text:
Ethics - Asking someone to work for free
This happened a few months back. By that time I had just finished my masters and was looking for a research position.
I approached a professor who was working in a field in which I did my masters. After some initial conversation about my masters' work. He asked me if I will be ready to work for free. Puzzled by this, I asked him what he meant by that. He said that he had some projects down the line and will not have access to the funding for another 3 or 4 months. Then to clarify things I asked him if he will pay me for this 3 or 4 months once he has access to the funds. He simply smiled and shook his head implying 'no'. After that, I just took my resume and left his office.
TL;DR:
I just want to know, is it very common in academia to ask people to work for free? If so, is it ethical?

In which country did this happen? I only know about cases where people continue to work after funding has ended, but usually very limited, usually in order to finish up a paper.

Academics regularly work for free, it is sometimes called "service," at others it is unpaid overtime (meaning any time worked outside of contractual hours). Starting-out researchers might-well work for free to get ahead. Your professor doesn't have the funds to pay you. If they did, then perhaps they would. Regardless, they probably think they're doing you a favour

@Mark: This happened in India.

I don't think that this has anything to do with ethics. He is not asking you to work for free, he is saying that he is unwilling to fund you, and if you want to work with him, you should obtain your own funding. This is something different.

@NostradamusJR: How do you say that he is not asking me to work for free?

Without going into the specific subdomain and topic — which discipline are we talking about?

In many locations, not only is this not ethical, it's not legal, either.

In academia, it is not common to ask people to work for free. It is also not common to ask people to work, full stop.  What is quite common, though, is to see people seeking work in academia. This include people looking for funding to help them developing their research ideas, and people looking for opportunities to join someone else's research projects.
You came to the professor seeking an opportunity to work with him. The professor did not offer to fund you, but instead offered you an opportunity to work without compensation for a period of time. You can take this opportunity or leave it. If you take it, the funding may or may not come in 3-4 months. You are free to quit this arrangement at any time, before or after the initially agreed period.
The professor did not want you to do his work. You wanted to do some work with him and he offered it. You also wanted some money and he did not offer it. You make the story look like you were deceived or forced into unfair relations - no you were not.
There is no insult in offering someone to work without payment. In some countries such an offer is illegal, and in some universities it is not permitted to work voluntary. This is done in order to comply with employment laws in a particular country. However, you seem to imply that this is somehow unethical or not normal in a weird way - no it is not.
BSc and MSc students often work on their own projects which contribute, sometimes significantly, to projects run by employed academics. Obviously, BSc and MSc students are not compensated financially (on the contrary, they sometimes have to pay tuition fee), but they use the feedback they receive in order to learn new skills. PhD students in some countries get a stipend, while in others they have to pay tuition out of pocket.
You have just completed your master, and have not yet got a PhD. From what I see, the opportunity to work on a project, receive a feedback and learn from it, with a chance of future employment, is not an unfair offer. Whether it is good enough for you to take it, you have to decide yourself.

@I agree, and  would go even farther and say, it’s a standard part of my decision process to consider this option.  Even if you might be in demand elsewhere, what if the opportunity came up to work on a high profile dream project or with a world class team?  In my view it would be short sighted not to consider such options.

Whether asking someone to "work for free" is ethical or not is a complex question.
One of the first parameters is what "free" means. Being asked to work on an academic project without monetary pay is as many comments have pointed out -- a common occurrence. But usually there is some sort of compensation for this -- like progress towards a degree (either credits or progress in research or learning methods) or authorship of a publication. Slightly more questionable could be acceptance into graduate school.
A second parameter is the situation of the person being asked to work "for free." Asking someone otherwise gainfully employed who can count is as "service" or get a publication from it is not generally unethical. Offering little to a desperate student ("the chance at entry into a program") might be unethical if the person offering knows that it does not really affect their odds or that this is work one is normally paid for.
tl;dr -- define "free" very carefully and figure out whether the relation is such that the party with more power is abusing the party with less power in the non-monetary compensation situation.
Looking at your particular case, whether what's being offered is unethical would hinge greatly on whether the person offering it is sufficiently thinking of your long term benefit. So if you came saying "I want to be an expert in blue inks" and he offers something that gives you the experience you need to advance in blue inks, then great. If what he offers will not help you get into graduate school or develop relevant skills, then it can be abusive taking and unethical.
But how can strangers on the internet make that judgment for you???

“how can strangers on the internet make that judgment for you?”  Easily. By explaining what I inferred from your answer, do a simple cost/benefit analysis which would include estimating the long term benefit to your career.  It’s also a matter of how determined you are, how bad do you want it?  Are you willing to make serious personal sacrifices to get where you want to go?  To some that’s a silly concept, others relish the opportunity.  Add your viewpoint on that into your cost/benefit model.

The culture of academia is that non-financial compensation is worth as much, and sometimes more, than certain financial forms of compensation: papers, degrees, prestigious titles, intellectual satisfaction, etc.
So, while I know many people that have worked without pay, I don’t know anyone that works ‘for free’.
It’s ethical because those titles, papers and degrees are worth something to the individual, and the society at large.

It is common, because I have heard of many labs doing it. I would say it is ethical, since you don't have to do it. Many PIs expect this sort of "trial period" to suss out people who are not good. Since the professor's attitude bothers you right away I recommend not working in this lab. Depending on where you live these uncompensated work arrangements may not be legal, you would have to contact the Department of Labor to see.
To give the specific details Pete L. Clark asked for:
In my time at "Big State School USA" my engineering lab PI always made undergrads take the first semester for formal "class credit" to see who was worth hiring over the summer. Even if they walked in and asked for a job the response would be "we always ask for prospective undergrad researchers to work a semester for class credit for training and evaluation before paying them over the summer" Seemed slimy but the people we hired over the summer were 100% trained and 100% good after that, so I can't say the process did not yield results. Bio dept was even worse - they had laypeople volunteering as unpaid pipetting robots to "fight cancer".
In my time at "Ivy League Uni" every year I had a new MSc students who were "interested in research" and wanted to work in the lab for class credit. I didn't take any of them on after the first because I realized that with unpaid MSc students, the return on the upfront training you had to provide for only a semester of work was not worth the investment.
In my time at "Big government USA" I was part of group where the individuals that controlled the hiring endeavored to bring in a team of unemployed BSc graduates on a volunteer basis to see who would "work out" and "earn" the 10 month contract position we already had funding for. Seems super depressing, all I could do in the situation was push for the one candidate that qualified and showed up to get leveled up as soon as possible. The candidate published a paper and is now in a PhD program so I guess it worked out for him/her.
Hope these are enough real examples that you would agree the practice would seem "common" to me ;)

"I would say it is ethical, since you don't have to do it."  That is a horrible ethical argument.  Have you not noticed the many recent instances of older, powerful people getting in ethical hot water because they asked younger, less powerful people to do various things?  In the case at hand -- as you say, it may or may not be legal to work without pay.  It is almost certainly inadvisable to take an unpaid research job, and I would like to hear more specifics from you as to where and in what academic field not paying researchers on a trial basis is common.

I agree with you that unpaid research jobs are bad and exploitative. OP should apply to PhD programs and take an offer that provides a stipend and/or keep searching for a job to discourage the practice. The 3rd sentence in your comment is a strawman -- you are referring to criminal misconduct.

"The 3rd sentence in your comment is a strawman -- you are referring to criminal misconduct." That's not true -- most of the instances of sexual harassment currently in the news have not brought criminal charges, and some of the people involved have been fired/dropped way before the criminality of the actions has been investigated.  I stand by my comment: "you don't have to do it" is by no means a valid test of whether a request is ethical.

Sexual harassment and unpaid internships are two very different things, I think. The first could get the PI fired, the second could contribute to the PI being promoted.

Thank you for providing further information.  Having a student do research for course credit is not the same thing as having someone with a graduate degree take a research job (the OP does not mention any student aspect to the job) without pay.  Your other example takes place outside of academia.  Do you have any reason to believe that what the OP is being asked to do -- i.e., work in academia as an unpaid, non-student researcher -- is common?

"Sexual harassment and unpaid internships are two very different things, I think."  Me too.  I haven't even said that asking someone to work without pay is unethical.  I'm just pointing out that your reasoning that it's ethical doesn't make any sense, since it applies equally well to justify flagrantly unethical behavior.

Yes, I think that if MSc graduates just walked into professors' offices and asked for a job on the spot, getting the offer the OP described would be very common. PI does not have funding for non-students and is being upfront. It is a crappy offer but a seemingly honest one. The professional academic response in this situation is to start a PhD elsewhere and spread rumors in the field that the Prof in question has funding problems(j/k)


text:
If a college/ university made false claims on its website, should you still consider studying there?
The school I'm taking about here is regionally accredited. The problem is, on its website, it falsely claims to be a member of two different international academic associations. Should I look for a different school just because of this?
PS: I asked these academic associations through email if the school is any way related to or affiliated with them at any time. They gave me a negative reply.

