, because some survey paper and pop science books take dreadful liberties with their primary sources...

Wow, you know my question better than I know :D. Thank you so much

Also, this is the first time I heard about survey paper. Is this different from literature review?

@Ooker Survey papers and literature reviews are fairly synonymous.  The terms might have slightly different implications to different communities, but the basic sense is the same: a secondary paper whose primary value is from the synthesis of results into a larger picture.

The main problem with citing a popular science book is that it is a secondary source.  Almost certainly, the author isn't reporting on original research that he conducted himself; he's discussing research previously discussed and published by others (and possibly his own as well), and putting it in context for a general audience.  He is one or more steps removed from the original work itself, and especially in a popular science book, there won't be complete details about how the results were obtained, which would be necessary to satisfy an expert.
So if you want to support your own arguments using some statement claimed in Morris's book (e.g. "baboons can use toothbrushes"), you don't want to cite this book as your only evidence for that statement.  Rather, you need to find the primary sources.  You should look for who Morris cites, and if necessary, trace back a chain of citations until you find the original paper where this result was reported.  This will be a paper written by the people who actually conducted the study that is claimed to show that baboons can use toothbrushes (call them Jones).  Read Jones's paper, and make your own decision about exactly what hypothesis they tested, whether their methods were appropriate, whether their data is good evidence for their hypothesis, and in general whether their work convinces you that baboons can use toothbrushes.  Then search for other papers citing Jones that may offer criticism of their work, reproduce their results, and so on.  Take them into account in your decision as to whether to depend on this fact.  If you decide it's reliable, then cite Jones and any other paper that offers something helpful to evaluating their work.
(And if you decide it's not reliable, don't fall into the trap of "But Morris believes it, and he's reputable, so I'll just cite him."  Reputable people make mistakes too, and propagating mistakes like this is a major cause of bad science.  Instead, look for other evidence to support or refute your argument.)
You can also cite Morris, if you feel that he adds something to the discussion, or that the reader will find it useful to read his book.  But a scholarly paper can't rely solely on secondary sources.  A paper that does so will certainly be taken less seriously, by anyone.
Edit: To address your comment, nobody here can really tell to what extent a PhD committee would view your paper as evidence of research ability; it will depend on how good they think it is, and only they know that.  But citing popular science texts instead of primary sources is probably not a good sign, since it doesn't seem to show a familiarity with proper research practices.  I wouldn't really expect a committee to be extra impressed because it was done in high school.  They don't really care how advanced you were in high school, they want to know whether you are prepared for grad school now, and that decision will be based much more on what you have done in your undergraduate work.  So unless the paper you wrote in high school was incredibly spectacular, I don't think it will affect graduate admissions one way or the other.

Thanks for your answer. The reason I make a bounty to this question is because the question in my comment hasn't been answered. I want to know if I had the ability of research or not when I was in high school. I have already known that it has less scientific value.

@Ooker: I added some text to address it, even though it's getting pretty close to a "too localized" question that can't help anyone but you.  Also, it's kind of frowned upon to redirect a question to a different subject as you did; in the future it would be better to open a new question if you want to ask something different.

@Ooker I understand you are applying for a PhD in Biology. You can safely bet the admission board would have no idea about linguistics, and thus, will not be able to judge the quality of your paper (for all they know, it could be a rehash of some well known facts, or utterly nonsense). What they can do is check for standard practices, like citing primary sources and so on.

@Davidmh Your comment really convinces me. Make it an answer and I'll accept you.

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


text:
Should I omit some of my qualifications in my application materials to "surprise" with during an interview?
I am applying for a fellowship so that I can pursue a PhD in the US. The selection process includes an interview for shortlisted candidates.
I like  to save the best for the last in order to surprise the audience. I think surprise, wherever it is used, has a good effect. I have a poster based on my undergraduate dissertation, which is said to be very attractive. It is inspired by the poster of Michael Barton, which is introduced by the Better Poster blog. I think I can use it to surprise the fellowship selection committee.
Now, should I apply this strategy to the interviewers? That means I will keep the information of what I've done in the SOP as minimal as possible, just enough to pass the first selection round to get to the face-to-face round. At this round, I will show them my poster and hope they will be favorably impressed.
Should I use this strategy?

I think I should quote my comment on Hans Adler's answer here:

I just take my A0 size poster in to the interview room. During the interview, professors will test my knowledge, ask me what I've done and judge that if I'm adequate to the fellowship. In the room it will have a white board for you to outline what I've done, and this is what is poster born for. Instead of drawing figure or chart by myself, I just need to open the poster and show what's what.

..."at least my poster is said to be very attractive". By whom? What poster? What does your poster have to do with the PHD interviews?

@Alexandros by the poster examiners. It's from a paper which its origin is my undergraduate dissertation. I'm applying to a fellowship so that I can study PhD.

By far the hardest part of an application process like this is getting to the interview.  Don't short-change yourself before that point.

Holding back the best stuff from the original application sounds like a terrible idea.

@ff524 thank you for helping me clarify the question.

I hate surprises. Especially at the interview.

Is anybody else completely lost as to what a poster has to to do with a PhD interview? What is a "poster examiner"? I'm having a lot of trouble parsing the second sentence in the answer to the "what poster?" question.

Maybe it's a great idea. That way, if you get to the interview and they say, "Well, we really want someone who knows about X" you can say, "Oh, great! Because I know all about X! I didn't want to put it on my CV so I could impress you even more in person!". Yeah - I'm sure that won't sound like you're making a false claim or anything bad like that.

