text:
May have embellished my CV and resume by mistake after I was admitted to MA and Ph.D programs. Could either of my degrees be revoked?
I am a doctoral candidate in a Ph.D program right now.
I reviewed my old resumes recently to see if there was anything relevant I could include from undergrad (as I am about to graduate with my Ph.D sometime in March or May 2024). Long story short, I think I may have embellished and I am not sure whether I did that intentionally or not (I wanted to get into an MA program really bad at the time so maybe). It is getting to the point I am doubting whether I did that on purpose or not.
I initially thought I had listed just my duties and that the time in which I did them was only 3 months rather than 9 months (I thought I had to list how long I was a member, which was 9 months). However, it turns out I had the following:

Ran participants using an eye tracker and learned related software
Provided feedback for the control and experimental variables used and manipulated
Chose images used in experiment
Ran data and made charts using SPSS that will be in the study once published

For point 1, the "participants" I ran were just other graduate students for testing the experiment before it was set to be run at the start of next academic year. As implied in my previous post, this never happened since the PI was a well intended, yet very disorganized and forgetful (to the point I could not even get an LOR from her because she was so unreliable).
For point 2, I did this during the summer in the lab. I gave feedback on the stimuli they used.
For point 3, this was one I did.
For point 4, I did help run data at one point and made charts in SPSS. Those were going to be the model for a study that the lab was going to try to publish (but never did).
The running theme here is that all of these points were momentary and they were things I made bullet points out of anyway and seemingly stretched over the course of an academic year. Knowing what I know now, there was zero way I would have wrote it like this. I now see on my resume in the past few years that I cut point 1 and edited the other points so it was more accurate to the time.
I distinctly remember that I had some doubt at the time when wrote it years ago as to whether I was accurate and just went with what "looked better." Again, I did most of these things but I am not sure if I embellished or not. Even so, it was probably an accident.
I was also only in the lab a few hours a week (as in as low as 1-3 sometimes) so I am so doubtful to the point where I am having a lot of stress all over again. I do not even know if I deserved to get my foot in the door somewhere at the MA, let alone the Ph.D level.
Do I need to be concerned about whether this change is going to be noticed at all by other parties? If so, what are the consequences?

Is anything really inaccurate except maybe you would specify “pilot participants” ? I wonder if you even understood the difference between pilot participants and regular study participants back then…

It is not our role to adjudicate individual cases. For general information about how degree revocation works, please see the above.

The short answer is: you do not need to be concerned, this will not be noticed by anybody, and there will be no consequences.
The long answer: you didn't lie on your resume - you really didn't even "embellished". Hear me out, you were part of the lab for x-time, during that time you did a,b,c,d. No-one assumes you spent literally the entire time doing a,b,c,d only that you did them at some point - which you did.
Personally, I think this sort of worry is a bit neurotic. You finished a MA and are on your way to finishing a PhD. I guarantee that that single entry is not solely responsible for you getting accepted into a grad program. And it certainly did not get you through years of school. Those are your accomplishments.
Worrying that someone will dig into an old resume entry and consider it dishonest and pursue some punitive action is just...not worth your time. It's one thing to straight up lie. But I don't see that here. By all means, update the entry to be more accurate (if you even keep in on your resume - most people drop things like this off sooner or later). But consider where this anxiety is really coming from. This sounds like imposter syndrome more than anything else. Trust that you deserve your position and accomplishments. Good luck!

Every situation is different, so it's hard to give general advice. And like any lawyer would say, this isn't legal advice or anything. So as with most things in life, take everything I say with a grain of salt.
Honestly, the fact that you are worried, speaks to your character. Admirable. Everyone embelishes, that's the nature of a resume. Intentionally lying, isn't good, but from your tone it sounds like you were genuinely confused and not intending to be deceitful.
I wouldn't be too concerned. Just fix it for the future (now that you know it was initially messed up) and learn from your mistakes. It would be incredibly unlikely that anything would happen, especially with regards to any ramifications. And if on the rare chance it comes up, just be honest. People make mistakes, embellish, etc. Just learn from your mistakes and try and avoid intentionally embellishing in the future.
If anything I feel like that's the most important thing to learn in a PhD. To learn from one's mistakes and try and do better in the future. But I wouldn't worry that much.


text:
Referencing cited authors
This problem comes up a lot when I write text that describes other's work.

to enable personalized Web searches was first proposed in [32], however in [9] it was showed to be computationally inefficient. [33] iterated upon the method and made it suitable for real-time use....

My question is if this is poor style? I've written such paragraphs myself but I have also seen them in real, published research. Hence the question.

It is a bit easier on the reader if you say, instead:

to enable personalized Web searches was first proposed by Smith in [32], however in [9] Jones, et al., showed this to be computationally inefficient. And Lindqvist in [33] iterated upon the method and made it suitable for real-time use....

It is easier, I suggest, for the reader to have something like a "picture" associated with a name, rather than just a reference number. And if the same author wrote more than one of the papers it brings them together in the reader's mind.

True. But in each of 9, 32 and 33 there is not one author but five or more. :)

Hence, et al. For two, you might list both names, of course.

Bah.  Humbug.  "Enabling personalized web searches was first proposed by Smith [32]; however, Jones et al [9] showed this to be computationally inefficient.  Lindqvist [9] later improved on the method, making it suitable for real-time use."

Uncle, Uncle. @JeffE

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Don't want someone else to continue on the topic of my thesis
Today I defended by Bachelor's thesis and I did well. The thesis is handed in. However the process of developing it was a real nightmare, I had many panic attacks, etc. and it was just awful. But now I realized that I have mentioned in my thesis that there is room for more research in this field when there barely is any and if someone decides to continue my research with my results they are going to have a really bad time. I just really don't want anyone to suffer the way I did or even more.
Should I be stressed about it and is there any action I can take?

I am sorry you had a bad time and Congrats on your BSc. However, is there any reason for you to think that anyone doing the same type of work would suffer the same that you did? The next person may enjoy doing it incredibly, or just be plainly OK with doing it. In any case, do not worry, its in the past for you. Get well and keep on.

Thanks. The reason I'm concerned is that I just today tried continuing the research in the way my thesis suggests and stumbled upon extremely confusing results and I know what the problem might be, but if someone continues my research they 100% won't know what's wrong and will suffer. Thesis has been just tearing me apart and I thought today I'd get rid of it, but there it is still sitting next to me and making me worry.

Extremely confusing results is the day to day of Academia, quite a lot of people just work and life for this. People are just different. Just relax, its not on you anymore, and that is the only thing that you should focus on.

@DSVA: 'From my experience that's code for "we stop this here and we aren't interested in looking into this any more"' - while that is one possible interpretation, two other extremely common ones seem to be "This extension is really obvious, but we were too busy/lazy/unintrigued to do it before finishing this document." and "We very much want to move into this direction, but we can't do it alone and are looking for support now, is anyone interested in collaborating?"

@SEwontLetMeDeleteProfile They better NOW since GDPR has passed.

@O.R.Mapper Another common one is “This extension is pretty obvious, but as usual, we have to do three people’s work each, so we have neither the time, the energy, nor the money to do it ourselves, but we’d be happy if someone else did”.

There is no way to know whether given field is complete or not. The history of quantum mechanics (or rather physics before) shows how naive such thinking is. Also what you take as suffering someone else may find enjoyable. :)

@DSVA how would you interpret "there is no more room for research in this field" either explicitly or implicitly (by not listing possible extensions).

Fuhget about it. I guarantee in 3 months you won't care at all. You're moving on to your career.

Congratulations on the successful defence of your thesis. If at all possible, take some time to relax.
I understand your concern, but you have no real reason to worry. In general, there is always room for more research on any given topic. Now, anyone who wishes to advance your work will either be more senior than yourself or working for someone more senior than yourself. It will be their responsibility to decide if they want to invest their time and energy in the project.
If you are ever contacted about your thesis, then you can explain why you are less optimistic today, than you were in the past. It is very likely that the other person has some fresh ideas and together you may move forward.

Thanks for the calming comment. It's just that today the reviewer seemed quite happy about my work and mentioned something about possibility to continue the research. I keep wondering if I have to tell him that the thesis isn't really that great and if continued little results with great effort are to be expected.

@gfels Considering that a lot of research yields no meaningful results at the cost of great effort, I wouldn't be so concerned about that...