What does regionally accredited mean?  What country?

Anyone can "accredit" a school.  I could "accredit" a school and so could you.  The question is by what agency is this school accredited.  If the school is in the US, is it accredited by some agency recognized by the Department of Education?  For those see http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation_pg6.html

In the US, "regionally accredited" means accredited by one of the six major accrediting agencies in different regions of the US such as the Higher Learning Commission (which covers the north central region of the US.)  In addition to regional accreditation, the US Department of Education recognizes a number of other national accrediting bodies.  Regional accreditiation is generally considered to be more credible than accreditation by one of these other bodies.

I've voted to close because it's simply impossible to answer the question without more detail.

What kind of associations are you talking about?

Are you sure this isn't a mistake or misunderstanding from either the university or the association?
I would recommend contacting the department or university. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt with this type of thing but are you sure this is a reputable school? Accreditation is a vague thing and varies wildly in how it is regulated and who accredits it, especially across different countries.
I'm a little surprised that you contacted the association directly. I myself never pay attention to professional associations and don't know anyone who does (at least not enough to investigate the claim).
But again, if this is important to you, I would recommend giving the university a chance to clarify by contacting them. You must remember, the people making the website or handling the accreditations most likely aren't the professors teaching the courses. I would also recommend looking into the reputation of this university more if this is indeed true.
EDIT: Many diploma mills/for-profit schools are "accredited" but that doesn't mean they are reputable, so beware.

All degrees offered by this school are accredited nationwide. That said, this school is not that "popular", because its programs were designed primarily for continuing and working students.

@user50284 Ah, this sounds like a for-profit school then. I have updated my answer.

This absolutely, but if there isn't any mistake then I wouldn't have a thing to do with them.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Why do some journals ask if there is someone who you do not wish to use as a referee?
I have noticed that sometimes when you submit an article to a journal it will ask if there is someone in particular who you do not want to referee the paper.
I was wondering what the reason for this option was.  Is it simply to avoid a conflict of interest or if you really do not get on with the person to the point where you do not wish them to review something you have written?  If you put someone down as someone you do not want to be a referee, will the journal think you are scared of that person's critical appraisal of the document and actually send it to that person or will they genuinely avoid sending it to that person for review?

I think that sending the paper to a person you indicated that you didn't want as a referee after they ask for that information would be unethical. No reputable journal would (or should) do anything like that.
I don't know precisely why any particular journal has any particular policy, but perhaps they have just had enough experience with people making such suggestions on their own, that they now make it routine to ask. It is a courtesy, nothing more.
But the author(s) can have any motive they please here, from "I don't trust the person" to "I'm keeping this private from them for a while". If they don't ask for a reason, don't provide one.

This happens when the author (or applicant in the case of a grant) believes that some likely referee might not act fairly for some personal reasons.  In my experience this is usually some history in these disputes. There might also be conflicts of interests.
Often there is guidance on who can be excluded, and the person must provide some measure (sometimes merger) of justification.

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


text:
Could I change my research direction after graduated master?
For example, if I finished a topic on the computer science field and graduated as a master degree, could I change to a topic within the psychology or any other field. Just because I'm more interested in doing research in psychology.

Probably more context is needed, because unless there are local state or university rules that apply in your case, I see no reason why not. Over the years I've had one colleague who got an undergraduate degree in English (only, I believe) and later got a Ph.D. in math and is now a moderately well known historian of mathematics, and another colleague who got a Ph.D. in math and was tenured at an R1 doctorial university (a U.S. classification) who later did graduate work in English and is now a tenured English professor at another R1 university.

You can always change your field, but it may not be trivial to do so. Study in a new field, and getting accepted in to a program usually assumes certain prerequisites. If you don't already have those, you will need (a) to get them somehow and (b) to convince others that you have the skills.
People change their minds about what they want to do. Others recognize that, so there are no hard barriers. But there may be a long period of study to achieve what you want.
Also, study of some fields, like CS or mathematics or statistics may make some things in other fields easier as many of the tools used in research generally are based on one or more of those things.
But you may have an easier path overall if you spend some time exploring your options before you set out on the journey.

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


text:
Is it good to take a project even if the topic is not what I'm interested?
One of my university professors offered me a research assistant position which would require me to study for a master degree.
I really wanted to take it but there are few problems for me.

I don't know that professor.
I don't know what career I could take after finishing a master degree.
I feel like other people are able to make more money early. (Even if I don't care about money).
Money problem mostly because I still need find a job to support myself.

Even though it got a full fee waiver, I couldn't change the research topic for the whole master degree.
So I guess my question is should I really take it even though I'm not really interested in that particular project and worried about my future career.

Sounds like a LOT of negatives in addition to the one in the title even.
Just responding to the one in the title, I would say to do a project that interests you.  Of course be smart about not picking something that involves a jerk advisor, unlikely to work, or 10 years of apparatus building or waiting for next Space Shuttle (even if you like the topic).  But in general, pick something you like.
That one looks like a dud.  Go talk to several more professors.  Have fun scheduling some meetings and talking to them.  Many of them like talking about their stuff and will pitch you on something or even mention a few possibilities.  You need to get a few options in front of you and choose the best one.  For one thing running this process will show you what is available and help you compare by contrast.  Don't marry the first girl you date.  Well, except I should have, but she was special!  ;-)

While in general it is a (very) good idea to explore new things, the negatives you list seem to imply that it is premature for you to do this. Committing to a Masters degree on a project that you aren't especially interested in seems like a bad idea.
On the other hand, if money is a small concern for you and time is of little or no concern, it might be worth it for the experience.
Spend some time thinking about what you really want your future to look like and evaluate whether a project like this fits in some way. Don't take a side trip just because the opportunity is there. Think about the main route to your future.
The fact that you don't know the professor is of little concern (or should be). You could explore things with that professor, of course: "What would my future look like if I do this?". Such an exploration would also let you know a bit more about the professor. If s/he isn't willing to spend time with you on this, you have learned something important, of course.


text:
How to convert a PhD Thesis written on published articles into a book?
Is it a good idea to convert Thesis (computer science field) written on the basis of my own published research articles into a book?
Taking care of text recycling and copyright plus wider knowledge achieved in the subject, is it worth to go for publishing book?
If yes, how it could be done?

Does this answer your question? Creating a book based on an article (copyright issues)

@Anton Menshov. It's partial answer. I will avoid text recycling and add new material to bypass copyright. My concern is, using the same information (avoiding similarity) plus wider knowledge achieved in the subject, is it worth to go for publishing book?

And then the question would be too dependent on individual factors AND/OR opinion-based.

Thank you both for raising the queries.

It happens regularly (at least in Europe) that newly graduated PhDs are contacted by "predatory" publishers. They say something along the lines of "We read your work and it is super interesting and should be published as a book". If  you got an email or phonecall similar to this you should probably ignore them. They are only interested in your money. Otherwise the answer is opinion based and depends on individual factors, so I'm voting to close.

@Louic. Thanks for noticing the Trend. I am planning to publish it with top and recognised publishers as like Springer, CRC Press, Wiley, etc.

I won't speak to the question of "how?" but will address "why?".
Writing a book is a long hard job, even when you are "only" concatenating published papers. Finding a publisher is as hard. So you should think about writing a book (now, or at any stage of your career) when you think you have something book-length to say that people will really want to read in that form.
That suggests (to me) probably not for you now.


text:
If a reference/book authored by your professor contains typos, how should you react?
My professor gave me a module on history that contains several spelling and grammatical errors. Should I tell him about this or just ignore these mistakes?

First check whether there is an errata web site for the book, and if so check whether your corrections have already been found.

What do you mean, if?

I recall professors who offered a bottle of champagne for the student who caught the most errata during the term. It helps them if they plan to turn their lecture notes into a book ...

@o.m. Well, the most famous of all the rewarders is certainly D. E. Knuth, who used to send a $2.56 check to all those who found a typo in his celebrated book series The art of computer programming.

@MassimoOrtolano, he still does. And not only TAoCP, all his books (or most of them ayway).

@Mas No he doesn't, he stopped a while ago because no one deposited them, but posted pictures of them with his account info on it. Now you get money deposited to the "Bank of San Serrife" Check his website

For the textbook I've written, I appreciate any feedback, including typos, misformed sentences, vague formulations and of course errors. Some points to consider (partly contained in the other answers):

Wait until you have a reasonable list or, e. g., until a chapter is over, the whole book, or the course.
Check if there is some errata available somewhere. Some authors maintain an errata on their webpage, sometimes the publisher hosts this, for some lecture notes I have a blog post. Only send the points that are not already in the errata.
There is no need to ask if such a list would be welcome. I guess it is safe to assume that this is the case (but others seem to disagree - see the comment below).
For other feedback than errors and typos (e. g.  feedback for formulations or the organization of the book) be prepared that your comments may not be taken into account for various reasons.

