text:
Is it correct to tell a professor that solutions to exercise sheets are online?
I'm a MSc student (second year) in  a math department in Europe and I have to check and correct the  exercise sheets of the students of the first year of Master degree attending a course this semester. Those points can add up to +2 extra points in the final mark.
These exercise are taken from the course of the last year, which was given by another teacher.
Unfortunately, in the e-learning platform of the past year all the solutions by the previous teacher are still available and anyone can access it.
I think I should tell this to the teacher, but I'm afraid to be inappropriate, as I'm a student like them.
Best regards

I reckon most professors know that the solutions are available online. Nevertheless, telling them is a nice thing to do. It's a way of showing, that you care about the quality of the lecture, and it might even trigger a fruitful discussion.
I am well aware that the solutions to my problem sheets are available online. Students told me so, but it is also obvious from the number of correct and wrong solutions. How do I know this?

I use a random number generator to obtain different starting values for the problem sheets. Students, who don't pay attention, might get it wrong.
Whenever I add a new problem this particular question gets the least correct answers.

Now, filtering the scores from old problem sheets according to the two criteria above and correlating them with the scores of the final exam, it gets pretty obvious that "doing the homework" and "coming to "consultation hours" significantly influences the final grade. I show this data every semester, at the beginning of a new course. During this presentation I also mention that the solutions are online, however, I try to put this into the context it deserves: Trying to cheat on the problem sheets is a waste of time. The time is better spent, having a beer and discussing the subject with your fellow students.

I feel like this is excellent information should be reshaped to answer the question. Can I suggest that you put your last paragraph first--basically, yes you should tell the professor--, and then follow up with paragraphs 1 & 2 on why an instructor might not worry about the fact that the answers are already online, or how they might deal with it constructively?

@LeeHachadoorian: Your right, that's much better. Thank you.

It's worth mentioning that those exercises has been created by himself. Anyway, thanks for the answer, and of course, it has to be the student to put all the effort to understand as much as he can. (I'm still a student and I strongly believe so)

Just send the prof an email or tell them in passing.
It's not your fault but they either know already or will be pleased to know so they can evaluate what they do.
What they do is either nothing or they may update the exercise material - students who want to progress will do the work anyway...


text:
I'm thinking about leaving after 6 months as a PhD student
I started last November but I've been having this gut feeling that this project may not be the one for me
The big picture is that I'm not really happy with the theory- if I'm being totally honest with myself, I feel that the project is disconnected from what I truly enjoy.
It's not something I'm considering lightly but the last few months I've been working, I sometimes wake up dreading the day ahead. I can't even enjoy my weekends without feeling this way. A PhD is a big undertaking I know but surely I should be happy and enthusiastic about approaching it? Even with a supervisor as prominent as mine, I just feel like I'm not having a good time.
I'm going to leave it a few weeks but I may need to take some time to consolidate my plan.
To summarise:

I feel that the field doesn't satisfy me, after extensive literature review and discussions, it feels as if the field has no practical uses and is purely academic. I wanted something that's engaging and hands on- so far my supervisor hasn't been able to answer about the applications of the research.
I think that my mental health should also come into it, the thought of dealing with this project makes me feel utterly depressed, I wake up dreading every day I need to work on it.
Something else which I didn't mention is the admin and HR department is very poor. For starters, I'm on a funded project and they tried to invoice me £8k. Moreover my supervisor put in a purchase order for some software and books I need and it still hasn't been approved after 3 weeks.

Thanks for reading.