@gfels, At the risk of making a cliche recommendation: consider reading up on impostor syndrome.  When you are still early in your career, you are not yet capable of accurately judging your own competency.  If more experienced people who you trust are telling you that the work is good, consider that they might actually be correct and your own perception of it lacking could merely be an artifact of your own (relative) inexperience.

Should I be stressed about it?

Well, like everyone else is probably telling you, no; but try to think about it this way: Suppose you find some book in the library about some subject; and you notice that book indicates further research could be possible. Would you blame the author if it turned out the experience of doing that research was not pleasant? Of course not.
Also, people's experience doing research is much more the result of their personality, their life situation, and the kind of environment they're in; it's almost not at all the result of the subject itself inducing stress.

and is there any action I can take?

Well, I suppose. You could talk to your thesis advisor(s), and let them know how you felt. You can indicate that the subject is "treacherously alluring" and caution them that future students might find it harder and perhaps more stressful than it may appear on first sight.
Of course you can't know for sure that future work will go through the same advisor; nor that s/he will take your advice seriously, but it's something, right?

Congratulations on getting through your thesis defence.  Since it is only a bachelor-level thesis, you will find that professional researchers will be more than capable of making their own assessment of the topic and its potential for future research.  Extending your thesis might be a cruel and unusual punishment for some, but it is the kind of masochism that academic researchers sign up for.  Relax and enjoy being pulled off the torture-rack.

Don't worry about it. Most of the work in academia is fakework for grants and dead-end prestige games. The unlucky sap continuing your work will not be in a worse situation than if you were able to prevent your work from being used.

To test the relevance of academic work, go to your local university library.  Find out where they keep BSc theses.  Pick one at random, open it to a random page, slip in a $20 bill, and put it back where you found it.  Revisit the thesis periodically.  If anyone else picks it up, they will pocket the money.

@emory, up here, they stopped having even printed master's thesis a couple of years back, so you may need to just go the website the thesis are archived on, and check the download/view counts from there.

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


text:
Citing part of a work when using IEEE style
Is it acceptable to be very specific in IEEE-style citations (always providing the section or paragraph)?
In the IEEE Reference Guide, there are examples on how one can use IEEE-style citations to refer to which part of the reference the reader should look at.
Doing some research, I learnt that, when citing a work using other styles, one may be specific about which part of the work they want to reference (example).
More specifically, I am considering using citations that look like this:

[1, Para. 1]
[2, Abs.]
[3, Sec. 1]
[2, Review and Suggestions sec.]
…

The details about which section or paragraph readers should look for has the benefit of making it easier to find that part in the reference.
However, I have not seen this used much. Such citations could make the paper look cluttered and perhaps reading would be cumbersome for people not interested in the citations.
Is it, in the end, bad practice?

This is not necessarily a bad thing. The rule of thumb I have is "how hard is it to find the said result in the citation". In older papers which might have theorem numbering starting fresh for each section (without a section prefix), I'd include the most accurate citation I can provide. In a paper whose introduction states "This paper is devoted for X", I would not bother in case I only refer to the general proof of X.
Ultimately, you need that the readers will be able to verify that the reference you cite say what you say that it says. When this is easy and the reference is "general enough", I think it should be fine to just give the citation; and when the reference is a complex body of work, it is better to pinpoint the citation.
You want to use citations as photographic evidence in court. The resolution should be sufficient that the jury can see the image and understand it properly; additional markings (e.g. arrows pointing the attention to something) can often be useful. However pointing to a specific pixel is not always useful. And most importantly, don't fake evidence.
(If you are not sure, err to the side of more detailed citations. The worst that could happen is that the referee or the editor will remove some of the details.)

So when the reference is small (a short article/webpage) this is not necessary right? Also inconsistency due to including such details at times and not at others is not an issue?

If the reference is a two pages paper, there isn't necessarily a reason to pinpoint the exact location of what you're referring to. Again, this is about context. Of course, if you're not sure, err on the side of more details.

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


text:
Funny 5th option in multiple choice exam?
I came across a multiple choice exam paper where the professor had included a funny fifth option in almost every question. There was also a bonus question at the end, where students can earn 0.5 extra points for writing their own humorous multiple choice question.
It was the final examination of a bachelor-level course, though I have no reason to believe that the professor does not do the same in master-level exam papers as well.
For example, the fifth option for one of the questions was, “I don’t know, but a vanilla latte would be perfect right now.” Another one was, “Come one man, stop it with these lame jokes.” On a question regarding why someone might have a conditioned taste aversion to sushi, the fifth option was, “They certainly did not try sushi from [popular local sushi place].”
The exam papers I saw were those of students who had done well in the exam, and they seemed to appreciate the humor, since they provided their own funny question at the end for the extra 0.5 points. However, I did not get the chance to see the rest of the papers.
Also, the questions did not cause any disruption during the exam itself. No student was visibly laughing or trying to communicate with another student.
On the one hand, I myself find this hilarious and it seems others, including students, find it too. It might help lighten up the mood and ease anxiety during the exam.
However, I am afraid that it might be a distraction, especially since it was not a single joke but a running joke throughout most of the questions in the 33-question exam. Students might lose time reading these responses, or they may feel that the professor is belittling what is otherwise an important and serious exam for them. Is this, perhaps, unprofessional?

Assuming five options are mandated (by the department or university, for instance), the professor is simplifying the exam, rather than causing students to lose time.

@user2768 Such exams usually have four options, so there is no simplification.

For what it's worth, sometimes for major tests (50-minute entire meeting-time tests of which 3 to 5 are given per semester course) I gave in classes, tests that I was entirely responsible for writing the questions, after I came up with a reasonable assignment of varying point values for the problems (points assigned according to my perceived difficulty and importance of the problem), I would find the total to be something like 99 points or 98 points, and didn't want to change any of the point values I'd already assigned. (continued)

Instead of rescaling all the test scores to a 100 point scale when recording the results after grading the tests, I would just put a 1 or 2 point question at the end, something like "24. Write your name in the appropriate blank a the top right of the first page." (2 points) or "24. Circle the correct value for 1 + 1: (A) 0 (B) 1 (C) 2 (D) 3" (1 point) Of course, I told students about it (or put a note at the top of the first page) alerting them to the give-away question, or put a note on the blackboard), because otherwise some might not get to the very end and see the last question.

the professor had included a funny fifth option in almost every question --- Personally, having this two or three times would be funny (to me), but having this in almost every question would border on being nauseating (to me).

Was the option always at the fifth position or was it mixed with other serious options? It might be less of an issue if it was separate and the students were informed, since then those who are not interested can ignore them easily.

@GoodDeeds It was always in the fifth position.

Sometimes multiple-choice tests have items that are hilarious to those who know the material but half the students don't suspect there's anything humorous there.

I don't know the complete context, so can't say whether it is unprofessional or not in this instance. But it is dangerous in a multi-cultural situation. If I were sure that everyone taking the class shared the same overall context (cultural base, familiarity with the language....) then I wouldn't be worried about it, otherwise it seems very ill-advised. If you "get" the joke, then fine. But jokes often depend on language and cultural context. Some jokes are also racist or sexist, but I assume that these would be avoided.
My guess about the example you give is that the professor was really trying to reduce the number of viable options. In fact, that is usually recommended: one answer that is very clearly not correct.
But, another possibility is that the "jokes" somehow depend on some deep insight into the subject matter itself in order to work. That would be interesting and might require some research to judge, but I don't think there are many people who could manage to create such exams very often as it requires too much thought.
My suggestion to you is that you avoid such things unless you have a very deep understanding of both the subject and the students taking the course. Most of us have students with many backgrounds and what "works" as a joke in one context can be either confusing or insulting in another. Even if it is merely confusing, it will disadvantage some students. Just. Say. No.
Some students, thinking it were "just fun" might actually pick such an answer "just for fun". What is the instructor's grading strategy for such choices?

For the record, I'm not humorless and enjoy such subtle plays on language and such. But not for exam purposes in my field.
And, I'll also note that some such "jokes" appear on this site from time to time, and we get comments from people not understanding the intent.

"Some students, thinking it were 'just fun' might actually pick such an answer 'just for fun'. What is the instructor's grading strategy for such choices?" I don't think that ever happened since students who do not know the answer would probably guess one of the real options (there is no penalty for a wrong answer). If it did happen, then I assume it would be just as good as a nonanswer.