Oh, and for the lecture notes I reward bonus points for every mistake spotted and submitted by a student.

There is no need to ask if such a list would be welcome. Well, I would probably ask first, because it's not worth the time to compile the list if they're not.  I know one author who seemed to have little interest in this, and have heard of another who disliked getting errata.

Many professors are interested in receiving feedback about possible errors in their lecture notes or, more generally, in their course material, albeit they might not be able to amend it immediately.
Since your professor might already know about those errors, ask them politely, e.g. (maybe it's not the best possible phrase, but it's just to get the idea):

Dear Prof. X,
Since I'm currently reading your history module, would it be useful for you
  if I compile a list of errata?
Sincerely,
user50284

In this way you should not have any issue, even if they do not care.

Collect all the mistakes/comments you find throughout the semester. Wait until the semester ends, and your grade is assigned. Send email to the professor with all your comments. You can also mention that you enjoyed taking the class, if you did indeed. Professors usually enjoy feedback, when it is made on clear professional grounds.

There is rarely a need to wait until the semester ends (unless you are actively trying to prevent the errors from being corrected -- indeed, authors are most active on their notes when they are teaching from them!).

Well, I've encountered people who would punish you if you embarrassed them in any way.  So I agree with waiting until the grade is no longer a potential punishment.

On the other hand, I've seen professors who reward good erratas. For example, in my country, the gradable activities in a module sum up to 100 points from which the grades are derived, but professors are allowed to provide a number of "bonus" points as well, so pointing out a mistake in the lecture notes can sometimes result in getting a bonus point or two.

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


text:
Could an undergraduate with an applied physics background get a research spot in a university lab in aerospace?
I am an undergraduate who has a very impressive resume in applied physics related to lasers and ultrafast optics but my major is going to be in the aerospace field.
I want to do research in an aerospace field but I have very little coursework or experience in that field. My resume shows that I am good at picking up advanced topics fairly quickly.
Would I have a shot at a research spot in university research lab in aerospace even though I have very little experience in it?
EDIT: I am looking for an unpaid internship in a lab where I can hopefully get co-authored in as an undergraduate (next fall).

a research spot in aerospace company or research lab?

research lab under a professor at the university

And what do you mean by research spot? doing a PhD after undergrad? paid research assistant work? an unpaid internship?

edited the comment

I am not in aerospace .They dont really do that in my country .I had a research spot in 1986 as an undergrad .I got co-authored on our paper .I quickly discovered that I was the only undergrad with a research job in my neck of the woods .I was actually a repeat student . So yes it is possible . I new that the little job was a priviledge so I pulled finger .

Yes, that seems reasonable.  Start knocking on faculty doors.

When knocking on faculty doors, does that mean actually physically meeting them, or emailing them? I tried emailing but it seems very ineffective.

Try both.      Minimum length comment.


text:
How do online resources compare to resources obtained from extension programs from top ranking universities?
I am a self learner because quite frankly I like it better and my brain seems to absorb material more efficiently that way . MIT, Harvard, Stanford and many other schools offer free online courses, which I have been taking for the past few years. Schools such as Harvard and MIT however, offer extension programs where you can pay a fee(usually around 2-4k) to obtain current courses. My question is, how viable do these extension programs hold against the older resources obtained for free? Although older, I do find the material to be consistent and hold over time. so as someone studying computer science, what exactly am I being deprived of by not buying these extension programs, or attending the actual school itself?

Why do you believe free online information about computer science topics is outdated?

@jakebeal Sorry, I didn't mean outdated. Simply meant courses not currently from 2016

how viable do these extension programs hold against the older resources obtained for free? — There's a weird false dichotomy in the question.  Universities have offered extension courses for many many decades, long before "online" was even a word.

You're being deprived of everything traditional paid schooling is supposed to provide, other than the material itself.

Contact with faculty
Collaboration with peers
Formal evaluation and recognition (i.e. a diploma or certificate)

Material that is two years old is not going to be out-of-date. Even in a field like computer science, classroom instruction just does not move that fast. Even when things do change, it's more likely that the contemporary technologies are going to change than the essential course material (e.g. switching a class from Java to Python).
Note that online-course technology and methods is evolving rapidly, so newer paid courses might be better organized for online learning. A lot of the free online course material is essentially videotaped lectures. Newer systems use a self-guided learning approach with autonomous evaluation and feedback.


text:
What role do relevant (!) foreign languages play in grad admissions?
Say I want to apply to a program like Comparative Literature or Classics, where it is required that during the program I will pick up at least X languages and will have to sit language exams etc. but it is not required in any way to already speak these languages at admission to the program.
Question:
Will stating that I already speak relevant language X (because it's my native language say) or have already studied language Y for two years (because I want to focus on writer A who wrote in language Y) be an advantage? And if so, how much of an advantage will this be?
I guess it is obvious that schools will care mostly about the quality of the candidate's research etc. but what role would knowing (relevant) foreign languages play here?
PS: Note that I am talking only about foreign languages relevant to the program here. So for example latin for a classics program, or german & french for a comparative literature program where someone wants to focus on precisely these languages.

If the program has you reading texts in those languages, or instructs in them, their not just advantageous, they're almost certainly required. If the program is taught and reads in English, it can't hurt to know the languages, so of course that'd be an advantage

This likely varies by program, but example: http://german.yale.edu/academics/graduate-program-german/phd-program-german-studiesliterature It states there is a test of language proficiency in second term in German, and in the third term you would need to demonstrate reading knowledge in another non-native language which is directly applicable (like French). It seems that they allow "time for improvement" during the study, but it seems that someone without any previous study of the key languages would be at a great disadvantage compared to those with a background in the languages already.

sure, this is certainly true. but what does it mean for admissions?

In Art History, this depends greatly on the language and the area of study. For example, an individual who wants to study Italian Renaissance would likely benefit from knowing Italian, French and German. These are such common languages and the Art is so well studied, that knowing them in advance is likely of little value in regards to admissions. On the other hand, if you want to study ancient Hindi art, then demonstrating that you know Sanskrit could be valuable for admissions since the university may not routinely offer the language and you likely need to be able to read it to write a reasonable proposal.

so you are saying that pretty much most modern languages are not likely to be an asset. Knowing german and italian when applying for a Classics PhD, although highly relevant for Classics, is not going to make much of a difference. But knowing ancient greek or latin maybe would?

@ChrisDoyle knowing German would be invaluable for a classics PhD as a great deal of the literature on ancient languages is written in German to this day (more so than Italian).

@virmaior the question is focused on if learning German before applying would help with admissions and not if learning it later would help with research

@StrongBad I didn't miss that. I think for a classics PhD application, prior German knowledge would be a strong asset as an applicant. Obviously, it would be outranked by some sign of competency in the ancient languages themselves.

I am slightly confused now. So @StrongBad is saying that popular languages are likely to be of little value, because they are so commonly studied. German would fall into this category I would assume. virmaior now says that German would be an asset for Classics, as it is highly relevant there. But so are Italian/French/German for s.o. studying the Italian Renaissance. And this is of course what my question targets.


text:
Is it ok to get independent feedback before handing in thesis?
I have a thesis to hand in at my university.
Am I allowed to ask a grad student who is an expert in my field to have a look at my thesis and give me feedback (more than merely grammatical / stylistic feedback that is) before handing it in at my university?
Some personal background to this:
I was asking my lecturer once if he knows anyone who is good at subject X. He referred me to Daniel. Daniel wanted me to pay him for his service, and I was ready to do that.
However, he then asked me whether I intended to hand in the paper, because if so, he could not give me proper advice / would have to withhold certain criticisms from me. I told him the truth and did not end up doing it.
But is this so? Was I unknowingly trying to 'cheat'? Would it not have been good conduct, because I would have paid him? Does this make it somehow different from "just asking a friend"?

I agree, but I was wondering why all of a sudden this person then also had these very strong morals telling me that he cannot criticise the paper if i plan on handing the paper in as coursework.

"As coursework?" A thesis isn't exactly what one would normally call "coursework". Could there be a misunderstanding between you and him, as if he thought, you were asking for help on a homework assignment, that you would usually be supposed to do by yourself?

Why on earth would someone pay money to have a manuscript reviewed if they weren't going to hand it in? It's such an odd situation that I have trouble believing it's a scam as it appears on the surface. I suspect there is some miscommunication here.

@LLlAMnYP well, no, i didn't mean coursework, sorry. So if I understand you correctly then, I would be allowed to get feeback on my thesis, but not on a paper that I would hand in as coursework?

Well, this is university/country/culture-specific, so I don't know here. Where I studied, there was no such thing as "cheating on homework", students would collaborate all the time, those who understood the stuff well would explain it to those, who struggled. Reading academia.SE I see lots of accounts of people who have assignments that they're supposed to "do without help".