I just read your question and I decided to sign up here so that I can answer your question.
As you say PhD is a long "journey", you are going to spend several years working on that project, and I really think that you should "believe in" your project to keep motivated. If it helps, I'm in my 3rd year of PhD, I am studing microbial ecology, which is not exactly my field (I studied Biotechnology and little ecology), but I was interested in the field I could see why it was important. Although I don't see future applications in industry (at least right now), I am aware of the importance of doing "basic research" and builging a general knowledge that help to better understand the world...
During my 2 and a half years I have had good and bad moments, and sometimes, talking with my supervisors helped (I must day that I'm very lucky because they are great persons), but most of the time, motivation depended on me, on seeing through the "bad days" and working on mental health, which includes not working on the week-ends, spending time out of the office, doing sport, talking about my work-related problems with other people in and outside academia, taking holidays...
This is my experience, if you have just started and you already have this feeling, I think you should look for other project or other type of job. Sometimes, deep inside, you know what you want but you are a bit scared/worried/embarrased to confront it (I don't want to make any assumptions). Problems with invoices, books, money etc are usual in all labs (in my experience), so you might encounter similar problems if you move to other lab. But mental health is so important!! If talking to your supervisor doesn't help, try other people around in the lab, with the experience of doing a PhD. You should be the most motivated person about your project, if you cannot see its usefulness, or you don't like it, it will get worse... In the next years, you will need to defend your project in papers and dissertations, you will have to read a lot of literature related to that to build a good knowledge, so at least you should enjoy reading and learning about that topic, if not, everyday will be a torture...
In any case, don't feel bad about your supervisor if you finally decide to leave, I know it can be embarrasing after the month he/she has spent teaching you etc, but if you think it is the right decision, you will be grateful in the future ;)
Hope this helps!

Thank you for your kind words, I'm so glad to hear you are enjoying your work- as you should! The truth is, I knew I was taking a gamble on an applied mathematics project when I'm a phsicist at hand. I prefer cosmology, solar and quantum physics to applied maths.
I need to be honest with myself and fully consider my options before I do anything

Let's separate the issues:

You don't like the topic? This is not what you want? Reflect very thoroughly, give yourself a few days. Then decide. If necessary, make a hard cut. There is no point wasting 3-5 years of your life on something you do not enjoy at all. There is always potential for frustration during a PhD, but it should be just an episode, not the the underlying mood of the PhD.

The depression is in such cases often coming directly from something that is wrong with your situation. Many people here are quick in recommending therapy, but I personally believe in first trying to get rid of the situation that causes you feeling badly (of course, this is not true if depression has always been an issue with you, I talk specifically about situational depression). Fix the situation, and you'll feel better. A clear decision (see point 1) may help.

Administration is a notoriously fickle thing. Rarely you enjoy the luck of an efficient administration. Don't let that ruin your day. I do not understand the invoice for 8k. For what is this? Fees? You should make sure you get a studentship, I really do not recommend paying fees for a PhD. In any case, this should probably be the least of your worries - it should be the worry of your prof.

Your question has several aspects:

I feel that the field doesn't satisfy me, after extensive literature review and discussions, it feels as if the field has no practical uses and is purely academic.

Isn't your field of study? I mean you did your bachelor and master in the same field. Right? If you want to do a PhD in another field, I am afraid you need to study the basics of this field: Bachelor and Master.
Of course, pursuing a PhD means doing academic work "mainly".
I don't know what is your field, but in many disciplines (e.g. argumentation), there is no direct applications.

I'm not really happy with the theory

In research, you have a problem and you need to solve it or approximate its solution. You don't have any power on the fundamentals and you cannot choose how the solution of the problem or the method that lead to that solution. You work as a researcher is to find that method after trying anything and reading a lot of papers, etc.
In summary, pursuing a PhD is not a necessity in life so if you are not happy about how academia works, I suggest you to quit especially if it is affecting your health and private life. Unfortunately, there are many things (e.g. relatively low salary, a lot of stress, etc.) that we need to accept when we decide to do research.

Thank you for your comment. No, I did a physics BSc and went on to do an applied mahs PhD (I jumped the masters stage). I realsie now that I just don't like applied maths, that's all there is to it. I want to change specialities to something practical- I am speaking to a professor advertising a position in semiconductor spintronics- I specialised in this dduring undergrad.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Should I send a follow up email?
I had a PhD interview nearly 3 weeks ago and it went well. I spoke to the supervisor after the interview a few days after and he said I was the candidate they want but that was 2 weeks ago. My question is, should I send a follow up email politely asking what the status of my application is. If it helps, I'm in the UK

I would be fine to ask. Thank them for their interest. Ask about the current status. Ask whether there is anything they still need from you.
Three weeks is about right. If there is a problem then it is time for you to know.