That is hard for us to determine. This could be a legitimate way to help students relax during the exam. The fact that the professor includes this at a fixed spot at the end of each question, that this seems to be an established tradition with students expecting this and being encouraged to participate in it, points in that direction.
On the other hand attempts at humor directed towards a large number of people in a context where you cannot easily defuse misunderstandings is risky.
So based on the information you have given us, it could be either.

You are saying that it could be either. Assuming I am a professor who is interested in trying this out, what factors do you suggest considering in order to determine if it will help students relax or if it will cause misunderstandings?

That is the wrong way around. The humor used this way is a method to solve a problem. So the starting point would be that I regularly administered an exam where I noticed that a substantial number of students did less well than they could because of anxiety. And I would consider various options, depending on the circumstances of that course. So you start with the problem and the circumstances and not with the method.

I wouldn't say there's a problem per se. Anxiety is commonplace for many students during exams, and the particular course does not cause more anxiety than others. It's just an addition that might make things better for students, even if things don't need fixing at the moment.

Humor is a very risky strategy, so I would not use this for routine problems. So it has it has to be an exceptionally stressful exam for many and other, less risky, strategies would not be as effective.

But I wouldn't say there's a problem at all. It's just a consideration to improve the experience of students taking the exam by lightening up the mood. Nevertheless, your point still holds that it's probably very risky.

At my college, the organic chemistry class was pretty high pressure, particularly for the pre-meds. Each year during the final, a plant would wait about 5-10 minutes into the 2 hour exam, stand up, proclaim’I can’t take this anymore’, and run out of the hall. This produced a wave of laughter and a general release of tension. That this would happen was well known, even to those like me who did not take the course.

"in a context where you cannot easily defuse misunderstandings is risky" seems exactly right. I was brought up to respect this Golden Rule "The Examiners must not make jokes at the expense of the Candidates, although a certain whimsicality is permitted in the Probability questions".

Is this, perhaps, unprofessional?

Yes, to the extent that students:

may feel that the professor is belittling what is otherwise an important and serious exam for them

Presumably this objection can be overcome by simply asking the students what they think!
Cultural issues have been addressed in other answers.
The other big concern is distraction. This depends on whether the situation was clearly explained to the students before the exam (which should be done anyway for the reasons discussed above). It also depends on the exam being consistently laid out, so students can train themselves to read everything that matters and nothing that does not. Consistency seems to be a problem, based on these quotes from the question (emphasis added):

I came across a multiple choice exam paper where the professor had included a funny fifth option in almost every question.

it was not a single joke but a running joke throughout most of the questions in the 33-question exam.


text:
Taking selfies with conference speakers
I'm at a conference and I really enjoyed a plenary lecture by a speaker.
His work resonated with some of the stuff I have been working on myself.
I have a Journal Club presentation coming up soon in my lab and I'm planning to present a few of his recent papers along with other perspectives in the field. Would it be ok to ask for a selfie at the conference dinner to put in the presentation?
In general, is it acceptable to ask scientists for selfies? I doubt that it matters, but the field in question is protein chemistry.

Many people detest selfies, but perhaps the speaker is gracious enough to let you have one if you explain why. Really, there is no way to know. It's tacky, though, so you are better a younger student if you do this :-)

Yes, it is acceptable. I heard a rumor that scientists are human beings. I have not been able to confirm it, but it seems like a plausible assumption, and if you are willing to accept this as a working hypothesis, it follows that it is acceptable to behave around them as you would with other human beings.
In particular, most human beings are flattered if you approach them with excitement and admiration and ask to have your photo/selfie taken with them because you want to brag to your friends (or whoever) about meeting them, and would either happily agree or (less likely, but possible) politely refuse. Scientists - even protein chemists! - are no exception to this rule.

And to confirm your hypothesis that scientists are human beings even when it come to pictures, I can tell you that two of my students asked a Nobel prize, in different occasions, to have a photo with him. He happily accepted.

@MassimoOrtolano sure, this is supporting evidence but is purely anecdotal with no statistical significance. Clearly more research is needed on this question.

Funny anecdote about scientists being human beings: a few years ago I met a student of mine in a supermarket. He was shocked. The next week he came to my office to take an exam. He confessed that at the beginning he was really shocked to meet me there, but then he thought: "well, they have to eat too, after all". I told him: "thank you for considering us professors human beings".

Here is a better idea.
Ask if you can have your picture taken with them.  Ask someone else to hold the camera/phone.
And don't ask at the dinner, ask before or after if the opportunity presents itself.  Don't be that guy that pushes through people to ask someone for a photo op.
Tell them how much you liked their lecture, etc.
Also, just to cover all bases a Forbes article on business dining etiquette  The list at the end is the biggest thing to pay attention to.

Asking someone else to take the photo does seem more dignified.

@VarunM I really don't see how the mode of photography makes any difference whatsoever to how dignified the request is. There may be some stuffy people here who disagree, and I think they may have a point when it comes to single-person selfies (which I do find a bit overly narcissistc myself), but taking a selfie with another person is just a convenient (and perfectly normal and acceptable in 2017) way to frame the picture and get it over with quickly, nothing more.

@DanRomik, it's totally fine. I appreciate contrasting opinions.

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


text:
University I rejected is asking which other one I chose over them; should I tell?
I got PhD admission offers from 2 Universities (say A and B) and yesterday decided to accept one of them (University A).
Today I decided to  let University B know that I would not be able to join them. After they acknowledged my refusal to join, they asked for the name of University A since they keep track of the same for statistical purposes.
Is there any harm in letting them know? Or is it better to keep it private?
Edit
I guess I was fretting over nothing. I sent B a brief reply saying that I was going to accept the offer from A (I've already signed documents with A so I'm reasonably confident they won't leave me in the lurch). B replied wishing me the best of luck at A.
Thanks for the comments! I wasn't sure this was a common thing to ask for universities.

Sooner or later you kind of need to reveal to the world where you're doing a PhD, no?

Sabotage is unlikely but it's not impossible. Just tell them you'd formally notify them when the actual procedure at school A has been finalized. Once the contract is signed, then feel free to tell B.

I cannot think of any reason not to tell them. It may be infinitesimally beneficial to let them know, such as by building trust with a potential future collaborator/peer reviewer/etcetera. or simply putting it in the head of the people you would have worked "ah X is working on Y". I was also asked the same and I let the would-be supervisor know, he responded kindly saying the place I was going is good.

You should tell them, but since there is no deadline, do it when you feel comfortable.

There's probably no harm, but I also can't think of any benefit. Treat it like you would any other unpaid survey

Maybe I'm just lazy, but I would never reply to a request like this. I don't know why they want that information; I don't care; and if they really want it, they can easily find it later. Not my problem.

Is there some kind of a competition on who can give the baddest advice on here or what?

I can't think of any harm in telling them, and in the medium term, this isn't a secret, because it will certainly be clear by the fall where you've gone since your name will probably be put on the department website.  If you're uncomfortable, it's certainly fine to wait a bit until you've finalized things at the school you accepted; you don't even need to tell them you're doing that---just wait a bit before replying to the request.
It may help to know that it's standard for schools to want to know where students who reject them are going, so there's nothing unusual or suspicion raising about the question.  It's useful information because it helps them assess their program and admissions practices.

It isn't just used for internal purposes. External funding agencies, for example NIH, use this sort of information when determining recipients of institutional training grants. It is one of the factors used to determine the attractiveness to students of different programs. It's a better measure than just basing those decisions on selectivity (i.e., program only admits 5% of applicants). If people choose against your program only to go somewhere highly respected, that counts in your favor.

There is no harm in letting them know. Universities and departments like to know their competition - if Univ B find out that many of their students are choosing Univ A over them, they can think of ways to better compete with them next year.

If you were rejected by those universities trying to get in, would they tell you whom they admitted ahead of you?
Of course they would, right down to the last rejected would-be undergrad.
So you should extend them the same courtesy.

No, they can figure it out themselves -- and probably do. Their Institutional Research office will periodically submit your Name and Birthday to the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC). Actually, they will probably batch-upload the names and birthdates of all new students and potential applicants to the NSC once a quarter.
The NSC will return a file listing your enrollment dates and degrees earned from any college in the US. This is a common practice at most colleges.

Here's a link: http://www.studentclearinghouse.org/colleges/studenttracker/using_studenttracker.php


text:
Can I select any of my published paper in journal for book chapter
I have been invited to submit a book chapter. The invitation email says:

Due to your involvement in the field, and the research you published in your paper, 'X', publisher 'Y' invites you to extend your work and offer a more comprehensive overview of your studies. Contribute a chapter to 'Z', an upcoming Open Access book edited by Dr.'W'.