Personally, I find the notion of "no feedback allowed" ridiculous, regardless of the nature of the task. Maybe, when the instructor wants to evaluate your weaknesses, he wants to be the one providing feedback... but we got off-topic. If in doubt, check the syllabus. I think Daniel wanted to get an easy buck out of you, but then realized, that this is not just a personal matter between the two of you and (obviously understanding, that he was acting unethically), provided an obscure excuse to make it look like it's your decision not to get feedback.

tl;dr I never said, that it's not ok to get feedback. I believe, it is almost always good to ask for feedback. All I'm doing, is trying to put myself in the shoes of the actors in your situation and see, how they could interpret the situation.

One of the objectives of gathering professors, postgraduates, graduate students and undergraduates at an university is precisely to encourage working together and cross-checking. Nothing wrong here.
If another graduate student in interested in your work, good for you! Perhaps the basis for future collaborations. If she helps you out by helping proofread your thesis, she is certainly entitled to an acknowledgement of the help in your final writeup. And you should also lend a hand, either to her or some following students, in gratitude.

I'd even go beyond this and say not only is it OK, it's something you really should do. Not having your thesis well-proofed before handing it in is practically an insult to the people who'll be responsible for evaluating it.

@vonbrand thanks for your reply. Here is the thing: I was just wondering, because I was asking one of my lecturer once if he knows anyone who is good at subject X. He referred me to someone. This person wanted me to pay him for his proofreading service, and I was ready to do that. However, then he asked me whether I intend to hand in the paper, because if so, then he cannot give me proper advice / would have to withhold certain things. I told him the truth and did not end up doing it. But is this so? Was I unknowingly trying to 'cheat'?

I can't imagine any kind of advice that would be ethical for an ordinary research paper, but not for a thesis, except maybe the kind that most of us would call "collaboration".

@ChrisDoyle Unless he is examining you, why would he not give you proper advice? This sounds like a weird transaction. Is there any reason why you would not ask a friend to help you?

At the time, I wanted to have good advice / criticisms for my arguments from an expert and did not know anyone who was familiar enough with my topic. I don't understand why he did not want to give me his 'full criticism', he was not even at the same university.

The upvoted answers are correct. You can and you should ask other people to proofread your work, and this will continue well beyond the times, when you have to submit theses and such. Senior scientists have their work reviewed by colleagues all the time too. For example, the internal review procedure at our institute - the internal guidelines basically say, we shouldn't submit a paper anywhere, before a couple of members of the institute have proofread it.
However, I wanted to make a different point here. I can see, that you're being cautious, and questioning your actions and that's a good thing. But, apparently, some (malicious at worst, unethical at best) people will take advantage of that.
Don't let the strange reaction of this Daniel character lead you into thinking, that you're doing something wrong here. You are not cheating in any way and are doing precisely the right thing by getting someone to review your work. You simply got a bad reference from this professor. Look for a different reviewer.

Some people are just looking for a way to get their money out of what could be "ground breaking findings".  By having you pay him for his "services" he ensures that his "expert knowledge" is paid for if you then turn around and use this to make money in the future.  It also seems like he feels that his advice is too good for the paper which is why he would need to "hold back and question your choice to submit it".
To me at least by the way you present this, he seems arrogant and just looking to make a quick buck.  I have found that generally, people are willing to help someone out and offer advice.  Some times, they might even strike a deal with you if they think that your subject is worthy of pursuing outside of academics.  Like say, you have a thesis paper that will help lay the foundation to later provide technology that will drastically change the way hearing aids work.  Someone might say hey, I will offer you help and provide you X, Y, Z if we do this and pursue this farther than academics if you will provide me X% of any profit made due to this.  I had someone do that to me actually when I was looking for help with my senior college project.  My group turned them down because we felt we shouldn't need to give away anything for scholastic help.
Also as a side note, he may have also miss-understood your intentions of going to him.  He may have thought you wanted him to basically rewrite the paper for you, instead of providing criticism (though I am sure you probably clarified that at some point).  Either way, he doesn't sound like a good resource to go to.  I have found that when teachers refer you to students like that, most of the time they are looking for payment.  You may be better off doing some googling for anyone local that might be an expert and contacting them, seeing if they will be willing to sit down over lunch and look it over (maybe even offer to buy the lunch as courtesy of their time).  Though it probably would be easier if you emailed them the paper and they can do it at their leisure.
I have found that established people in the fields are more generally willing to help out college students for free and provide quality feed back.  They don't need to make a name for themselves because they are already in the field, and generally they want to encourage people to have interest in their field.  It is how their field grows and in turn better technologies are created/provided.
Sorry for the TLDR but hope my 2 cents help!

well if you are going to downvote at least say why! I believe this is relevant to his concerns about the person who wants to charge him for their advice and withhold proper criticism.  Everyone else pretty much already stated that it is not an issue to seek help but no one has bothered to mention his 2nd part about his concern about the resource he was referenced to yet.

Dont be too miffed about the downvotes (I like the answer, by the way). The OP only later edited his post to include info about this Daniel character, I imagine those, who downvoted never read the update. And some only read the question title, e.g. answer directly above yours, posted several hours after the edit.

I am also finding your answer very helpful! Thanks!

Yes it is fine, as it will help you and other PhD students like you to communicate and discuss about PhD thesis and its contribution(s).
However, I would also add another aspect to this: seeking perfection from others makes projects/publications go forever. So as long as you do this in timely manner you be fine, so don't be picky too much.

Does the background info provided by the OP not bother you in any way here?


text:
Is Ph.D relevant in academics because of the university under which it is done or the paper publications?
Is Ph.D relevant in academics because of the university under which it is done or the paper publications? I am planning to join for Ph.D under a relatively new university but I hear often that it's the papers that count and the quality papers in it. The university as long as it's registered with the government / legal doesn't matter. Is that true?

See this: http://academia.stackexchange.com/a/154/10042


text:
Acknowledge startup funding in manucript
Has anyone acknowledged their own university for startup funding that was used to conduct the research to be published in an article? If so could you please share the wordings that you used? Thanks!

It is polite, but probably not necessary to do this. But generally, acknowledging help of any kind is good.

If your university specifies the wording that should be used, then use that. If they don't then just write something. There's no magical One True Sentence ;-)

Do you know where your startup funds came from? Sometimes there may be a more specific source that is worth crediting.

Unless you were given other specific instructions from your university, all you need to do by way of acknowledgement is to put “[name of author], [name of university]” on the title page of your paper. This is enough to ensure that people understand that the university is paying your salary, giving you an office, and providing you with any other resources that you need to do your job, including startup funding if applicable.


text:
Should I finish my PhD?
I have one more year until finishing my PhD. I feel that I will have a mediocre PhD thesis, at best. I feel like quitting, and I had this feeling even from the start of the PhD. I felt even from the beginning that something is wrong and I should not continue but I continued anyway because I was very passionate about the subject that my thesis is supposed to be focused on. (Of course I did not get to do exactly what I thought I would do, but still... the things that I worked on belonged somehow to that area of study that I always interested in). I struggled a lot during these PhD years, and that's mainly because I did not get much help. Now I feel exhausted. I don't have any energy left to continue. I really feel that the reason I got into this situation is because people that were supposed to help me think very low of me... And they just left me to deal with my problems all by myself. Probably because they think I wasn't good enough to deserve much of their attention.
I have a few publications. In principle, I have all I need in order to finish. But somehow I feel like it is worthless. I am aware that it would be very stupid to quit right now. I don't know what to do. I don't know whether I will continue my work after the PhD graduation.

You are not alone - https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7668/what-can-i-do-to-recover-from-a-short-term-burnout, https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9331/too-burnt-out-to-continue-msc, https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81724/strategies-to-avoid-burn-out-due-to-systemic-lack-of-time

Some quotes from this site (and elsewhere): 1) "There are only two types of PhD theses: bad ones, and unfinished ones." 2) "The best type of PhD thesis is a completed one."

Your mental health is the most important factor in this equation. PhD's are hard, and demotivating, and exhausting. But the best PhD is a completed PhD! It sounds like you've got everything you need to finish, you just need to full together the threads that make up a thesis.
Often people get most of the way through a PhD and have not taken a holiday in years. When was the last time you took a holiday or just some time off?
Make a plan of exactly what is needed to finish. What are your publication requirements? Structure out what the thesis will look like and define any loose ends that need to be finished. Make a list of these things and plan out - week-by-week when you want these completed by. If the end is in sight, you'll find that motivation will return - like a marathon running who has hit the wall but can see light at the end of a tunnel. These feelings are so natural - almost everyone I know who did a PhD experienced it!
And with regards to you thinking your thesis is mediocre at best. EVERYONE thinks that! I'm not going to tell you that it's better (because I don't know). But statistically, half of PhD graduates wrote a thesis that is average or worse than average. I know mine certainly was! Who cares? If you do enough to pass, then it really doesn't matter. And the saving grace is that very few people will ever read and understand the thesis enough to work that out!
You've got this! Remember to prioritise a good work-life balance as in the long run, it will serve you far more effectively than if you crammed for the next year!