So do I have this straight?  Your proposal is to give practically no detail about your work in your application, hoping that you will get an interview anyway.  And then, assuming you do get an interview and are asked about your work, rather than answering, you propose to whip out some massive poster and say "Here, read this poster."  Is that right?

@Compass why do you hate surprise? Surprise will makes people remember you longer.

@JLRishe when you hang your poster in a poster conference, there will be some poster examiners go around to choose the best posters.

@NateEldredge Not really. As I said, whether I bring my poster with me or not, there will be a white board waiting in the room so that I can outline what I've done. A poster will help me do it quicker and fancier.

@Ooker Maybe they're a surprise arsonist too :/

Hiding something and revealing it during the interview might also get people thinking what else you might be hiding....

I don't really understand the obsession with posters.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit as I said, with or without the poster, I 'll have to describe my work to the interviewers. And the poster is the best thing to describe it (I think) because it is quickly to show and have detail information.

@Ooker: No. You were already told, two days ago, that this is not how interviews work. An interviewer wishes to evaluate you, not your previous project or your poster. You appear to be doing everything you can to make an evaluation of you result in a negative. You have several misconceptions about how to go about looking good to people! And you're not listening to anyone here who's been telling you that for days.

In other words, it's completely useless to show some prepared material (be it a poster or in some other form): the interview wants to see the evidence that you understand the work, and that you are articulate enough to explain it to them on demand. "I'm too lazy to do that; read about it yourself" is not going to make them want you in their team.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit no, I just explain to you what I though before I asked this question.

note people go back to the application to remind them of your qualifications after the interview. So, even if you do get an interview, waiting to talk about some of your best stuff in the interview may mean that they forget that stuff when they look back at your application to make the final hiring decision!

Be sincere, not sneaky. Don't assume you are pandering to an idiot. List your qualifications plainly, but wow them with specific anecdotes if asked. Its the difference between telling me your life story in the resume and listing your positions -- after reading what positions you've held if I'm interested I'm going to ask you your life story in the interview. Not telling me anything about what you've done gives me nothing to ask, though, and leaves you with no opening to regale me with an interesting story. If the interviewer misses this chance, that's on him. Its give and take.

So, if you receive a question like "why did not you put this information to your CV ? " What will you say then ? Will you say it would for surprising you ?

@optimalcontrol haha, very good argument. I guess that cat will get my tongue for that. This one alone could make me rethink about this.

Absolutely not.
Even if you turned out to be a good candidate, I would reject your application on this basis alone. You're completely wasting my time by failing to be up-front about your qualifications when you know that I have a lot of work to do in prioritising applications and arranging interviews accordingly.
If I find out, after doing all of that work, that by hiring you I will be hiring someone who routinely withholds relevant information because he wants to "surprise" me, then I know I am only hurting myself in the long run. I would instead pick an individual who is capable of being up-front and honest — someone with whom I can work without constantly wondering what he's not yet bothered to tell me.

But I think sometimes people need to be wowed?

@Ooker: This is the reverse of the way to wow someone. Wow them, impress them by demonstrating integrity, reliability and wisdom. Your "strategy" sort of suggests the opposite to me. However, you've already been told this several times now (surprising someone may get you remembered but not necessarily in the way that you want to be remembered; they'll be telling stories about you to their friends for a while, but it's likely they'll be laughing whilst doing so) and you don't seem to be getting it, or you're unwilling to accept the overwhelmingly negative response to your idea. So.

For the record, I think that @ff524's answer is wildly better than mine. Not sure why you migrated the acceptance tick!

I know that her answer is better than yours. I just feel that your answer is easier for me to digest. It's not her answer is uncomfortable, it's because there are somethings (that I think) needed to be ask deeper. I still choose her answer as the best. The accepted answer is the one that works for me.

Thanks for your help ;). Anyway, your second comment is also good, why don't you think that it should not be in your answer?

@Ooker because it is a commentary on you and your question, not an answer

@LightnessRacesinOrbit Maybe Ooker is waiting for you to surprise-wow him.

I think that it is harsh to reject a good candidate because of that basis. I would be crying if I were that candidate.

@kitty: It's not about being "harsh". The entire selection process is based upon finding the right person who has the right qualities for the position. If you demonstrate that you do not have those qualities, then you are qualified for the position. It's not "harsh".

Hi, Lightness Races in Orbit. I would feel sad, keep crying for some hours if an interviewer did it to me.

not qualified* (oops)

No.

How will you know exactly what's "just enough to pass the first selection round"? You won't. You can't.
Don't "surprise" by withholding helpful information. I believe most people find it annoying and inconsiderate when someone deliberately withholds information that they need in order to do their job (which is what you are proposing to do to the selection committee).
It's harder to change someone's opinion of you than it is to confirm it. Even if you manage to get an interview using this strategy, convincing the interviewer that the candidate he thought was mediocre is really exceptional is more difficult than making him think, "This student is just as exceptional in person as I thought he would be!" (Also see: confirmation bias)
Presenting yourself badly on paper can lead the committee to think that you don't know how to present yourself well, or didn't bother to find out how, or didn't care enough to put effort into your application. These are not qualities that people look for in an applicant.

The "it's harder to change someone's opinion of you than it is to confirm it" really convince me.

Also, in general, do you think that should I use this strategy frequently? I still think it is a good strategy.

Ooker, it is a a nice strategy maybe for a pickup line, but not for work-related things.