Surprisingly, paper 'X' is completely unrelated to the Book 'Z'. The book is edited by a renowned professor, the publisher is InTechOpen.
What to do in such case? Can I select any of my published papers in journal for this purpose? Will it not create any copyright problems?

Who owns the copyright for your journal paper?

This can only be answered by whoever gave you the invitation. What is their view of the book. I'm sure it isn't just random stuff.

First of all, make sure that this is a legitimate invitation from a reputable source, and not a scam by a predatory publisher. (See the 3 links for more details.)

Regarding your latest edit: You did not name the publisher, but I recognize the wording. I have the exact same email in my own spam folder. See: What is the consenus of IntechOpen, open access books, are they predatory?.

@Buffy: Actually, given what else we know about this "publisher", I am pretty sure it is just random stuff.

"The book is edited by a renowned professor ...". Prove it.

If they're sending you invitations to contribute to volumes that are completely unrelated to your work, the next step's simple: ignore the email. They're clearly not doing their research and are resorting to mass mailings.

+1, I was just about to post the same answer.  I get such emails all the time.  They are clearly just spam of no academic merit - they simply want to get you to pay the "open access processing fees" that they will charge.

And the fees are nothing to sneeze at: 1400 GBP for a book chapter, according to their website. Save your money (and reputation), and just ignore them.

Ignore all emails from InTechOpen.

@InquisitiveLurker Wow. Reputable publishers pay you, not the other way round.

Normally, when getting an invitation to submit a book chapter, the expectation is that you submit a novel piece of work, unless stated otherwise.
Submitting a paper already published will not satisfy this requirement. There are two problems with this: 1) you often give the copyright to a publisher after the acceptance of your paper for publication. For a republication, you would need the permission from the publisher then, which is unlikely to be granted. 2) This will look like you are trying to publish the same result twice, which is frowned upon.

Actually my area of research is completely different from the topic of the book. I don't know why that invitation came to me. What to do in such case ?

@richard-williams This "invitation" is not real. It's a mass-produced email sent to thousands of people whose addresses were scraped from publications and academic web sites. If you accept it, you will actively harm your career. Ignore it, and send similar emails to your junk email folder.

@iayork: The book is edited by a renowned professor, the publisher is Intechopen.

If you want to proceed, email the "renowned professor" (at an email address you find, not the one in the email you received) and ask if they're genuinely associated with it. These emails typically fake the editor names. Even if the "renowned professor" is actually associated with it, all that shows is that senior people can also be fooled by scammers.

@RIchardWilliams According to their website, intechopen have almost 107,000 "authors and editors". You are not joining an elite club here.

Since the asker has edited the question to indicate that the publisher is predatory, this answer is now incorrect.

@AnonymousPhysicist I would not say incorrect - it's still the answer to the question in the title. It's just not what the asker should actually do in this specific case.


text:
How to shorten an article before submitting to a journal
Does anyone know a good online source for guidelines for shortening journal articles?  I've just finished a paper that I'm going to submit soon, but I think it is far too long.  Its current length is 30 journal pages.  (I know that because I've obsessively figured out what formatting would get me to have 1 word processed page for each journal page of a specific journal.)  This is in the humanities.
So I just want some good guidelines for things like "get rid of 'the fact that'."  The only such things that I found online were directed at people writing their college-admissions essay, which has to be very short, like 500 words.

Unless you have any evidence that your paper is too long by some objective criterion that will cause it to be desk-rejected, you should submit it as-is. If you feel the writing is a little verbose then, sure, copy-edit it and knock a couple of pages off. But you shouldn't remove actual material without a reason.

Just to add to the many answers already here, I'll put what I usually do. I'm often quite verborragic while writing, so this is a common problem for me, as we can all see :)
1) Revise every single sentence, not only to remove stuff that is not needed, ("To this end", "such as", ..., I usually use that stuff to "link" ideas while writing, but they are not needed and usually can be cut out without significant change), but also, as said previously here, to better express your points. Be concise.
2) Remove trailing sentences in the end of paragraphs that do not use the full width of the column. Some times you have one or two words dangling on the end of a paragraph that waste a whole line. At one time, I managed to get a little less than half a page of space on a eight page article just by doing that.
3) Check the references. If the journal is not against journal names abbreviations, do it. The same trailing thing applies here as well...
However, those tips only work if you are close to the mark... For instance, one of my articles was reduced from 10 to 8 pages after the first review... We had no choice but to cut content and move it to supplementary material.
Always keep in mind what information you want to convey...

In my experience, I have found there are four main strategies for reducing the length of a paper.  In order of most to least radical, they are:

Write a different paper.  For example, one of my recently accepted papers really wanted to be about four times as long as the page limit, and also would have required at least another month of work beyond the deadline in order to properly complete.  When this became clear, it was time for radical surgery: most of the original manuscript was pushed off into future work and only the first key result was expanded into the full presentation it deserved.  We added the word "Toward" to the front of the title and started working on the follow-up paper that contains the rest of the work.
Drop significant chunks of the paper. A slightly less radical version of the first, it may be that you can keep the narrative and main results, but drop some of the secondary explorations entirely.  This is the course I dislike most, because it can significantly weaken the work and "less important" dropped sections are unlikely to be able to form a separate publication on their own.  This can work, however, for a conference publication that will be followed by an extended journal version (e.g., the conference version sketches an analysis of less important properties of the system being studied, while the journal version contains full exhaustive proofs).
Shove things into supplementary material. If you're submitting to a journal, it's typically possible to put unlimited amounts of information into the supplementary material.  This can be a win-win situation, in which you drop significant chunks of the paper without actually omitting them, just tucking them off where only those who really care will read them.
Squeeze blood from a stone. Careful and thorough editing can often remove a remarkable amount of length from a paper, but it's a very time consuming and painful process.  I can typically halve the length of a manuscript without omitting anything simply by dint of streamlining the presentation down to the level of individual words and phrases.  Cutting 10% is not too hard for a native speaker with enough time to invest; getting all the way to 50% is an exhaustive exercise in scientific haiku. Usually, it's better to use one of the more radical but less painful strategies instead, but I have had special occasions where squeezing blood from a stone was the right approach.

I actually recommend that your consideration move from most to least radical, the reason being that the more radical actions are often actually easier, because they require less precision.

You can shorten a paper by 50% just by rewriting? You are either insanely good at shortening or very verbose in your writing.

I like suggestion 1. I've had great success cutting a large paper into a small one by redefining the scope.

Something has gone bady, badly wrong with academia when we have to remove actual research from papers. Journals should exist to disseminate what we do, not to control what we do. The work-around of splitting a paper in two and pretending that work already done is "future work" hurts everyone and wastes everyone's time. I'm not criticizing you, Jake, because we all have to work within the system we find ourselves in. But, frankly, the system you describe is f***ed up.

@DavidRicherby One can remove actual research from one paper and put it in another.  I takes good judgement to do this well.  One doesn't have to tak about "future work," just a "separate paper."

@xLeitix I am an evil ninja of shortening.  But also, there is a lot more redundancy in "normal presentation" than one might expect.  For example, your comment can be readily shortened from 23 words to 13 words: "Halve length by rewriting? You are either great at shortening or quite verbose."  A lot of the texture and character of the writing goes away, but the substance remains.

@DavidRicherby I disagree. I see no problem at all with having to think about / improve the presentation of our research. Part of this is figuring out how to not ramble on for 30 pages when (according to Jake) 15 would be enough. Splitting up a very long paper into a number of manageable pieces would also be part of that. So is cutting the chaff (even if it is "research").

@DavidRicherby I don't think it's quite that straightforward: long, rambling manuscripts can also be a communication problem.  I see working within limits as no more a problem with scientific papers than with short fiction: it simply changes the complexity of a tale that you can tell within a single unit.  As for "current" vs. "future" work: if you've actually finished everything before you write up, I would agree with you; in my experience as a scientist, however, writing tends to drive significant additional experimentation and analysis as one fills in the details.

@xLeitix I hadn't imagined that somebody could be aware that their draft contained 50% ramble and chaff and still write the draft that way. Sure, one might write a draft and then tighten it a bit, removing a little waffle in the process. But removing 50% of the paper during this process means that either the first draft was completely terrible or that worthwhile material has been removed (or some combination of the two).