I am very sorry that you are going through this.
It is a very disheartening and difficult time for you. I am not trying to minimize your agony, but I think you should take the time and celebrate how much and how far you have done. You have a few publications, that is brilliant work. You are only a year away from completion and it sounds like you just need to start writing, that is a fantastic platform from which to be sorting out your future. On the basis of your publications alone, you can do many things even if you do not finish your PhD...
Having said that, burnout is quite common and distressing. Unfortunately, burnout is quite poorly understood and there is no accepted "treatment" or strategy. There are plenty of stories of taking time out, doing the yoga/meditation/health diet thing and being able to bounce back. Burnout is serious and many academic journals even Nature has taken time to educate and discuss how serious it is. Self-care is important but taking time out and having a break away from the work is also an important way forward, only something you can decide (Rutgers article).
Your feeling that your work is "worthless" is also very common. It is important that you realise that change will not occur after a 3 to 5 years of intense study, the worth that you give over the rest of your 80 to 90 year life will far outstrip this artificially stressful but short period of time.

Compounding the pressures is the sense, at least according to the economics Ph.D. candidates surveyed by the Harvard researchers, that their work isn’t useful or beneficial to society. Only a quarter of the study’s respondents reported feeling as if their work was useful always or most of the time, compared with 63 percent of the entire working-age population. Only a fifth of the respondents thought that they had opportunities to make a positive impact on their community - Atlantic 2018 article

You may also be clinically depressed. Depression among PhD students and graduate students is common. A 2015 Berkeley study found that nearly 47% of their graduate students were depressed. The highest rate of depression on screening was in arts and humanities fields (64%), higher than in STEM (43-46%), the social sciences (34%) and business (28%).
Unfortunately, few graduate students will seek help and most will likely blame themselves, consistent with impostor syndrome or perfectionism, qualities selected for in graduate school. So yes, it is very important that you seek help, your university would have student support services. It is important that you support and care for yourself in this very tough time. Seek professional and expert help, you have so much more to give after this unfortunate spell...

The other answers already provide you with excellent advice, I'll just add a couple points along the same lines:

You're not alone: it's very common to feel depressed towards the end of the PhD. Talk to fellow PhD students if you can, you'll be surprised to discover that even among the ones who seem to be doing very well many go through this. This can help you realize that you're not being fair with yourself: your PhD work might not be as perfect as you hoped it would be, that doesn't mean it's bad or even "mediocre".
Try not to entertain these self-loathing feelings: seek professional help, take a holiday break, contact some old friends or spend some time with your family... Whatever way works for you to change your mind, go for it.

I really feel that the reason I got into this situation is because people that were supposed to help me think very low of me... And they just left me to deal with my problems all by myself. Probably because they think I wasn't good enough to deserve much of their attention.

I don't know your supervisor(s) but I can confidently say that your interpretation about why they didn't help you as much as you expected is completely wrong. There are plenty of reasons why some supervisors turn out to be moderately helpful, the most common ones being: they are too busy, are not as knowledgeable as you imagine in your topic, started other lines of research and lost interest in yours... or just have a very loose approach to supervision. Supervisors are not perfect either, it doesn't mean that they judge you badly. This interpretation is the result of your low self-esteem.

I think you should emphasize the suggestion to seek help. The university almost certainly has mental health services, and they know the kinds of problems that graduate and PhD students go through.

I haven’t completed a PhD, but every single person I’ve spoken to who has, reports feeling the exact same way you do, and it is often the case that you will continue to feel like your thesis is subpar until the moment you are completely done with it. This is the nature of large projects; they suck until they don’t, and most times you just have to stick it out until this becomes the case for you.
You also don’t know if your thesis or degree will be worthless right now. It’s impossible to know. You can make an educated guess, I suppose, as you have done, but you will only know when you have the degree and know what your professional life is like with it. I say that to say, it’s better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Especially since you’ve invested a lot of time and effort into it so far and you are almost finished.
Having said that... You know your mental state better than anyone else, and with the statistics for mental health issues and PhD students being what they are, you should really consider your next move seriously.
Good luck! And I’m confident that it will work out for you.

Beware of the "Sunk Cost Fallacy."

Individuals commit the sunk cost fallacy when they continue a behavior
  or endeavor as a result of previously invested resources.

https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/sunk-cost-fallacy/

My Story
I was pursuing a Psy.D. in Clinical Psychology and had completed the coursework, but still had my internships and research project ahead of me. I was miserable and quitting was one of the hardest but best decisions I've ever made. I now work in an unrelated field that I love.
I felt shame and fear quitting a program I had invested so much time and money into (including tremendous student debt).
What became clear to me, however, was that the career path I was working toward was not going to make me happy. I made it so far because I kept thinking that I just had to survive the program and I'd enjoy the work, but my externship work made it clear that quite a bit of what I disliked about the program would still apply afterward.
My Advice
Consider the additional paths that open up to you when you complete your PhD. Are those worth the work that remains?
In general, educational degrees open up additional paths and are thus worth short-term suffering for long-term gain.
If the additional paths that open up, however, aren't worth the sacrifice to you, then cut your losses and stop investing more.

As good as the current answers are, they miss something, which is natural.
Are you able to pivot your thesis into an area you are interested in? It doesn't have to be a large move, just enough for it to be more interesting. My mom got a Masters in Art History (not the same as a PhD, I know), and she wrote a paper not on the "classics", but rather historical and current Native American Indian art. In her case, she spent time camping on various American Indian reservations and interacting directly with the cultures she was writing about for days or weeks at a time.
No only did she get some great information, but it also helped her relax and avoid burnout. I'm not saying this will work for your topic, but it goes to show that some topics aren't relegated to just a lab or a library. Yes, she could have spent those same weeks in a library, getting her research material from books, but instead she went out and did the research in person. It cost a fair amount of money and I don't remember if she had a job to take time off from, but she absolutely loved it.
So what do you want? This is about you, not someone else's expectations of you. FYI, my mom did this degree for her own interests, not because it would necessarily help her career. I'm sure that was part of it, but she was in her 50's (maybe 60's, I don't remember) when she finished her degree, after decades of starts and stops along the way.
Once you get your mental health addressed, prove to your "haters" they are wrong about you. One of the best ego boosts is to see those same negative people come around to your side. That doesn't mean you should accept their pandering, but enjoy the fact that you were right after all.
BTW, PhDs are supposed to be hard. It's to weed out people who think they can't do it. When you prove that you think you can do it by overcoming the difficulties of a PhD, you get the rewards of that hard work. One of those things is that what used to be hard may no longer be difficult for you. Another is self doubt about your abilities goes away. All of that might not happen just because you get the diploma, but it will eventually, as long as you don't compare yourself to others. The key detail is that you have to think you can do it before you can actually do it.
Too often, even after they get a degree, people will compare themselves to those who are leaders in their field and think they are nothing compared to them. Well, likely that's true, but only because they have vast amounts of experience you don't yet have, which is only because you are newer to the field and haven't the time to gain the experience they do. How are people with brand new degrees supposed to compete with those with 20+ years of experience? By patience and gaining those 20+ of experience themselves. Those leaders didn't become leaders overnight.
Also, those leaders were likely once in your shoes, comparing themselves to people who had vast amounts of experience. They were also likely where you are right now, thinking they can't make it to the end of the PhD, being stressed, and thinking of quitting. But they didn't quit, they kept on until they finished. If you must compare yourself to these people, use them as positive influence. "If they can do it, so can I."
Just like you need to, they took care of themselves and finished their PhD. They gathered themselves up and thought, "I got this." Not because they knew they'd become leaders, but because it's what they wanted to do.
So I ask again: what do you want? What is it that you really want, with the core of your soul/heart/being/(whatever you want to call it)? Do you want to quit or do you want to finish? Either answer is OK, but are you going to regret it later in life?
You don't even have to answer this right away. Take a couple days, a week, or a month to get your head straight and your body recovered. Just don't take more time than you need. Waiting too long will help you make the easy answer of quitting. The sooner you answer, the more likely it's going to be your right answer, the one you can live with for the rest of your life.
Even if you quit, rest assured that the time you spent working was not wasted. You found your limit, stretched it, found new limits, and decided to stop before you broke. There is no shame in admitting that you set a goal you aren't ready to reach. Maybe you pick things back up later. Maybe you don't.
Yes, I wrote most of this Answer as if you need to finish your degree. I did it to show support for you in your goal of completing this degree, but if you can't finish it, know that I support that decision, too. This is your life, your goals, your decision. What I think about it shouldn't matter to you. I can only give suggestions. I can't do it for you. You do what you need to do and if people don't agree, accept their criticism with the same amount of respect it deserves, but keep doing what you need to do to feel good about yourself. That's all anyone really can do.
This is an academic site, so the "of course" answer is going to be to finish the PhD, but the real answer is: what do you really want to do?
Good luck and I hope you enjoy the journey ahead of you!

prove to your "haters" they are wrong about you. OP makes no indication of anyone other than themself thinking they aren't good enough.