@Ooker I can't argue with what you think. All I can do is give rational, objective reasons to support what I think. Perhaps your unwillingness to change your mind even in the face of these is another example of confirmation bias :)

@ff524 it's hard to tell whether I am confirmation bias or not. I just want to do what I think is best, until something else convinces me to be better. I think keep asking and learning is the way to get out of that bias :)

@Ooker the only place I could see such a surprise strategy being possibly useful is when giving a scientific presentation. But even then, you would need to be very careful in how you use it.

@Ooker The withholding important information is in general terrible, because your basic problem will always be to get people to care enough to pay attention to you.  Put the important "what" up front where everyone can see it, and let the surprise be how you achieve that "what."

Busy people make very fast decisions based on the available information.  Do I go to this talk based on a one-paragraph abstract?  Is this job applicant worth a phone-screen, based on my 20 seconds scanning their resume?  Treat your audience like adults and put your best up front.

@Ooker: in general it's a great idea to present information in an order that creates a memorable "bang!" moment for the listener, where they're pleasantly surprised. However, this is a two-stage process in which you're first asked "list everything relevant", and you're proposing to leave something out. So it's not just about the best order to present the information for effect, it's about whether you should deliberately omit information for effect. I think that's what makes it different from, say, building up a big surprise on the last slide of a presentation. Or telling a joke.

I fully agree with ff524's answer. As you still seem to think that your question outlines a good strategy, let me offer an additional point.
One purpose of having two rounds of selection is that the paper application focusses on different qualifications than the interview, and the committee wants both to be tested. So yes, by all means, do surprise the interviewers, but do that with points that couldn't be shown on paper due to their nature. Examples for these are:

Give a convincing oral presentation about your results or plans.
Show confidence even when asked critical questions.

The poster you mention may not be a good fit for the paper application anyway, but do not withhold any information about your research that would fit into the paper application format.
If you can show the poster at the interview, you would want the interviewers to be surprised by thinking "This guy has very nice research results, and he can present it in an innovative format."
You don't want their evaluation to be "This guy cannot write clearly about his research, but ..." (nothing follows because you're not invited to the interview).

Points that couldn't be shown on paper. This one also convinces me. Thank you.

No.  Too often, interviewers will be surprised anyway by things you did put in the application and even things you said in an earlier interview.  They are reading a lot of applications.  The interviewers who do carefully retain all the information they've gotten are people who do not prefer surprises.

No. In addition to reasons given above, the following story illustrates the folly of witholding. I once turned down a candidate, i.e. did not invite him for interview.
He then demanded to know why.
I said such and such were essential.
But I have such and such, he said (in, however, not too convincing a manner, otherwise I would still have invited him at this point).
It is not on your CV, I said. It really should have been there.
There was no room, he said.
You managed to find room for... [activities that were not relevant] I said.
Yeah but I sent you the same CV I send to everyone, he said.
There's your mistake, I said, in future remember to tailor those few pages to the job you are looking for at that point in time.
Thank you for your kind advice, he said, welling up. (Of course he didn't!)

authors: Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні

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


text:
I attended an Olympiad for student and failed. How should I write this down on my CV?
When I was a freshman in the university, I was a member of my university Olympiad team to compete on the Student Physics Olympiad. And I failed to get a single medal. Although the results weren't good, the fact that I had a chance to go to the competition is one of my competitive points. How can I write that down on my CV?

How do I pretend to be success?

No. Just no. If you get caught falsifying facts, you will be in even worse position.

Never lie in your CV. It will most certainly backfire. @Ooker the success is that you made it to the competition; no more, no less.

@Davidmh making it to an olympiad is definately a successful achievement as a student, be proud of it. You should include it if it´s relevant for want you intend to you your CV for(eg. a scholarship...).

@djechlin: it's not vague, it's pretty clear, and it's not misleading, it's plain wrong, dangerous, and highly irresponsible to suggest lying.

@LieRyan: actually when I first read that phrase, I though it was something like in djechlin's answer. I still think it is.

Wow, @zoz's comment is a brilliantly well-hidden double entendre. Now that I noticed its alternate reading, I'm no longer quite so sure what it's supposed to mean. I suppose I'll give the benefit of doubt that is supposed to read "Don't ... pretend (that) you succeed(ed)".

When you go to an interview, the interviewees often read your CV beforehand looking for subjects they can talk to you about.   They are often very interested in anything that will let them explore how good your are at team work etc.
So yes you should list it, but be ready to give positive answers to questions about it, what you learned, and how you help your other team members etc.


text:
I used external help for my masters thesis coding work
Hi I wrote my masters thesis and it got A grade. I wrote 20,000 words on my own but I took help for the coding portion. Ideas were mine but he helped me putting them into action - discussing solutiouns,  helped in debugging , helped in finding code from internet etc .Have I plagirised in any form ?

What did your advisor say?  If you didn't inform your advisor of this, that's a cause for concern.

There's a line between "acceptable outside assistance" - effectively 'tutoring' - and plagiarism. Determining where exactly your actions fall will require far more detail about exactly what this person did (giving advice versus writing, etc). It would also help if you explain why you think it might have been plagiarism, what specifically you think might have gone over the line., etc.

Only helped me with debugging where I got stuck in code. advisor knew. It was like my first big distributed application , he helped me when I got stuck in code like that ways

I wrote an excellent methodlogy and related works , it was massively appreciated. I lacked coding skills in java so used a coder to help me only where I got stuck . Supervisor said get the code "running"

You said you found code from the Internet. Did you mention the sources in the references section of your thesis? If not, your have a separate concern in addition to the coding help related concern.