@jakebeal I don't think the comparison with fiction works at all. Fiction is written to be entertaining; scientific papers are written to describe the results of (typically taxpayer-funded) research. If I want to try to entertain you in ten pages, that's fine. If some third party wants to restrict me to some arbitrary page limit that bears no relation to what I'm trying to describe, that's hindering science.

@DavidRicherby In my discipline, a few journals have no page limit while most do. Those without page limit seem to get insanely long-winding and rambling manuscripts at times. So, anecdotically, the arbitrary page limit is definitely a quality-enhancing measure, and I personally have stopped reviewing for journals that don't have this.

@xLeitix Fair enough. In my area, journals usually have no page limits, but few papers run to more than 40 pages and i don't think I've ever come across one I'd describe as "rambling".

@DavidRicherby Don't confuse rambling (which is a macro-structure problem) with compressibility (which is a micro-structure feature, and not necessarily a problem).  Compression also has its down-sides, as it generally makes a document more fragile to future revision.

"Halve length by rewriting? You are either great at shortening or quite verbose." — Halve by rewriting? You're either brutal or verbose. — Halve? You're kidding! — Halve?!

In general articles in the humanities are significantly longer than those in the sciences, as I'm sure you know.  Does the length of your paper far exceed those typically published in your journal of choice?  Then maybe some cutting is in order.
I know what you're looking for, a handy-dandy list of things to look for when revising, but I don't know of one.  I think you need another pair of eyes.  Do you have a colleague whose writing you admire that could have a look at it for you?
For nearly my entire academic career, I was in a writer's group with three of my colleagues.  We would meet once a month or so, when someone had a conference paper to give or was finishing up on an article.  It's invaluable to have a few colleagues you trust to give each other feedback.  It might be a little late for this paper, but if you could even barter with someone (you'll be a reader for them in the future), it would help you greatly, I'm sure.
Good luck with it --

+1 mainly for another pair of eyes.  Have you got a student or two of a suitable level who could be trusted to comment honestly? They do exist and may not yet have built up a tolerance for rambling.

After some serious googling, I found a site with just the sort of recommendations I was looking for.  Shortens without removing content at all.  I just wish it were longer, because the suggestions are really good: Need to shorten your paper?  Hopefully this might help other people.
An example of the recommendations:

(1) Proteins have various functions that are precisely controlled.
You can shorten this in two ways. First, revise to emphasize the important point, which in the context of the paper was not the variety of protein functions but the precise control of those functions. Second, eliminate unnecessary prepositional phrase: use “protein function” not “functions of proteins.”
Protein function is precisely controlled.

That's a good article!  I'm glad you found it.  I've bookmarked it for the future.

This is a nice exposition of the sort of "blood from a stone" shortening that I talk about in my answer.  Good find!

This answer could be made more useful if the key points at the link were summarized here; this is essentially a link-only answer.

@MadJack I've added one of the examples in

I love the irony of "I just wish it were longer" :)

A couple things to consider:

You think it is too long, but does the journal you intend to submit it to think it's too long? If nothing else, knowing this knows your target.
Is there things you can offload into an online or supplemental appendix? Good examples include proofs and the like in papers where the actual results are of interest, or technical details, supplemental or supporting analysis, etc.
When it comes down to it and you just need to start killing words - start marching through, getting rid of long phrases, parenthetical asides that don't need to be there, superfluous adjectives, etc.

The journal won't think it's too long, but I don't want my referees to think it's too long!  Journal referees in my field are very lax about deadlines for referee reports.  The shorter the paper, the less time it will take them to read it and submit their reports.  Plus, I don't want potential readers to get put off by length.  The shorter the paper, the larger the readership.

@DeliaRuby Keep in mind referees will be more than happy to wing you for missing things, and as a referee, how long it takes me to review a paper is more a function of my life rather than your writing - unless it's truly egregious. As for "The shorter the paper, the larger the readership." [Citation Needed]

@DeliaRuby: Omitting "The fact that" and similar things will not make the paper appreciably easier for the referees to read!

At the risk of creating a "just a link" answer, there's an online Stanford course about writing for the sciences.
The first few lectures are about "cutting the clutter" and give quite a few examples showing lengthy academic-style text being shortened and made more readable, with specific techniques being discussed. For example, academic writers often turn verbs into nouns, like so:
"We performed the configuration on the gewgaws."
Which could be shortened (and improved) to:
"We configured the gewgaws."

I'm not sure what the structure of your article is, but I would make sure you are matching the writing to the target audience. I've found that it's possible to cut a large amount of background material from a paper on the grounds that the audience is most likely already experts, or has access to that information and can readily understand it without me having to spell it out for them.
I've been able to reduce paragraphs and sometimes whole sections down to one sentence with a reference to a book chapter.

I don't think that an automatic tool will do that for you, and I don't think that you should use one.
If you don't want to shorten, you may consider finding a journal that allows more pages.
If you want to stick to this journal, then it is better that you shorten manually. Then you can decide what is important and what should be left out. There are many way to shorten a paper, for example by shrinking or removing unecessary details in some figures, removing a few references, removing some figures, removing or rewritting text differently, etc.  There is no tool that will do that intelligently for you. You really need to do that by hand.

Sorry, guess I was unclear.  I don't want it to be done automatically!  Argh!  I just meant, is there a site that gives good guidelines?  I'll edit the question!

If all you care about are small stylistic changes, I'd suggest looking into The Elements of Style by Strunk & White. It's a very short and concise (and therefore cheap) book that largely focuses on similar issues. That the book is so short proves that the authors know very well what they are talking about.


text:
What should I do if my student has quarrel with my collaborator
I have a project that is a follow-up work of a senior PhD student, and my student is working on it. Due to their experience of the previous project and expertise, it is led by my collaborator, not me. My student is junior and sometimes makes mistakes, such as careless typos, or ignoring my collaborator's comments. My collaborator may have higher requirements and standards, so they directly pointed out those mistakes, and asked in person why the comments were ignored. In the meeting, my student was complaining directly that their collaborator doesn't like them and is targeting them, and that the collaborator keeps on saying that their work is wrong, things like that.
To respect my collaborator's leading role, I do not get involved unless I am asked. In my role, what should I do? For sure they won't collaborate anymore beyond this project, but I am not sure how to handle the current one. And also, should I educate my student about etiquette and respect? I have a feeling it already went beyond academic or scientific debate. My collaborator may not like my student either (I am not sure), but to my judgment all points my collaborator made are reasonable.

Are you PI on this project? Are you a co-author on the paper?

this project is lead by my collaborator. Yes I am a co-author.

Notice that in the first sentence, you describe the student as "senior", and in the third sentence, as "junior".  I don't know what that means, but it is interesting.

one is year 4, close to graduation. one is year 1, just start the PhD journey

You mention that all of the points made by the collaborator are reasonable, so it sounds like your student should have taken it as constructive criticism rather than being unliked or targeted. It also sounds like this isn't the first time that the collaborator has given this feedback, given that you talk about previous comments being ignored.
In this case, yes, it sounds like it would be a good idea to educate your student about etiquette and respect, and about the value of critique. I appreciate this could be an awkward conversation, but it sounds necessary.
As the supervisor you are an important mentor for your students. Your job is to help them develop into people who will succeed in academia. This often goes beyond academic or science, since there are aspects of being a good academic that fall outside of that narrow skillset.

Part of the need to educate the student may be that expectations about how feedback is delivered and responded to vary enormously. If the student's expectations are at one end of the scale, and the collaborator's at the other, things can be felt personally when they weren't meant that way.  Trying the patience of someone who's already a bit more direct than they'd like, by not taking on board valid criticism, is unlikely to do the student many favours

I do not get involved unless being asked to respect my collaborators leading role.

I'm sorry to say that you really can't stay out of it. You have an obligation towards your student to train them in collaboration and help them manage the situation if things are not going smoothly, and arguably it's also not fair towards your collaborator to bring them into this and then declare yourself not responsible for your student's behaviour.
However, you do have an opportunity to act as a mediator. A mediator is not a judge - it's not your job to decide "who is the problem" (usually the answer is "both, a little bit" anyway). Rather, your goal should be to:

Turn this into a learning opportunity for the student (yes, that will probably include some discussions around taking criticism and, potentially, being respectful, but should also include how to work with people they perceive as being harsh, unfriendly, or difficult to work with).
Work with your collaborator to alleviate their grievances with this project. Maybe it's enough for you to participate in every meeting and ensure that feedback is given constructively, and taken as such (this may require interjecting if things get heated). However, depending on how bad the situation is, you may need to go one step further. Maybe you need to provide feedback first, before your collaborator is asked to comment on work by your student? Maybe it's better for your collaborator to give feedback to you, and you communicate with your student? And, of course, if things escalate too much it may be time to stop this collaboration altogether.