@CaptainMan, "I really feel that the reason I got into this situation is because people that were supposed to help me think very low of me... And they just left me to deal with my problems all by myself." If that's not a softened description of haters, then I guess I'm wrong. Also, IME, there will always be people around that tell you you can't do something, but generally only because they couldn't manage it. Just because the OP doesn't mention it, it doesn't mean they aren't there.

@computercarguy It's hard to tell from the OP if the OP's colleagues actually think low of them and didn't help, or if the OP is suffering from distorted thinking patterns/"warpy thoughts" due to, for example, anxiety or depression which are both very common near the end of a PhD. Some of the phrases the OP used point towards the latter, for example the level of exhaustion and feeling like their work is worthless.

@user3067860, from what I quoted in my last comment, to me, it seems as if this has been a trend for more than just recent times. It may just be that they haven't gotten help recently sure, but it may be longer term than that. I haven't tried a PhD, so I don't know from experience there, but I've had plenty of experience with people who should be helping me thinking I'm too far below them to matter and liking to watch me struggle so don't help. I haven't succeeded all the time to overcome that, but when I do, it's a pretty good feeling. I consider even these type of people as "haters".

@computercarguy It may be that people genuinely have not been very helpful, but the "warpy" thoughts would be thinking that they were not helpful because they think the OP is not worthy. There could be many other explanations, I think Erwan's answer does a good job covering them. For most people, re-framing into a neutral position (my advisor didn't help me because he/she is just not a great advisor) leads to a happier mindset compared to re-framing into an aggressive position (my advisor is a hater so I hate him/her back).

@user3067860, I never said to hate them back. I said to overcome their hate/delinquency, not stoop to it.


text:
Is it possible for an academic to successfully claim their Google knowledge panel with an institution-hosted webpage and a Google Scholar account?
Edit: I rewrote the question based on the associated discussion on meta.
Context
Google created a "knowledge panel" about me which appears when my name is searched in Google. It consists mostly of a link to my Google Scholar profile, a couple of my publications and a picture of a person who has the same name as me. I want to replace the erroneous picture so I claimed the panel, and this involves an apparently strict identity verification process.
In particular, this verification process requires the person to prove that they can edit the content of at least two of the profiles which appear in the search results for their name.
Problem
I provided proof that I can edit my professional webpage hosted by my institution and my Google Scholar account, but my claim was rejected (after 3 months). When I asked for clarifications I was told that:

the login screens to your web profiles that you submitted in your verification application did not match with the social web profiles that appear on the first few pages of search results next to your knowledge panel.

I don't understand what this answer means, as my institution-hosted webpage and my Google Scholar scholar profile appear as first and third link in the search results. The issue seems to be about the definition of "social web profiles":

acceptable web profiles on SRP are Facebook, LinkedIn, Soundcloud, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, Official website.

This list doesn't even include Google Scholar, although it's the source of the knowledge panel so to me it wouldn't make sense if they don't count it as a valid profile.
This list includes an "official website", but I suspect that they don't accept an institution-hosted webpage since it's harder and less standard to check a proof of ownership.

Of course I contacted Google support, but so far their answer has been disappointingly vague. They were not even able to answer the simple yes/no questions of whether my academic page or my Scholar profile counts as proof.
I assume that a professional webpage and a Scholar account are probably the two most common types of online "profile" for an academic. I've seen a few other academics' knowledge panels, according to my observations these always include at least another social media profile, such as a twitter account. Since Google employees/contractors themselves cannot explain the rules precisely, I suspect that there is some subjectivity involved. This is why I would like to know if any academic succeeded securing control of their knowledge panel without any social media account.
Question
Is it possible for an academic to successfully claim their Google knowledge panel only with an institution-hosted webpage and a Google Scholar account?
If yes, is there an effective way to prove ownership of the institution-hosted webpage?
My experience tends to show that the answer is no, but I want to check because it looks like their criteria are unclear. In other words, I don't know if they apply the same criteria to everyone, that's why it would be useful for me to know if anybody else succeeded in this way. I might also not have provided the kind of proof that they expect for a professional webpage or misunderstood their (vague) instructions, so I would appreciate any tip from fellow academics who went through this process.
Side notes
I don't have a clue why:

They implement a strict verification process for the knowledge panel which depends entirely on the Scholar account that I already own (and didn't have such a verification process).
Their system picks up a random picture instead of the one on my Scholar account.

Thanks to the people who explained the problem with my original question on meta. In this version I tried to target the specific problem that I have as an academic, I hope it's now clear that I'm looking for other academics' experience with this.

The question is now reopened. In case, anyone please bring any further discussion about topicality to the associated meta question.

After multiple emails with Google support who didn't seem to understand the problem (or didn't want to), I finally obtained a clear answer: currently their verification process doesn't even consider that showing ownership of the Google Scholar account is a valid proof:

Sorry but you didn't answer the question: is Google Scholar a valid profile for the verification process? yes or no?

In regards to your concern, Google Scholar is not a valid profile for the verification process.

I didn't manage to obtain a clear answer about showing ownership of an institution-hosted webpage, but if even a Scholar account is not considered valid proof (even though it's the source of the knowledge panel), I assume that the institution-hosted webpage is certainly not a valid profile either.
Thus the answer is no, it is not possible for an academic to successfully claim their Google knowledge panel only with an institution-hosted webpage and a Google Scholar account.
Update: my claim was eventually accepted after I submitted my LinkedIn profile as single proof. Normally this is not sufficient according to the instructions, so I'm not sure what was the main reason for the acceptance. It's possible that me repeatedly pointing out the problem by email was a factor.

Consider talking to your university's lawyers.
As an academic, you're associated with a university, and that university should have legal staff working for them. Since Google's misrepresentation of you might affect the university's reputation, it's possible that you might be able to get your university's lawyers to send Google a Cease and Desist letter instructing them to either take down your knowledge panel, or update its contents to be accurate.
While I'm not certain, I imagine that Google would likely be far more responsive to a legal letter written by lawyers than it would be from a request from lone individual - especially if you're located in jurisdictions like the EU where you have legal rights over how your data is used.


text:
How likely is that a high school student has a paper published in a peer reviewed journal without any help from a professor?
Most often high school students do research in a university under a professor. Has there been any instances where a student published a paper in a peer-reviewed journal without any help from a professor?

Why do you ask? How is this relevant for professional academics?

Considering the peculiarities of the publishing process (the "usual" format for articles in a specific field, relevance of results/etc), I'd say unlikely. When I'm reviewing submitted articles, I can usually tell when the advisor didn't really review the paper, exactly because of those kinds of mistakes.  Experience makes a lot of difference in this process...

High school and middle school students have successfully published in a bunch of predatory journals that claim to be peer-reviewed, according to this recent paper. But I assume you are asking about publications that actually mean something.

I find it hard to believe a high school student could navigate a journal submission system without some sort of help.

It's unlikely but not impossible.
To use an example, I once had a colleague reviewing a paper where a high school student produced some results from a commonly used mathematical model in epidemiology. While not duplicative, they weren't exactly novel. Yes, no one had published for this model and this disease in this population, but these results were very much of a "Yes...and?" variety.
But the journal in question was pushing the "Papers should be technically correct, and excitement or novelty is less important."
I don't know the final outcome of that paper, but it's conceivable that it could have been published.

Though the student might have been significantly helped by a professor not interested in having authorship too.

@MassimoOrtolano IIRC in that case it was expressly their high school math teacher. Though you could never really rule out an anonymous professor.


text:
How do I register a paper URL into doai.io or oadoi.org?
oaDOI.org and doai.io are services that give open-access links based on DOI.
How can I register a paper into doai.io or oadoi.org?

doai.io relies on BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine)'s data. So to  register a paper into doai.io, one has to put it in an open-access repository that is harvested by BASE. There are more than 5700+ indexed repositories, the complete list can be found here
oaDOI.org relies on its own harvesting of open-access repositories, that are listed at https://api.oadoi.org/data/sources.csv


text:
At the various levels of a post-graduate career, how much freedom of research will I have?
I'm an undergrad who is planning on a career in academia. At the various levels (graduate, postdoc, professorship) how much freedom will I have to research whatever I want?

Obligatory comic.

Will your research require expensive labs and equipment?  If so, you may have to limit yourself to research that you can get funding for (at all those levels).

@ff524: It's a good one. To the OP: I think that your question is very field-dependent and situation-dependent, so don't expect a good generic answer.