Maybe it depends on the field, but are you a 'master' of your field if you require outside assistance?

@juhist - I meant from internet I learned , I used how to use a particular library of java . Like encoding and all that. I nnever copied someone else's code but yes I did read the code how it is done with a certain java library and suite

@HEITZ - i never claim to be good at editing software not written by me . This software was badly written , it threw exceptions (without warning) even if naming convention to save the file was not right like - guy's name_abc like that . I had to dig deep to find out these issues . I just coded 10 percent of my design , I was fedup and added teeth to my research methodology and related works part

There are two independent issues here:

Did you take credit for someone else's work?  To avoid this, you need to explain the situation clearly and explicitly in your thesis, so that nobody will give you more credit than you deserve.  This has to be prominent enough to be noticed.  (If the code is a major part of your thesis, then it's not enough to mention the assistance just in a footnote on page 85.)
Did you do enough yourself to fulfill the requirements for your degree?  To ensure that this is the case, whoever grades your thesis (advisor, examiner, thesis committee) should be aware of the situation.

If you mentioned the assistance clearly in the thesis and your advisor was well aware of it, then you should be fine.
If you mentioned it clearly but your advisor was unaware, then you're probably OK, since it would be embarrassing for your advisor to admit that he/she didn't notice the clear statement in your thesis.  But you should have made sure your advisor knew.
If your advisor knew but you didn't mention it clearly in the thesis, then you should have written it differently.  You could be accused of academic dishonesty, but I think you are unlikely to get in trouble for it now, given that your advisor knew and hasn't objected.  However, if you publish the thesis results, you should be sure to mention it then.  (In my experience, people are more likely to get upset over credit issues for a publication than a master's thesis, so this is riskier.)
If your advisor didn't know and your thesis didn't mention it, then you are in a bad situation.  You probably won't be caught, because it's not so easy for anyone to find out, but if people do find out then you could easily be accused of academic dishonesty.  How serious this would be depends on the details of your case.

Above, @BrianDHall has a valid point that not all help needs to be credited. Discussions and help with debugging may as well count as just tutoring.

Advisor suggested take help and get the code running , since the work required building from an already existing very mature code base . I told him that I cannot edit this code base , so there was a plugin skeleton for this software written by the original devlopers. I used it and wrote a plugin , I got stuck in debugging and other discussions. I was honest with my advisor that I cannot edit source code of software not written by me , he was like OK and then later said you deserve A grade. He gave C for implementation but other sections like related works , methodology were A

@Anonymous Mathematician - advisor knew but I did not mention it in my thesis. for the publication I have to edit the source code , this was a plugin .


text:
Plural or singular in CV section titles?
In a CV for graduate school application, should one use plural or singular for the section titles? My main confusions are at

Research Experience or Research Experiences
Publication or Publications (more than one paper listed)
Education or Educations (two universities listed)
Honor & Award or Honors & Awards (more than one award listed)

I think this is just a grammar question. Make the concrete nouns (2 & 4)plural, the abstract ones (1 & 3) singular.

This question appears to be off-topic because it is about standard English grammar, not Academia

There is no general answer, I'll answer for the specific cases:

Research Experience (singular)
Publications (plural), or "List of Publications"
Education (singular). A better term is "Academic Record" IMO.
Honors and Awards (plural)

In points 2 and 4, going for plural makes sense because there is more than one publication and more than one award involved. In pt. 3 there may be more than 1 institution involved, but it doesn't say "institutions", it says "education", which means sum total of everything you obtained by going in these institutions. In point no. 1 also, the phrase "research experience" talks about all the research you have done in your academic career. "Experiences" would refer to the experiences you had during the course of your research. That's not what they are asking for!
Hope that helps :)

But there is a general answer. "Experience" and "education" are non-countable nouns, so they appear in the singular; "publication", "honor" and "award" are countable nouns so they appear in the plural, since you are likely to have more than one of them. (I suppose there's still a question as to whether you should title the section "Publications" even if you only have one publication, which is quite likely for an undergrad.)

@DavidRicherby - OP made it clear there are more than 1  publications listed, so I went for a plural. Besides this is EXACTLY why I said a general answer is not possible - in absolute generality, you can't say whether "one should use plural or singular for the section titles", because in general you don't know whether there is one item involved or more. English does differentiate between countable nouns when there is an issue of plurality involved. So, there is no general definite answer that can be taken as the standard and used for all cases. Anyways, thanks for your comment :)

Huh? You can give a general answer that is conditional. For example, "Always 'Education', not 'Educations'; if you have more than one publication, 'Publications' and, otherwise, either 'Publication' or 'Publications'." The only question is whether one should advise the use of the singular "Publication" if there's only one publication. I think it doesn't matter, since "Publications" is the normal title but "Publication" is accurate, so either can be used without being misleading.

@DavidRicherby - "Huh?" This discussion looks like an overkill to me. You are free to post another answer. I'll be happy to upvote.


text:
How to cite my own submitted but not yet published work?
I plan to submit part of my current work to conference A. I then wish to submit my whole work to a more prestigious conference B. As for the part submitted to A, there is no point of repeating it again. So I will just cite my submission to A in my submission to B.
But the problem is that the submission deadlines for A and B are roughly the same. So actually the moment I submit the work to B, my partial work submitted to A has not been published yet. I have not even been notified of its acceptance.
Can I still cite it? My concern is that even if I can cite it, one will find nothing online.