When communicating with either of the two, resist the natural temptation to be on the student's side when talking to the student and on the collaborator's when talking to them. As an effective mediator, you need to do almost the opposite - represent and explain the other's point of view, leveraging the trust you hopefully have with both parties.

I did not stay out, as I was asked to involve sometimes. I think I will need to a talk as suggested here very soon.

@MahaliSindy Note that it's one thing to step back from scientific details, but it's a distinct thing to step back from mentoring. You call them "my student", which implies you're nominally taking an active role in mentorship. Even if you defer to your collaborator's scientific leadership on the project, the collaborator is presumably not in charge of mentoring the student (which is why they're a collaborator and not an advisor), so it falls to you to be proactive about addressing mentorship issues once you are made aware of them (even if you haven't directly been asked to intervene).

Yes, I do not expect that. From time to time my student also express these kind of concern to me. When the first time my student ignore comment, my collaborator complained to me and I already told my student the usage way to handle comment. So I am surprised it happened again. For those 'feeling' issue, such as my collaborator don't like them -- The way my collaborator did, to my judgement, is already higher than average. Given that even my collaborator really don't like my student, I don't think I can do anything except telling the student focus on the science.

@MahaliSindy I have to say, this whole "collaborator doesn't like the student" issue is confusing me a little. Why is your student so concerned about whether the collaborator likes them or not? And, maybe even more importantly, what does the collaborator do that makes this so obvious to the student? I don't like all students either, but professionalism requires to not show that.

@xLeitix Hmm, I have no idea. I chatted with my student, what I can guess is that my collaborator raised many comments about mistakes, errors or correction, but my student don't agree with them, and think my collaborator is picky, and targeting them. To my judgement, all comments I can see is reasonable. Maybe my collaborator required higher quality of work, to me it still falls on reasonable domain. At least for every moment with my collaborator and student, I don't think my collaborator showed anything about unliking my student.


text:
When a contributor stops contributing
In our research I had many meetings and discussions regarding our work (i.e., solutions, implementation, related work, etc) with three other researchers. When I wrote the papers, they were also responsible for reviewing the manuscripts and making decisions together about anything related to them (publishing, editing, assessing comments from journal reviewers etc).
These contributors were my coauthors in every paper I wrote for this specific research. They are all researchers, PhDs and teachers in different institutions.
There are still two papers left: one in the process of being published and other brand new. However, one contributor simply stopped contributing. He didn't say that explicitly, but every time I write a new paper version and our reviewing process starts, he either does not respond to e-mails or takes too long to answer or finish his duties. Usually, the reviewing is only partial (e.g. "I couldn't read all the paper, so here is my comments regarding the first two sections").
My question is, even though this person contributed to our overall research and for the papers in the past, should I put his name in the next paper, assuming he is not going to contribute anymore (while the others will)?
How would you deal with this situation?

If you plan to change anything in your authorship agreement, you should bring this issue up as soon as possible.
You could politely ask if the person is still interested in working on the paper,  e. g.  ask "I've noticed that your responses for this paper come slowly. Probably you are busy with other things. To complete the paper I would need... from your side. I could also try to finish the paper without you, but wonder if you still want to be a coauthor." (Just a first shot for a formulation...)
You don't know the motivation on the other side, so it may well be that the coauthor is really busy, but feels obliged to continue to work on the paper and they would be happy to say "I'm out." I have they can't work on the paper but insists to be coauthor, that is another topic for which your field plays a large role.

Things to consider:

What are the standards for authorship in your field, and for the type of journals you expect to submit to?  Some fields and journals have much more demanding criteria than others.  They may, for example, require that they not only make meaningful contributions to the research (it sounds like he did), but also meaningful contributions to the actual writing and final approval of the article (questionable).  Others may expect significantly less.
Is author order important in your field?  There's always the possibility that he gets demoted in the ordering, or that any arrangements you made regarding varying the ordering of authors on each paper can be taken into account (maybe he was in the lower importance positions on earlier articles but contributed highly to those, so you just count those towards his higher positioning on these and call it even; or he's in the low importance positions now and that's consistent with his contribution).
Did you and your collaborators discuss the conditions for being listed as a coauthor, or the loss thereof, at the beginning of the project?  If not, the lesson here is that this is usually considered a very good idea.  If you did, does he meet them or not?
Very importantly: Have you recently discussed this issue with the other collaborators?  You can't make a decision unilaterally, and they may see the matter as a bigger or lesser problem than you do.  You will also need to address how you're going to broach the topic with the colleague that's at issue.  He has to be made aware in a professional manner, otherwise if he finds out you've cut him out he may contact any journal you submit to and cry foul play, potentially getting you into a whole heap of trouble.

Collaborations can go awry for lots of reasons, and people getting busy is one of the most common.  That's why you often see the suggestion here to discuss authorship issues at the beginning of the project, instead of at the end.  Sometimes practical realities force you to accept concessions regarding authorship that you might otherwise be opposed to.  Best to start talking with your collaborators on their opinions and advice.  Keep a record of conversations about the writing of these articles as well as discussions concerning authorship.  Even if you think he's made no significant contributions to the actual writing of the article, that he has provided any feedback at all may be usable as proof that he did. A broader record that puts his "contribution" into context, and makes it clear that you aren't trying to hide things, is likely to help your case if problems should arise.


text:
Unexpected long delay with paper review and no answer from editors
We've submitted a paper to a well known journal, but it's been more than one year without a reply, despite multiple e-mails sent to the editors. We got a reply once, just pointing to another editor which did not answer our requests.
Just to clarify:

aug/2014: paper submission;
mar/2015: first e-mail sent to editor (no reply);
may/2015: second e-mail sent to editor, which answered pointing to another sub-editor and saying that the delay might be caused by a late reviewer;
jun/2015: e-mail sent to sub-editor asking for clarifications about the delay (no reply);
aug/2015: e-mail sent to editor and sub-editor asking for news about our paper (no reply);
oct/2015: again, another e-mail for both editors (no reply), and we even asked to confirm the receipt, without reply either.

What is the next thing we should do? I guess that withdraw our submission is the logical step, but we don't want to lose all this time of reviewing without any feedback and knowing that our paper was probably reviewed by one or two reviewers, and it could be near completion.

I'm sorry that you're having this frustrating experience.  Have you written to the editor in chief / managing editor of the journal?  Have you tried calling any of the editors at a work number?

Yes, the editor is in fact the chief editor of the journal. But I haven't tried calling him - it's an international call, but I will work it out. Thanks.

@Chaotic I am also going through the similar situation and was about to asked the same question. It was really frustrating when we don't get any responses of our mails from the Editors of the journal.

First thing first, I would suggest planning to never submit to this journal again.  Some journals take a very long time to review, and in some fields more than a year of reviewing is not uncommon.  Editors, however, should be reasonably responsive to email and months without reply is not reasonable.
Although, there is one case where it might be reasonable: it might be that all of your email has been going into their spam filter.  You don't say where you are from, but there can be problems of this type: I recently had an experience where some international colleagues had their entire domain blacklisted by anti-spam systems and it made every interaction very painful and difficult.
Either way, at this point, you've basically got two options for escalation in attempting to find out the status of your paper:

Make contact via another medium than email, preferably by phone so you can get a human on the line.
If that fails, get in touch with the publisher and let them know what's going on with their journal.

You also need to be more persistent in your attempts to contact: emailing once every two months and just taking no response as your answer is really letting things slide.
If all of this fails, then you're stuck with an unpalatable choice: leave the paper in limbo or withdraw.  Neither is a particularly good option, but neither is the end of the world, either.