First, you can always research anything you want on your own time and your own money.
Thus, I assume that your question boils down to what range of research topics will I be able to get paid for?  That depends heavily on:

Your level of ability.  If you are sufficiently outstanding you can get awards that will fund you to research whatever you want at almost any career stage.  For instance, grad students who have, say, a government fellowship (in the US these are things like NSF, or DOE CSGF) are often given a lot more leeway to pursue their own research agenda.  But such fellowships are rare and highly competitive.  What's more, almost any professor will be willing to take such a student.  At the other end of the pool, if you are a relatively weak student it may be difficult to even find an advisor, and when you do they will probably require you to follow their research plan.  Similarly, a young professor who gets a CAREER award can more easily follow their interests.
Your communication skills.  If you can give persuasive presentations and write excellent grant proposals, you will be able to obtain more funding for the projects that interest you and therefore be free to work on them.  You may also be able to buy yourself out of teaching responsibilities and so spend more time on research.  Of course, this is intertwined with #1 above.
The nature of the research itself.  In experimental or observational areas, you need to buy equipment.  If you want to study gravitational waves (observationally), you will need a lot of money -- or collaborators with a lot of money -- to get started.

Finally, let's talk about career stage.  The three factors above are operative at every career stage.  There are brilliant grad students who can work on just what they want because of their talent, and there are tenured professors who can hardly do research at all because they are required to spend nearly all their time teaching (this may also be a choice -- research is not the top priority for everyone).  That said, on average your freedom to direct your own research increases at each successive stage.  The "restrictions" at each stage are well illustrated by the comic linked in the comments above.


text:
How to mention a recently dead scientist?
I would like to mention in an article a scientist that passed away in 2015 and was universally recognized as a pioneer in his respective field. Since many knew him personnally, I would like to mention him respectfully, such as 'the Late Dr. XXX' or 'Honorable Dr. XXX'.
I am afraid it would be unethical, especially considering that many other authors that I mention are also gone (but few people really knew them) ?

You could dedicate an article to the scientist.

@user2768 This would be inappropriate if you didn't know the scientist concerned personally.

@user2768: As far as I understand the question, the author is concerned even writing "the late Dr. XXX" might unfairly call attention to Dr. XXX compared to other late researchers. It seems that dedicating an article (in both possible interpretations) to Dr. XXX would intensify this issue rather than alleviate it.

I am not sure if 'late' is really a term of respect, I think it's more to convey information to the unaware reader. Why not try something like 'the influential' or 'the founder of the field X'? If it's a scientific paper, I don't think it makes much sense to put an opinion of a peer in there unless it conveys useful information (e.g., where to look for the foundational work in a field).

@user2768 Indeed, I don't know the said scientist personnally. But, since it's a small field, most researchers should know him, and a good part of them, in person.

This sounds like a wonderful opportunity for writing a letter to the editor of one of your field's journals. In my area, at least, there's usually a small section of these journals dedicated to such letters. Even if you didn't know the scientist personally, you can write of the influence their work had on you.

I would strongly advise you against that idea. A well written article has to remain objective. Your relationship with that scientist is not a matter of any importance in the research you are describing in the article. Even adding qualifiers to the name is a bad move in my opinion, as you would be imposing your judgement to the reader.
I know this might seem a nice gesture in the moment, but the article is here to (hopefully) stay, and this type of personal/temporal address will become even more irrelevant to the reader.

Thank you. The concept of sustainable article writing, for me, makes the point. Even though in such small field everyone would agree for the scientist stature, over time it will definitely not be relevant at all, even disturbing if other reknowned authors died along years. The fact is (I think I realize), scientific writing is no place for superfluous sentimentalism.


text:
PhD interview advice!
I have received an invitation to interview for a PhD position and have been asked to present past/current research in a 10 minute presentation. I am currently doing a masters but am more comfortable talking about a past research project - I was wondering if the committee would expect or ask me why I have chosen to not present my current masters research work?
Additionally, I am confused about the amount of raw data to include in my presentation. Do they want to see the big picture rather than the nitty gritty raw data? I don't think it would be possible to include all the data I have collected in 10minutes, would it be acceptable to say "we did X and saw Y, but I haven't shown the data here for the sake of time"?
Additionally, some of the experiments have some design flaws in them, should I acknowledge and explain the flaws and point out what could have been done to get better data or not show these figures and change focus/skim over them?
Thank you!

In ten minutes, keep it high level. Goals, a bit on methodology, results - even if partial. And don't forget to mention that you have done things after this one. And make sure the one you talk about is somehow relevant to the doctoral studies you hope to start.

Personally, I'd expect to see at least one example of "big picture" thinking and at least one example of detailed thinking.  Don't try to cram in everything.  Do have a professor critique your presentation.

As a member of my department's graduate admissions committee, I have been participating in a bunch of interviews, just like what you are describing, this very month.  We invite the prospective students to give a brief talk, ten to fifteen minutes, about a project they have done in the past, at the beginning of each interview.
Sometimes, students who are currently in master's programs talk about earlier work they did (usually from their times as undergraduates), rather than their current thesis work.  I don't see anything negative about this, and I don't think the other committee members do either.  So I think you will be fine talking about an earlier project—although don't be surprised if there are some general questions about your more recent work.
The goal of an admissions intervew is to show what you know and your level of familiarity with research.  The faculty interviewers are evaluating the students they talk with for their potential; they are not specifically evaluating their current research work.  Showing a lot of detailed data is not necessary and may even be counterproductive, since it may draw attention away from the big picture of what you are trying to convey—which is that you know your field and will be able to do good research in that field.  If there were problems with your earlier experiments, you can explain that and use that explanation as a way to show that you understand the difficulties that are encountered in research; if you can explain how those problems could be fixed—even if you are not going to be able to implement those fixes yourself—that can be a very good way to demonstrate research competency and maturity.


text:
Is it common to have a personal copy of one’s own PhD thesis?
I worked very hard on my PhD thesis, and I think it would be cool to have a nicely bound physical copy of it. I’m simply wondering if obtaining one is a common thing to do.

Congratulations, Dr. trb123!

If you want your thesis, why should it matter if someone on the internet finds this weird?

Comments are not for anecdotes or answers; this conversation has been moved to chat.

Absolutely! I had 5 copies bound - Me, my supervisor, my parents and two for the library (these last two were a requirement).

Very similar here - and it's often a bit cheaper to have them done at the same time as the library/supervisor copies, and while still a registered student.  I did consider binding my own copy myself (properly, with leather), but saw sense.

I have a copy of my undergraduate thesis on the shelf in my office.

Have you read back through it at any point? I'm often surprised, in a great way, at my writing abilities back in my prime (while writing daily). Almost reads like someone else wrote it!

@SnakeDoc then again, my undergrad thesis makes me laugh everytime I stick my nose in and feel lucky that the grade actually was quite good^^ (likely more due to content than writing^^... I hope^^)

I had three personal copies made, although at my own expense, but it was offered as a normal option during the thesis submission paperwork with the graduate division.
In fact, at least one colleague from another university was required to have multiple copies made and submitted to the university library.

Apparently at some Swedish universities, one is required to have over 100 copies printed!  https://jmg.gu.se/english/education/Doctoral+programme/printing-of-doctoral-thesis

Indeed! The colleague was getting a Ph.D from an institute in Sweden, and the number of required copies shocked me!

Wow! Reading further down: they require 20 copies for the department, 25 at the defense (I guess for anyone who wants one), and 20 copies for the student. The department will pay up to 25,000 kroner (over $2500) for printing up to 300 copies, though they recommend printing no more than 150 (!!), since they "very often end up with surplus copies, which will remain lying around in boxes."

Surely these arn't hardback, leather bound copies?

@IanSudbery No. They are always softbound.

Some departments apparently print 250 copies of theses, according to this answer.

In Germany it used to be around 40+ copies, to be handed in and then sent to libraries around the country as the thesis should be available to anyone, but most places wisely now allow publishing a digital version and handing in a single digit number of copies instead. There are also companies preying on students with the offer to "publish" their thesis as a book instead, usually without telling the student that the company makes its money by then selling the 40+ copies back to them at inflated prices or inventing all sorts of other fees.

At a UK university some of my masters degree work was required to be bound and depositied in the library as an archive.  All PhD submissions were the same.  The past couple of decades were accessible to everyone for reference.  Anything less note-worthy of greater age was kept in an archive which you could request the retreaval of.  As far as I can recall we had to have 2 copies bound (one for sumission one for archive) and could choose to have as many extras as we liked.

"very often end up with surplus copies, which will remain lying around in boxes" Indeed. In some parts of the world, it's not normal to have a personal copy of the thesis. I have 15 copies lying around in a box. One day I'll go to the railway station and try to hand them out to unsuspecting people.