I definitely do not see the point of citing an unavailable paper. As you do not repeat the part of A that would also belong to B, the first thing you have to do is to make A available before submitting B. How would the referees do their work otherwise? After that, citing is an issue easily settled.

@BenoîtKloeckner But as I said, their deadlines are roughly the same. By no point, you mean the reviewers will have difficulties finding the paper? If that is the case, will arXiv fix that?

My point is indeed that the referee have to have access to the paper needed to read the paper under review. arXiv is a good solution, if it is ok with your conference, as suggested by some answers.

In principle you can cite other, submitted work in a research paper. Just give the authors, paper title, and either "Submitted." or "Submitted to [venue]." in the reference list.
However, both as a reviewer and reader, I usually find this disappointing. I already came across several cases where I wasn't able to find the cited paper even years after publication of the paper with the citation. It is well possible that the cited paper is rejected, and maybe someone just doesn't follow up to really get it published. As a better alternative, check whether you can put a preprint version of the paper you want to cite online (e.g. on arxiv), and just cite that.

But will putting it online say on arXiv affect the acceptance of the paper? I mean will the conference reject the paper since it is on arXiv. What's more, if the paper gets rejected, I may wish to refine it and re-submit to somewhere else. But if I put it onlione on arXiv, will anyone freely steal away my work?

@perfectionm1ng 1) Check with the conference whether they do accept papers that have been published as preprints. 2) If someone steals from an arxiv paper, its clearly plagiarism, and you may even prevent that someone publishes the same idea before you.

+1 for the suggestion to publish it on arxiv.  Or just make it available on your website.  In many parts of math, physics, and CS, most papers are published first this way.

@DavidKetcheson  May I ask most papers are published first this way for what reason? I don't understand in the cases except mine, why would they do it.

Here's my take on why you should publish before you publish.

@perfectionm1ng: I put all my papers on the arxiv prior to submission, because it make them available. Having one's papers read is a natural goal, don't you think?

@BenoîtKloeckner Thanks! It also prevents others from publishing the same thing while your work is under review, I suppose?

Putting your work on the arXiv does not prevent other people to publish roughly the same thing, which sometimes happen on good faith, but it gives anteriority since the arXiv deposit is dated.

You are allowed to cite works in submission as part of your ongoing research; this is something I've had to do on a number of instances for publications I wrote both in graduate school and as a post-doc.
The key here is that you must cite the work only as "Submitted to Conference A" rather than a standard reference to a work published in the proceedings. You would then, if possible, provide the conference paper A as an appendix or supporting information for the referees.

Citing something that is not published will prevent reviewers from doing their job, so it's a big no-no if you want to improve your chances of being accepted. The best way to go is to be patient and submit to B next year, having had the chance to improve using the reviews from A.
If this is not at all possible, you may be able publish A right now as a technical report from your lab/department an cite it as such. You'll have to check the guidelines of both conferences, namely if A accepts material previously published as a TR (in CS at least this is very common) and if B accepts citing TRs (usually also true in CS as long as it is easily available online).
Most importantly, when citing from a non-refereed source like a TR, you have to be very prudent in the way you characterize the work. Remember that it was only accepted in your department as an interesting document, not properly validated using the scientific contribution standards of your community. If I read a claim that something was "proven", or "shown", or "demonstrated" by a tech report, I'll probably reject the paper.
In any case, do not just cite A unless it is tangential (and in that case, why cite it all?). If it's actually important, give it an overview in your B submission, sufficient for a reviewer to keep on reading.

Just for clarification: you're saying that if I cite my older paper from my newer paper, then the reviewers of my newer paper will not be able to do their job of reviewing my newer paper by looking up references. Is that what you mean?

I believe that there a few issues that need to be addressed in this situation:

You believe that part A is based on fundamentally sound methodology and the findings will be accepted within the community of your discipline.
Can you cite works in submission?
Works in submission are not available to the public.

Whether of not Part A is widely accepted you can site it as a work in submission, the answer to the second concern is: you can also cite it as an unpublished work. For proper format check with the manual of style for your discipline.
An example of an unpublished work not submitted for publication using APA Manual of Style:
Lincoln, A. (1863). The principles of human equality.. Unpublished manuscript.
An example of a work in progress or submitted but not yet accepted using APA Manual of Style:
Lincoln, A. (1863). Gettysburg Address: The principles of human equality.. Manuscript                 submitted for publication (copy on file with author).
As far as the third concern goes, I have reviewed numerous submissions to everything from small local up to international conferences and the equivalent array of professional publications and journals, personally I prefer that a brief description of the "Part A" methods and finding be given in a manuscript. However, when it comes to an abstract and space limitations a simple "previously we (I) found...; therefore, we furthered the body of knowledge with..." was always sufficient for my standards.

Agreed with @aeismail♦, I just find a solution that indicated in IEEE conference paper template as follows:
"Papers that have not been published, even if they have been submitted for publication, should be cited as “unpublished”.
e.g. K. Elissa, “Title of paper if known,” unpublished."