Have you checked the online tracking system of the journal to see if the status or the status date has changed recently? If the status has been 'under review' for a long time, but the status date is fairly recent, it would indicate that the editor or reviewers have accessed the system more recently. This is a positive sign, showing that there is some activity around your paper. However, if there has not been any  change in the status date for a long time, it means that your paper has been lying idle.
In the former scenario, it might help if you try to contact the journal over phone or by sending more frequent emails. However, if your paper has not been accessed for a long time, it would be better to consider withdrawing it.


text:
Is providing more references than the required number in my PhD application acceptable?
I'm applying for a PhD program which lists "Two references" in their required documents. The general university online application portal lets me submit details of more than two referees though.
I really want to provide three references for this course. Technically I do have two technical referees in the system already, but while quite ok, I expect their references to be a bit flat and generic - given we worked together not that much, two years ago and in a different field. I know academic references have priority over professional ones. However, my technical project manager in my job (software), I know would write me an absolutely smashing reference (because I saw their annual review feedback of me). The PhD is in robotics so software experience is not irrelevant.
Is it acceptable for me to add this one more referee to the application, even though the program requires only two?
UPDATE: I've emailed the program people and they've replied that 3 references would be very much ok, especially if I think it will paint a clearer picture of me as a candidate!

I don't see the harm in a third reference, especially if it's highlighting a separate, non-redundant skill/feature of your application, though others might disagree. I'd carefully scan the directions for cues like "at least" which suggest a third reference is totally fine, or "no more than" which would suggest it's not. If you have some time before the application deadline, it would also be reasonable to ask the program staff (not the department head) if a third reference is a problem. They could warn you if Professor X hates it when applications come with too many references.

It's usually best to carefully read the application's supporting materials (FAQ, 'help' section, explanation pages, etc.), as some programs I've seen explicitly say "please do not send more than 2 [or usually 3 in the US]". Some programs require 2, but allow 3 (I've seen fellowships accept up to 5, but not a PhD program that does that).
However, I mainly answered to suggest you carefully consider how you pick your two "guaranteed" reference letters. If you are going into a program that is friendly towards industry practitioners, and your job and experience is relevant, and if your industry writer would be in a position to talk about relevant aspects of your application (technical skills desirable to the program, work ethic, reliability, etc), then it is possible that such a letter is actually better than a bland academic one by itself. This varies heavily by field, but if the program explicitly says something about how to professional references are OK (often with a stipulation that at least 1 be from an academic), then I think there's a case for you to go with one academic and one professional letter. Then you can put the 3rd in, if the system allows it, as your additional academic reference.
This can be very field and program specific, so I'd advise you to try to get some more guidance from someone closer your target program to give you there advice. But some fields - especially in applied areas of computer science, like many robotics programs, software engineering, etc - are far more appreciative of certain kind of professional reference letters than others.

However, my technical project manager in my job (software), I know would write me an absolutely smashing reference (because I saw their annual review feedback of me).

You should be really careful about interpreting this. In industry annual reviews are for internal purposes. They reflect on both the person being reviewed and the reviewer. Many companies forbid employees from writing references and hand reference requests off to HR who produce a boiler plate reference stating the dates the employee worked at the company and that there were no disciplinary problems. Employees who are not forbidden to write references still only write bland (aka awful) letters.
In the US, it should be fine to submit more than the minimum required references if the system allows you to. In some countries, it might be problematic and the admissions committee might randomly select the required number of references and ignore the others.

My company doesn't forbid employees from writing references for other employees in this context. In fact, I ended up getting my manager's blessing for the PhD programme and an explicit permission for me to set off and find people who would write me one.


text:
Should I mention in my PhD application that I'm quitting my job in a month to spend time learning about the subject?
I'm working as a software developer right now and am applying for PhD programmes in robotics and environmental conservation. I've put in my notice at work recently and should finish working there mid-February, about a month after the PhD application deadlines. I am quitting for a number of reasons, one of them including wanting to focus on learning how can I help the environment with my tech skills. One of the ways I can is to do research in a relevant field - hence the PhD.
I was wondering if I should mention my quitting in my PhD application. On one hand it demonstrates dedication to my interests. On the other hand, leaving your job without anything else lined up is an... unorthodox move in the professional world and I can see how it could be taken as a sign of volatility. What does stackexchange think?

From the admissions perspective, it shows dedication but also chutzpah in a bad way.
Many competitive programs have an admissions rate between 5-20%. Even if you are a strong candidate, it is not guaranteed that you will get in anywhere this year. This is why you have to apply to multiple programs as well as have a backup plan if you don't get in anywhere. Staying in a job (you might hate) would be such a backup plan and would show that you are someone who has Plan Bs.
If I read your application, I would have a nagging feeling at the back of my mind that you are rather sure of yourself and/or desperate and/or headstrong. None of these are good qualities for doctoral programs.
There's also a slight feeling of being extorted - as in, if you don't admit me, I'm screwed. But that's not our problem, you put yourself in that situation, yet it still leaves an unsettling feeling.
Neither of these are enough to tank your application but it could sway someone on the cusp of denial/admission towards denial.
tl;dr: A much stronger application would be one that says, "if I am admitted, I plan on quitting my industry job in May and spending the summer ahead of matriculation preparing for graduate studies by doing xyz."

Thanks for sharing your perspective! The problem with my job was that it wasn't getting me where I wanted to get, so I wouldn't think of it as my plan B, unless other options were explored. I did not quit expecting I'd get into a PhD program instead - quitting and applying for PhDs occupy two independent shelves in my mind but I can see how that would be difficult to convey in a personal statement.

I wouldn't mention that you already quit, but some version of "I plan on spending my summer preparing for graduate studies" without perjuring yourself would fly much better.

Confidence is good. Arrogance is bad. Fine line between the two.

I wouldn't mention quitting your job, because there's no need to do so.  Instead focus on the extra things you're doing to prepare yourself without mentioning your current work.
I did something very similar when I applied for PhD programs in economics.  I took two years off after undergrad before starting my PhD, and while I did work, one of the main things I did was read seminal literature in my field - Adam Smith, Keynes, etc.  I talked about this in my application, and knowing my department as I do now, I'm entirely certain this played a large role in getting me in.
This is especially true if you've done your homework on what things the department you're applying to is likely to care about.  In my case economic history was a very important field for them, so it mattered.
So, don't mention quitting your job but do mention extra things you're doing, even if it's as simple as reading.  I actually wouldn't say something like "if admitted I intend to..." as @RoboKaren suggested; doing this extra stuff because you're passionate about it and not because you know for certain you'll need it for school carries extra weight.  "If admitted I plan to read the Wealth of Nations!" is very different from "While working in industry after undergrad I spent my free time reading the Wealth of Nations."

I look at graduate applications each year, though not in your field. I think that the right approach is in how you frame the statement.  If you say that you've quit your job so you can start learning about the field, it does sound amateurish and hokey.  However, if you frame this as a commitment to a new path in your life, it can come across very differently.  You might say that recently you have decided to leave your job ("quit" is not necessary) to devote yourself full-time to deepening your knowledge base in your chosen field and applying for graduate programs, to maximize your success in that area. How you phrase this is up to you, but the important thing is for it to come across as a positive move of re-orientation and commitment, rather than "I just quit my job, and hope that grad school is the answer." Good luck!

It is completely unnecessary and superfluous to mention this.  Anyone who applies to grad school as a returning student after working for some time has to navigate these waters.  Graduate program administrators will admit you or not, based on their assessment of your ability to succeed in their program, and if they admit you, they will notify you if you have any deficiencies that you must make up before starting.  And they will assume that you will give careful thought to when and how you handle your transition from the working world to the academic.


text:
Are engineering PhDs more relevant to industry careers than science PhDs?
So I am considering pursuing a PhD in robotics (or a related field) after spending a year in the industry. I want to make an informed decision about my career path and be reasonable about things. The thing is, frequently when presented with a potential reason for why graduate education is a bad idea, I seem to dismiss it thinking: "but engineering is different!.."
In particular, people saying that there is no point in going for a PhD, unless one wants to pursue a career in academia, seem to strike me as not relevant to the engineering disciplines. In the end there is plenty of technical R&D going on around, and even my medium-sized company employs their fair share of wise folk whose only job is to come up with ideas and research into them to see if anything interesting comes out.
Somehow, in my mind, engineering PhD's are applicable, employable, can quit it half-way to return back to industry with no harm to their CV, etc. etc. (not to mention there's always funding for them!).
I do acknowledge that there exist some pretty theoretical or not-applicable technical fields out there, but they don't really come into my calculation as my interests lay elsewhere.
Where is the flaw in my thinking? Where am I most likely to get burned with my expectations?

I edited the title to ask about the specific aspect of engineering PhDs that you seem to wonder about. (The previous version was very, very broad, as there may be many differences between engineering and science PhDs). However, you should also specify what you are thinking of when you say "science", because there is tremendous variety of science PhDs from medical research (which FYI also has major applications in the pharmaceutical industry, among others) to theoretical physics to social sciences...