It's common enough that my program offered everyone 3 copies that they pay for: one each for you, your advisor, and the program itself. You could also have additional ones printed at the same time; I had one made for my parents and grandparents.

In my old supervisor's office he had a bookshelf with bound physical copies of all of his PhD students theses, so I am assuming the students themselves probably kept physical copies as well.

I don't see what you're basing that assumption on. Lots of reasons for only the professor to keep the physical copies: Unlike the PhDs, professor will almost certainly stay with similar topic to those theses. Unlike the PhDs, may need frequently read up on some detail (“so you want to improve experiment X? I know Y did this in her thesis, but I wasn't there myself, let's check what solvent she used”). The professor is likely to be more attached to actual paper instead of digital reading than the younger student. And, a bookshelf full of graduations is just a bit of a status symbol, isn't it?

OK yes you're right, he was probably just trying to show off, he was that type of person.

@leftaroundabout Please keep in mind that you describe the ideal state that one aspires to. An unfortunate reality is that of the PhD student working on a topic without real interest from the research group and the knowledge being lost when they leave... - A few years later some fool (...might also be me...) comes along and finds a topic interesting and thus has an old thesis handed to them as literature and sets out to gain an understanding of the topic which - once again leaves for the wide world when they graduate... Senseless? Yes. But unfortunately the sad reality today....

I also had several copies bound. I found a local bookbinder who did a lovely job. It's been over 25 years and I'm still proud of it and glad I had it done.

In the Netherlands, the custom is to publish the thesis as a small book and provide copies to the thesis committee, friends and family.  I eventually ended up throwing away a box of copies of mine after ordering too many.

Why throwing away the box with the leftover copies? The box is still in my attic. Once I'll be dead my grandchildren can have a look and throw them away.

@usr1234567 I moved across an ocean and didn’t want to ship the box.

Once all three readers approved my Ph.D. thesis, my university required me to submit 3 loose-leaf hardcopies printed on heavy-weight archival-grade (e.g., acid-free) paper. I voluntarily had four additional bound hardcopies made of the thesis: One each for myself, my parents, my parents-in-law, and my main advisor. If I remember correctly, the bound copies were typeset on regular-weight regular-quality paper.

Absolutely you should get your own personal copy printed and bound!  After all that work, you should be able to feel proud every time you look at it for years to come.

It's a pretty common thing to do, go for it.
It's also a pretty common thing to then never look at it, and throw it away when you're downsizing your house 15 years later.
It's also not unusual to not be able to find it that one time you could actually use it, and therefore have to refer to your electronic version.
Source: my and spouse's personal experience.
Facetiousness aside, you should do whatever you feel like, and enjoy the pride that comes from the accomplishment. And if you do print it out for yourself or others, it's far from being strange!

Downsizing 15 years later, already?

@BernhardDöbler, changing institutions -- to one in a higher cost-of-living location, does that to you!

By the time I got around to defending, my university and program only required electronic submission (this had changed in the final year or two of my program). I was a lazy and cheap grad student who was already working a full-time job, and so I never got around to having hardbound copies produced. I was rude, so nobody got a hardbound version. Everybody got a review copy on paper that I bound myself using that plastic comb binding system, which I could do because my job had one of the machines and the supplies and was happy to supply them if it meant I graduated sooner. I still feel a bit guilty about not doing it whenever the subject comes up. Not even my advisor got a properly bound one.
UMI/ProQuest should have a copy of my dissertation online if somebody wants it, and I can still build it from LaTeX and image sources if someone asks me directly. I'd be happy to just give someone a copy if they asked since I think the build procedure Just Works™. It's also, supposedly, in the Library of Congress, because UMI put a copy on file there as part of the copyright registration. I don't know if you can get a copy from the LoC.

Downvoters care to comment?

The requirements depend on the University. In my case, I was only required to submit a single hardcopy as well as a version in pdf.
Any additional copies were a personal choice. At the time I was getting frustrated and only the library copy was bound according to the university's specification. However I had additional copies bound for less (I think about 10£ cheaper a copy) at my former undergraduate university which were given to my supervisors and family. Did I have a copy for myself? I don't even remember anymore... Though I know it would be meaningless given that I have the pdf and can also always get a copy of my own pdf from the "White Rose Grid" where the electronic copy is publicly accessible.
It can be noted, that the custom of publishing a thesis with a proper ISBN as would be done in Germany does NOT exist in the UK.
So this is country specific.
It is (or maybe was, definitely still in 2006) also possible in the UK to have a thesis that is not accessible to the public as it is labelled "commercially sensitive". As a result the library will not give you a copy, however the former supervisor may if they have a copy. (And whether it is truly commercially sensitive is a different discussion.)
So to sum it up:
To get the degree you need only fulfil the requirements of the university.
(For me this was pass the viva, have corrections approved is necessary, 1 hard copy submitted according to university specifications plus the pdf.0
For yourself you can do whatever you want. Print them personally, have them bound as the university copy - differently. Have gilder pages, have no copy - whatever you like. It is your choice.
In addition, easily accessible computer storage was not standard just a few decades ago. Some people would have a copy of their thesis because that was the only way they could easily retain a good copy of it. Today, the digital version is possibly of greater use to the majority of people, so whether you retain a hard copy for yourself is truly your own choice today.
(In my case I also believe I have better books to put on a bookshelf... But hey, nobody can tear a thesis apart better than the original author and life has, unfortunately, carried me out of the academic sphere into industry. Still, I am at present happy with my job so I shouldn't complain and who knows what the future holds. Anyway, I'm rambling now and should better stop ;))

Yes.  Will you ever look at it again?  Probably not.  It is basically long term carbon sequestration and it's main value is environmental ;o)


text:
I was accused of cheating on an online physics exam because my answers were similar to those on Chegg
Today I was found guilty because my exam answers were similar to those on the math website. I haven't even seen the evidence(Chegg's answers) they said. I would like some advice on the appeal.
Here is what happened.
There were 2 questions they suspected. In the first question, I put an absolute sign on my answer to eliminate the direction of water flow because the question provided the flow direction so that I didn't need to consider the direction. I think the official answer didn't have the absolute sign but Chegg's answer had. In the second question, I used an equation that is slightly different from my lecture note because I learned that from the internet and it is more accurate(the difference is due to different coursebooks). I think Chegg's answer used the same equation I did.
I have explained the reasons why I answered like this and provided the note I learned from the internet with the equation I used. The committee didn't challenge my statement at that time. It turns out they found me guilty.
What reason can I use to appeal this result and claim my innocence?

Sorry to hear you are in this situation. I suspect your next steps will depend on your university's appeal process (which will be difficult for us to advise you on, since every university has its own process).

I think you're going to have a rough time proving your innocence if you used equations not taught in the course. Have you used the modified equations in previous work like an assignment?

@Cell - really? Students should not use anything but exactly what was provided in the official course materials? I guess I should not have been reading all those other textbooks to see different ways to approach problems...

Worth a read: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/148236/72855

Can you explain what "found guilty" exactly means and what else you might do now? Also, what exactly is this "comitee"? Is it in general just?

@JonCuster You're exaggerating. We all read other material besides what's taught in lectures to learn, but there is a difference between  new conceptual approaches and straight up using different equations especially if they can't be derived from the lecture ones. And doing so wont put you in a favorable position like this one.

@Cell - of course I was exaggerating, generally to good effect however. The whole point of reading more broadly is to find and understand other approaches, particularly ones that resonate better (for whatever reason) with you. Those may, or may not, involve different 'equations'.

To follow @cag51's comment, the first thing you should do is find out all you can about the process and what resources are available to you.  At my university, this would be communicated to you by the Integrity office (who should be handling this) and I believe you would have support from a student-run organization.

Do you know for a fact that there is a formal appeal process at your institution? There's probably no way to conjure an "appeal" out of thin air if no such process is defined at your school.

Thay said I can appeal with proper reasons within 7 working days. I'd like to challenge that 1) I have never seen any evidence they found, I don't have a chance to respond to it. 2) I have clearly explained my working steps that led to the answers and no one challenged my statement. I also provided my study note with the equation I used. And they found me guilty. Isn't it a presumption of guilt? 3)I have followed the rules to record my self and my screen when I took the exam with a TA's monitoring, I was not able to cheat online. 4) They cannot prove I can't reach the answer except cheating.

@user111388 They said the act of cheating was established. I can appeal now. The committee reviews the evidence and my explanation then voted if I cheat or not.

Do you have a "lawyer"? Have you talked to your student union? Also, why is the question closed? And is it in general a fair process? (Eg we had mighty profs who could just say "you cheated" if they don't like you  and it counted as proven -- then my advises would be different).

@user111388 The question closed for individual factors. I am not able to afford a lawyer. And my student union is not responding. They said the committee is formed by 6 profs, I think it should be fair.

@ChrisLin: I am sorry about the question being closed. I don't neccessarily mean a real lawyer, but someone knowledgeable who helps you.