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


text:
How do I tell my supervisor that I've been offered a job and want to leave?
Yesterday I posted about wanting to leave my PhD and I've definitely decided that it's the healthiest choice for me. Now comes the hardest part- telling them that I plan to leave the program once I find an alternative role. I'm not a very confrontational person and I hate to feel that I am wasting anyone's time so I want to be as polite and direct as I can be.
Is it as simple as emailing to say that I wish to discuss my progress and long term goals and then inform them during the meeting that I've been offered a job?

Now comes the hardest part- telling them that I plan to leave the program once I find an alternative role. have you or have you not got an offer?

@AzorAhai-him-'s question is important. If you desire to leave and have not yet secured another position, you should say nothing. However if you do already have something lined up Buffy 's answer is good.

Nobody wants to supervise a student who wants to be somewhere else. Even if there's a little disappointment on their part, telling your supervisor will be doing them a favor—you're letting them know that you're taking steps to make a better situation for you and a situation for them where they can direct their energy elsewhere.

There is no reason for it to be confrontational. It is a sad situation, not a confrontational one. Just say that you are leaving and have considered your options.
Don't get talked out of what you want to do. If the person is angry, that is on them, not you. Say you are sorry, but determined.
Make some effort to clean up unfinished work that impacts on others if that is at all possible.

To the user who raised Low Quality Post flag, would you please explain the reason to raise the flag? I fail to see what's wrong with this answer.


text:
Feeling pressured to work
I'm a first year PhD student and the last month has been nothing short of a crucible of stress. I had to do 2 exams, wrote a 3k approval thesis, finalise my research objectives, plan the project and prepare a 30 minute presentation for a Q&A session. And I've had to write a bunch of code to produce the plots needed
The presentation is due to be done next Thursday but in the meantime I need to find the time to get a new desk because mine is falling apart. I'm at the point now where I'm feeling incredibly burnt out and I'm balancing so many plates.
I'm pressuring myself to work over the weekend even though I've drilled the presentation and know it'll fit precisely in the time I'm allocated. How do I stop my project taking over my personal life?

@Buffy see the last line too "How do I stop my project taking over my personal life? "

Sorry, I misread it. But, who is pushing you? Is it yourself, a schedule crunch, a too-demanding professor? Something else?

Balancing demands is something we all work through, differently at different times of our careers, and subject to our own temperament, talents, goals, and environment. There's no pat answer. Maybe start with a list of the three things you value most at this point of your life. Use that as a basis for prioritizing what you work on. The crucible doesn't go away, it simply changes shape.

As far as your question to @Buffy goes, maybe start by working through the advantages and disadvantages of allowing a project take over your personal life. I've known people perfectly happy being completely immersed in an endeavor, to the complete exclusion of other things, things I myself value highly. In your case it appears you don't prefer to operate in the manner you have been.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8542/how-hard-do-early-career-academics-in-the-united-states-work-really is more targeted towards post-docs/early-career professors rather than grad students (and the US rather than elsewhere, though in this case I don't think that matters either), but I think it's pretty applicable to what you ask about. In general there are many questions under https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/work-life-balance that address this sort of thing.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/153597/is-it-important-to-maintain-a-work-life-balance-as-a-phd-student for another example

And also your own previous question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163170/feeling-bad-about-taking-time-off - there really seems to be a lot written on this subject here that you've probably read. What's still missing from the answers you've read that lead to another question?

One trick that works (surprisingly) is to reduce what you do by 10%. Take the step back and decide what happens when. Having a plan and sticking to it (at least for this critical week) will take some anxiety away that you are missing out. I also recommend a separate sheet of paper for each of the tasks that you have to do and collect everything there, then sort by priority. It also works on the computer, but paper is more tangible and you can take it around.

@Roberto_1986: It's been a month and a half. How have you adapted and what have you tried since your original post?