I usually don't like to have many public versions of the same paper. I prefer releasing papers on arXiv only after receiving reviews and addressing relevant comments.
To address this issue, a solution I have been thinking about is to share the preprint I want to cite privately, i.e. only accessible for people reviewing the submission. This could be done by protecting paper access with a password that is given in the citation:
e.g., J. Guerin, “Title of the paper”, unpublished, available at "URL", password:XXX.
The citation can then be fixed once the cited papers is actually released.
Anyone has some comments about why this might be a bad idea? I don't see any problem so far.


text:
IRB guidelines for secure online data storage, backup, and syncing?
I am asking to get people's success stories in presenting a data management case for secure data backup using remote online services, rather than the antiquated "server in a locked room" model of security.
In general, I have gotten the impression that most IRB's think that a server on-campus in a locked room is safer than a cloud server in a mysterious data center.  It's an argument that doesn't hold much water to me.  In the business world, vital data is stored in cloud data centers all the time. However, given that IRB boards tend to not have many data-security specialists (if any), I am not sure what kinds of guarantees are typically requested.
For those who have gone down this road, what kinds of services and guarantees were required to meet the requirements of an IRB panel (and for what level of vulnerability of subjects and disclosure risks)?  For example, for medical data, I would assume that a HIPAA-compliant data service (e.g., Carbonite's Pro version) would usually be sufficient (but possibly not always).  I am most interested in slightly lower-risk data (e.g., sociological or cognitive), but would be interested in any reports on reasonable and IRB-approved service requirements for storing, syncing, and sharing data on a project.  Is a HIPAA-compliant storage usually sufficient?  Is it sometimes sufficient to have a non-HIPAA-compliant one, but with some other types of certification or privacy guarantees?  How important are guarantees that data will be fully-stored in a same-country (e.g., US) data center or on a discrete server?  In short, I'm hoping to figure out the guidelines that are generally used for matching a remote data service to an IRB data management plan.

Are the data anonymized? If so, why do you need to have a "locked room" data management plan?

There are a few reasons.  First, some types of data for research processes are inherently non-anonymous: think very large text corpora that may contain names in the text.  Second, other types of data, while anonymized, can be used to uniquely identify a person.  Big data sets, even with anonymized user ID's, can be used to pinpoint real people.  Finally, if you are dealing with data from vulnerable populations (e.g., students), it is always prudent to store the data carefully just in case it might be used to identify users.  For example, linguistic fingerprints or later college grades.

And those are just on the social-science/linguistics side.  For people who work with DNA data... you can anonymize the labels it all you want, you've got their uniquely-identifying info either way.  In short, with modern analytical techniques, having truly-anonymous data in a rich data set is usually a pipe dream.  It's the 20-questions problem: even 20 yes-no variables can uniquely identify most individuals through history.

For IRB, the responsibility is on you to convince the panel.  I think it will be hard to really get an example the same way lawyers do.  For example, even if I had convinced my IRB board to let me use cloud data, it is not some precedent at your location for why they should accept it.  If you know the low level reasons why your cloud storage is as safe as any 'locked room' server, make that argument to your board in a clear way

@CharlesMorisset IRBs present unique issues. I think of the question as not really about secure data handling, but rather how to convince the IRB that what you are doing is ethical.

Does this document from LLNL help?

@CharlesMorissett: I would argue that this is on quite-topic because IRB's are often distinctly different than just following best-practices in data storage.  It's analogous to the difference between building a safe plane versus getting the FAA to approve your plane for flight.

@StrongBad: That is definitely a good start, with the interesting things near the end.  It looks like the National Labs' approach to remote data is two-factor authentication.

Also, I should note that while I am aware that the IRB is not required to follow any precedents (their own or elsewhere), being aware of effective arguments made in the past could be a big leg up.  At my particular institution, IRB is fairly slow (i.e., measured in months per cycle).  If you need to address 2 revisions with the IRB panel, that will likely take half a year or more to be approved.  Cutting out one such cycle is a major speed-up.

While this solution will likely be only a drop in the bucket for your request, I did write a paper covering security issues related to health information and HIPAA while finishing up my Master's. Section 6 has a case study on Amazon Web Services as a "HIPAA-compliant" cloud storage solution, including both its positives and its negatives.
Since this was a review paper, I feel the need to point out that I don't have any personal experience with Amazon Web Services or with setting it up for HIPAA compliance, so don't take it as an endorsement either for or against its use.
It's important to evaluate exactly what any proposed service you select actually provides. AWS, for example, supports basically the creation of the HIPAA-compliant environment. That being said, that's the creation of one, not one provided out of box. You'd have to implement a variety of features normally associated with data storage such as backing up data, auditing all changes, and so on.
Basically, you're asking what you need to do to satisfy the IRB, I guess. What you should probably be asking is what you can do to satisfy HIPAA regulations, and using that, justify that it is a viable solution to the IRB.
I can't really provide you a concrete example of an actual cloud data storage plan (the one I was involved in is non-disclosure and I'm also not an IS guy) but I might be able to answer some more conceptual questions.


text:
Submit a paper to a conference where co-authors are in the committee?
I recently read a paper whose co-authors are found in the conference committee.
Although they are not in the executive committee, they are in organizing committee and all the committee people know each other well.
So I am wondering how this can happen? I mean, is there any regulation, either ethical or by law, that prohibits this type of thing? Or it's allowed?

For any reputable conference, authors with a conflict of interest will recuse themselves from discussions about their paper. They won't have a vote on the paper, and if things are very well administered, other committee members won't even know that the paper is from that particular author, only that the author has a conflict of interest. Indeed, there are many reasons for a conflict of interest:

Current or prior colleague at the same university.
Current or prior collaboration or co-author on a paper or papers.
Current advisor / student relationship.
etc.