Also see What are the potential pitfalls of having a PhD? and How true is the stereotype that PhD graduates are overqualified?

One possible 'burning' point: Say you spend 2 years pursuing Ph. D. before dropping out. You could have spent these 2 years earning a salary and gaining employment experience.

I think the best answer to your question is another question: Have you read the What are the goals and benefits of doing a PhD? question yet?

I have a PhD in Aerospace Engineering and work at a university, but I'm not really on a traditional academic track. So non-academic jobs are possible for PhDs with engineering degree. I work for UT Austin's computing center, and while I publish some, it's not my primary focus nor do I teach often. There are jobs at large centers of knowledge production and problem solving for engineers and technical non-engineers alike!
Also, everyone who quits a PhD program probably takes a small knock to their CV or resume. Physicists and chemists who don't complete a PhD also have lots of options for employment, but there's a risk that they will also have trouble finding a job because they may be seen as unable to complete a hard task by sticking to the work. I think you are being to glib or flip when you assume that you can bail out of an engineering PhD program and land softly immediately after in an industry job. Maybe, maybe not.
Also the idea that PhDs employed by industry are the wise men(!!!) who come up with the ideas is both quite sexist and shows that you have some thinking about the world still to do. Non-PhDs and non-men often come up with good ideas and solve research problems in industry and academia both.
You are likely to get burned because your thinking doesn't really reflect the world. Men and women both, engineers and scientists both, can all solve hard research problems inside and outside academia both.

Thanks for your answer.
Just to clarify - I only used the word 'wise men' because I was referring to the situation in my company. Unfortunately gender balance in the engineering environment in the UK still leaves a lot to be desired and so the research portion of the firm is just a room ful of, well, men. I do wish that wasn't the case.

@SaladButt, that's nice, though it wasn't clear from you writing at all. You should be careful how you present yourself.

I answer as a comment, because my intuition tells me this is answer is relative. I too have (engineering) professors who told me this during my undergrad, and nearly swears by the fact that engineers command more, have more flexibility and thinks more applicably in research. In my limited experience, being an engineering researcher doing basic/ fundamental research, I have noticed more of these values, but again...my engineering professors has emphasized those traits every week, whereas they're not usually mentioned as often to non-engineers, say traditional science majors. That being said, doing a Ph.D isn't about thinking that you could "back out half way," more importantly, it's about your commitment to solve an unknown truth. Be qualified, be passionate, speak about real applicable aspects of your work, that will ultimately determine your reputation, engineer or not. What do you think?
From my experience in industry, Ph.Ds have been hired from across the spectrum, perhaps it may be safer to say, if the company is primarily mechanical engineers, they would tend to favor the Ph.Ds with similar training and experiences. One thing to keep in mind is make sure you know the "tools of the trade." Ph.Ds in industry would really benefit, though some pretend to stand on a pedestal anyways.


text:
Is "get passing grades and follow voraciously your curiosity on the side" a good strategy for graduate school?
I will be starting my PhD in Math this fall. I have diverse interests including philosophy, history and economics, but I concluded that a PhD in Math would be most useful in the real world. I wanted to hear people's thoughts on Nassim Taleb's strategy for graduate school, which can be summarized as follows: "get passing grades and follow voraciously your curiosity on the side." Here is the full quote:
From Antifragile:

My idea was to be rigorous in the open market. This made me focus on what an intelligent antistudent needed to be: an autodidact—or a person of knowledge compared to the students called “swallowers” in Lebanese dialect, those who “swallow school material” and whose knowledge is only derived from the curriculum. The edge, I realized, isn’t in the package of what was on the official program of the baccalaureate, which everyone knew with small variations multiplying into large discrepancies in grades, but exactly what lay outside it…
Again, I wasn’t exactly an autodidact, since I did get degrees; I was rather a barbell autodidact as I studied the exact minimum necessary to pass any exam, overshooting accidentally once in a while, and only getting in trouble a few times by undershooting. But I read voraciously, wholesale, initially in the humanities, later in mathematics and science, and now in history—outside a curriculum, away from the gym machine so to speak. I figured out that whatever I selected myself I could read with more depth and more breadth—there was a match to my curiosity. And I could take advantage of what people later pathologized as Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD) by using natural stimulation as a main driver to scholarship. The enterprise needed to be totally effortless in order to be worthwhile. The minute I was bored with a book or a subject I moved to another one, instead of giving up on reading altogether—when you are limited to the school material and you get bored, you have a tendency to give up and do nothing or play hooky out of discouragement. The trick is to be bored with a specific book, rather than with the act of reading. So the number of pages absorbed could grow faster than otherwise. And you find gold, so to speak, effortlessly, just as in rational but undirected trial-and-error-based research. It is exactly like options, trial and error, not getting stuck, bifurcating when necessary but keeping a sense of broad freedom and opportunism. Trial and error is freedom.
(I confess I still use that method at the time of this writing. Avoidance of boredom is the only worthy mode of action. Life otherwise is not worth living.)

@user37208 Work in industry

It's not clear how you plan to implement that strategy. Are you planning to follow your curiosity in math on the side, or other things?

@ff524 Did you read the quote I linked to?

We shouldn't have to follow an external link to understand your question; if there's something we need to know, include it in your post.

@ff524 Ok I included the quote

You haven't stated your objectives, so how can we assess your strategy for achieving them? Are you trying to maximise your income, maximise your intellectual satisfaction, or maximise your chance of finding the girl/boy of your dreams?

Depending on what you want to do later, you're likely to need letters of recommendation. Make sure some respectable letter-writers are sufficiently impressed with your work to write strong letters for you.

The passage you have shared refers specifically to a baccalaureate degree:

The edge, I realized, isn’t in the package of what was on the official program of the baccalaureate... but exactly what lay outside it.

In a PhD, coursework takes a backseat to research. In research, there is no such thing as "get passing grades"; there is no meaningful threshold at which your research is considered acceptable, only a continuum of poor to exceptional. At the end of your PhD, your prospects on the job market (especially the academic job market) and the impact you have made with your work depend on how close you are to the "exceptional" end of that range, not just having achieved some minimum requirements and earned a piece of paper that says you have a degree.
Furthermore, PhD-level research requires a level of depth and focus that is not typically present at the undergraduate level.
That's not to say you can't have broad interests, and you can even leverage your broader interests to improve the quality of the work you do in your primary field. But a strategy of planning to undertake a PhD and put minimum effort into your PhD research while doing other things on the side is not a winning strategy for most people. Instead, you should try to use your curiosity for your PhD research. (Also see: Can I slack off and get a PhD?)
In fact, later in that same chapter, Taleb describes how his curiosity and drive to understand probability led him to specialize in that and focus on that to the exclusion of everything else:

When, at Wharton, I discovered that I wanted to specialize in a profession linked to probability and rare events, a probability and randomness obsession took control of my mind. I also smelled some flaws with statistical stuff that the professor could not explain, brushing them away—it was what the professor was brushing away that had to be the meat. I realized that there was a fraud somewhere, that “six sigma” events
  (measures of very rare events) were grossly miscomputed and we had no basis for their computation, but I could not articulate my realization clearly, and was getting humiliated by people who started smoking me with complicated math. I saw the limits of probability in front of me, clear as crystal, but could not find the words to express the point. So I went to the bookstore and ordered (there was no Web at the time) almost
  every book with “probability” or “stochastic” in its title. I read nothing else for a couple of years, no course material, no newspaper, no literature, nothing. I read them in bed, jumping from one book to the next when stuck with something I did not get immediately or felt ever so slightly bored. And I kept ordering those books. I was hungry to go deeper into the problem of small probabilities. It was effortless. That was
  my best investment—risk turned out to be the topic I know the best. Five years later I was set for life and now I am making a research career out of various aspects of small probability events.

That is a high risk, high reward strategy, and one that worked for Taleb. Your passing grades would turn off a lot of employers. But the point of following your passion is to hope to "get lucky" with one highly placed person who loves your work, and will "jump" you past your peers. In games like bridge, it's called "playing for top or bottom." The idea is not to be "mediocre."
Taleb's own research is about "fat tail" events, that the chances of getting lucky (or unlucky) is "fat-tailed, that is greater than most people would believe, assuming a normal distribution. Events that are on the unlucky side are called "Black Swan Events."