These guidelines are generally spelled out in the paper submission guidelines, too (if you are an author and have a conflict, you should list them). Also, in many program committee meetings, committee members go in and out of paper discussions based on whether they have a conflict for a particular paper or not.

is there any regulation, either ethical or by law, that prohibits this type of thing?

Ethical: sure (see above).
Legal: no. I'm not sure why people think there are a lot of legal rules that dictate how independent, non-government conferences and journals are administered. I've seen this in a number of questions recently, and the bottom line is that a conference has its own rules to abide by, and that's about it. Conference organizers have a vested interest in making things fair to the extent that they don't want the conference to have a bad name, but they aren't in the position to be bound by any laws pertaining to the way the conference is administered (outside of normal law-abiding behavior).

It would be a strange situation if you were forbidden to publish something when you organize a meeting. What usually happens is that your paper is taken on (for editing or other scrutiny) by someone else in such a committee. I agree that it can become a little sensitive if you are the sole organizer handling the reviews and submitting a paper. In such a case ethics would hopefully make you think about a co-convener or to openly state that someone with more neutral standings will handle your paper specifically.
So this situation is common, very common, and in most if not all cases there are ways to avoid conflicts of interest. There may of course be cases where the intent is to circumvent objective handling but such cases are likely noticed in the community. In the end, I think it is bad judgement to avoid objective handling.

It would be a strange situation if you were forbidden to publish something when you organize a meeting. — In most theoretical computer science conferences, submissions from program committee members are not allowed.  (Submissions from organizing committee members are allowed, however, because that's not the committee that decides on the program.)

In some of the communities I am in, the following processes ensure that bias is removed.
In one case, such papers would receive additional reviews and would be rejected if any of the reviews suggests rejection. In another case, there is an additional committee whose task in part is to review such papers.


text:
Strategies for getting involved in students' work during labs?
As a TA I conduct computer laboratory classes (the lecture is conducted by one of the professors). These are part-time studies, so labs take place during weekends, 3 clock hours each. Some students are older than me and are mostly male (I'm female). Some students have longer job experience than me, but I still feel I can teach them something important, not particular technologies, but rather an engineer attitude.
I prepared detailed written tutorials for these classes, which students follow step by step. At particular steps there are some general remarks included, like as you just saw, it's a good idea to include validation both at client and at the server site. The reason I don't say these remarks by myself, is that the speed of work differs significantly from student to student.
The result is that I don't have anything to do during these tutorials. I say a small introduction at the beginning, but it's not extensive, because the theory is covered at the lectures. Students don't ask me for help because the written tutorials address a large set of mistakes that students from previous years already did. When they really don't know what to do, they ask their colleagues.
In rare occasion they ask me a question I rush to them and explain everything, I also say in the beginning that if they have any questions I will be happy to help, so I don't think I deter then from asking for help.
But still I sit silent for most of the time. I only make few rounds around the lab, asking if they achieved the particular step, but they say they did and that's all. The rest of the time I do other things related to the classes (for example review tutorials, check homework, answer emails).
Last year I overheard students saying they like the written tutorials very much, because they are clear and include everything they need. Still I'm worried they can give me bad notes for my teaching, because from their perspective I do nothing and I am of no use to them during labs (last year my final score wasn't count because too few students decided to grade me).
What could be strategies to make tutorial-based lessons with tutorials more interactive? Or maybe I should not worry about it?
My idea was to make the tutorials more vague so that they ask more questions but it seems ridiculous. The tutorials are also used by students who could not attend classes or couldn't finish during labs. Also only first part is step-by-step, because the second part contains homework, on which they can practice self-reliance.
Edit
This situation also makes them ask if they can do the work at home, without attending labs and just send in homework. I'm ok with that, but I think my department is not.
I also had a situation when student send me an email with finished task during labs instead of showing it to me.

When they really don't know what to do, they ask their colleagues Something is wrong here. Why don't they ask you?

I don't know. If I knew I would do something about it. I'm always able to answer or give them a tip. But usually colleagues also know the answer, so they ask them.

How difficult are the tutorials? Having been in a similar situation myself recently -- from the perspective of a student -- I would usually avoid asking the TAs for help as the tutorials were not too difficult and I could do them by myself after racking my brains for a bit. Good documentation further obviates the need to talk to a person for help. Also, if they have internet access then asking a TA demands more humility then searching StackOverflow.

@theindigamer I observe that for some students they are very hard and for some very easy. Those who have no problems are asked questions by others. I used to do the same in fact, but I would like to know how can I get a little bit more interaction.

Why not just walk around the room and talk to them as they work on the lab? "Hey, how's it going. I see you're up to part X. Did you have any trouble with Y? It's interesting that Z, isn't it." Talking to them gives them an opening to ask questions, and also helps you tease out those that still hold onto some persistent misunderstandings.

@ff524 They mainly reply with yes/ok and it's hard for me to follow up. But I will try to practice this. It was much better last time. I will also try to analyse the effect of windows in the classroom (we have one classroom where there are none and students seem to be much quieter there, there is air conditioning, lights and all, but it can be perceived gloomy), but I need a larger sample.

"I prepared detailed written tutorials for these classes, which students follow step by step." To me this seems to be the opposite of teaching an "Engineers attitude"...

@WeckarE. These steps shows certain mechanisms, which are important for engineer to take into account. For example "check what happens if user inputs X. Review Y and try to fix it.".

Ah, I imagined the step-by-step nature would be far more menial. Monkey see, monkey do type of thing. My apologies for misunderstanding.

@WeckarE. It wasn't evident from the question so no reason to apologise. Your remark is very useful in general.

From your post it appears that the labs are already highly interactive. Students are engaged working on the assignment among each other. From an education perspective the current learning environment is student-centered, which is often the ideal.
However, one common drawback to an engaging, student centered environment is that the teacher is not the focus of the learning. This can be somewhat un-stimulating for the teacher but the goal is always for the students to have maximum involvement.
One option for dealing with this situation is to shift from trying to lead the students to provide expertise when necessary. When students have questions be available to answering them. Another useful strategy is monitoring. This involves observing student progress and providing additional unsolicited support.

These situations require also the structuring of sessions. If they just work, then they just will work. It is especially bad if the students are better than the teacher. Why would they ask you? Teacher is always the authority in the class, so peers are preferred because you can get chatty with them. This is good and should be encouraged as Darrin Thomas said.
We have a bit similar course where we start the sessions by students presenting their solutions. Other students can ask questions, but it is usually only the teacher that does. The students are too shy because they lack the authority. Here the possible intimacy gets in way and the role of teacher is needed. You just ask there easy questions, that have likely puzzled some other students: "How did you end up with that solution?" or "Why did you do it like that?"
If the teacher is not in a hurry, you can spend more time with one question. You can make sure that the student actually understands how and why the solution is as it is. You can stay beside the student while he is solving the problem and monitor while giving tips. You can also interfere with right solutions, like give tips on how to make it more neat.
These will work even if the teacher is not the best one in the class. You always have your perspective that can benefit the students by making them improve their solutions from other perspectives than their own.


text:
Should I cite logos and clip-art in my thesis?
In my presentation I am using a block diagram which contains few logos (like Mathworks, visual studio) and some clip-art (like desktop, hardware board) . I got these from various random websites from Google image search. Should I  cite them??

You should cite anything you use, and you should make sure that you have an appropriate copyright license for any material you do not own the rights to. Look for Creative Commons and other pre-licensed materials to use in your work.

The only thing I'd add to that is, "when in doubt, include a citation"! ...With one exception, if it's something like Microsoft clipart, and you got it from within your software package (e.g. PowerPoint), you don't need to cite it. Which brings up another question... why not use your software's clipart collection whenever possible?

but i can't get logo of bmw or something from that...so i need to use internet to get those extra logo. like visual studio logo. etc@BethR.

@arunkumar, must you have a BMW logo? It's generally OK in many locales to use a company's logo without permission when referring to them. No one will be confused that you are referring to them rather than implying an endorsement.

If there's an image you need that isn't in your software's clipart selection, and it's not available as a pre-licensed/open image online: You can try to select the versions of those images that contain the company's trademark (TM) symbol, or the copyright symbol (C with a circle around it), etc. -- just to show that you're aware that some sort of acknowledgement like that is expected. It looks a little more professional that way... imho.

authors: จีรศักดิ์ เหลี่ยมแก้ว


text:
How to interpret division of Korean names when citing articles?
I'm preparing bibliography using Microsoft Word's bibliography creator, which look like this:

I would like to insert Korean author Won-Hwa Park. Where to put his names in the "Add name" section? What is his first, last and middle name? What are rules that govern citing Korean authors?

I don't know the answer to your question, but I just want to remark that a lot of language don't have middle name. It seems to be an English-speaking tradition...

The only 'real' purpose to getting this right is to be sure that your citation could lead somebody to the correct paper.  These days that will often mean a search in a database. I have gone in to Web of Science to see which permutations of names will lead to the paper popping up (and avoid the ones that don't). Perhaps brute force, but if you comply with a Korean convention that does not lead a reader to the article, well, that isn't very useful to the reader.

The "last" name (i.e. the family name) is Park. First name Won Hwa (or Wonhwa/Won-Hwa/Won-hwa). No middle name.

There are three general naming conventions you need to familiarize yourself with for proper citation in a modern context: European, Middle Eastern and East Asian.
European
(Primary Given Name) (Optional Secondary etc. Given Name[s]) (Family Name)
(John) (Mephistophiles) (Smith)
East Asian
(Family Name) (Given Name)
(Huang) (Jieshi)
or
(Park) (Hwa-won)
In this case the Family name is usually 1 Chinese character, and the given name is 2 characters (even if the characters are no longer used as in Korea and Viet-nam). In Chinese, Korean, and Viet-namese that usually means one syllable per character, but in Japanese it varies wildly.
Many times the romanization of the East Asian names will join the given name with a hype (Won-Hwa) or have them as a single, unbroken word. However, sometimes they are broken apart, in two words, but they are still one name. When in doubt, Google the name you suspect to be the family name. If it is the family name, there will be lots and lots of people with that name. (Park is the most common name in Korea).
Middle Eastern
(Given Name) (Father's Given Name) (Grandfather's Given Name) (Tribal or Locational Name)
Sometimes the Fathers and Grandfathers given name is preceded by an article like 'bin' (Arabic), 'ben' (Hebrew), 'ibn' (Classical Arabic), or substituted for 'bint' or other female forms before the father's name if a woman. The locational name will almost always be preceded by the article, 'al'. The articles may be separated from the names by a hyphen or not, but when written should be included, but not usually when spoken unless in very formal circumstances.
(Mahmoud) bin (Hamid) bin (Abdul-Qadr) (al-Hashemi)
In a citation manager it should be entered as follow:

Following this table your entry should be:
Last Name = "Park", First Name = "Won-Hwa", Middle Name = ""