Start by embracing an uncomfortable truth: If you continue on an academic career, work will never ever be done. In the past, it may have been a viable strategy for you to work until you have completed everything you needed to do, and to then have sufficient time to recover before more work materializes. This will no longer work, and it will probably get worse in the future.
There are very different strategies that work for different people. I know colleagues in academia who have strict rules on when is and when isn't work time. By reserving a reasonable amount of time off (and sticking to it), you can obviously prevent work life from expanding to encompass everything.
A more flexible strategy can be to self-monitor for signs that you need a break (whether its 10min, an afternoon, a week, etc), and then to take it. If you are in it for the long haul, sacrificing your physical or mental health just isn't worth it. Whether you take time off on a schedule or when needed, be clear with yourself that you need and deserve time off, and avoid feeling guilt about not working.
Of course, when carving out time off, you also need to make some decisions about how to prioritize tasks for the remaining work time. This is in itself a massively complex topic, but some basic notions are:
a) Plenty of things just need to be good enough. This includes qualification exams and initial documents.
b) Just because someone wants you to do something does not necessarily mean that you need to do it. This holds even more for the "by when"-part.
c) The vast majority of academics is going to be aware of these struggles, and few of us are superhuman. Reach out when needed.

My answer might look too late now, but it will help those who find it later. I will try to keep it in few bullet points.

first of all, reach out for help. As you just did, ask for some help, emotionally or motivation wise.
Try to explain your topic to few people, for example, any family member ot one of your friends. This will help you to relieve some of the stress.
Try to reduce the work load by noticeable amount that makes a difference in reducing stress level, crediting @ Captain Emacs, 10% is reasonable in my opinion.

you earn my respect for not letting your academic work load take over your personal life.


text:
Accepting bad results
I recently had to sit a series of take home assignments and they were so difficult I only really managed to solve 3/5 questions. I'm at the point of diminishing returns now and I was considering taking the "L" as it were and submitting since I can't do any more. Have you aver had a bad exam, how do you not let it get you down?

Some exams are intentionally very tough. Do you have a way to ask the prof for advice?

Sadly not, it was remotely delivered

In an undergraduate physics course, my semester-long average was about 35%. That was an 'A' in the class - the problems (homework and exams) were very tough by design and students were not expected to fully solve them. I will say I learned a great deal about how to properly set up problems.

Once had a final in my graduate years, one of my minors, there were four of us in the course. A gentleman we'd never seen came in, passed out the test, reactions were memorable: silence and groans. There were four questions. The first I could decipher, barely, the others I couldn't make heads or tails out of. Ten minutes in the guy behind me starts crying. I think the high score ended up being 30/100. More to the story than that, but yep, sometimes you perform poorly on a test.

@Aruralreader I think you're right, it's just one of those things where you end up being unlucky, sorry that happened to you

@Roberto_1986: Turned out the final was for a different course, a mix-up. The four of us were given the opportunity to retest. All's well that ends well, but I sure remember cudgeling my brain for a pretty miserable two hours.

Academia is not all about grades.  Sometimes you can't finish an assignment.  Sometimes it's not worth your time.  I remember a time as a undergrad when I had an assignment worth 5% of my grade, but I realized that it would take over 20 hours to complete during an already busy period of my fourth year.  I just didn't do it.  It wasn't worth my time because the learning objectives of the assignment did not align with what I wanted of my career, I didn't have the time, and I didn't have the energy.  I look back on that now as probably one of the best decisions of my academic life.  It freed me to do so many other things that were much more urgent.
In your case, it seems that the exam is so difficult that you simply can't finish every question.  This happens.  Think of the exam as an opportunity to demonstrate what you learned and your ability to contextualize and use it.  It would be nice if we could all get perfect and demonstrate clear mastery of every subject, but that's not realistic, especially given the limited time we have to learn and demonstrate it during a standard academic course.  To bounce back from this, take it as an opportunity for growth.  Ask yourself the following:

Is it important to you to master the subject? Sometimes it isn't.  For instance, if it is a required course but one on a topic that doesn't interest you and is not a prerequisite for anything else...why does it matter?

If it is important to master the subject, what do you need to do to get there?  Remember, academia isn't all about grades.  Ostensibly the exam is an indication that you still have learning to do.  In a situation where you don't get any feedback and there are no grades, do you still intend to master this subject? If so, use the exam to inform what you are missing, and work on a plan to solve that.

Manage your expectations and reflect.  What are your goals?  Do you intend to get a high enough average to move forward in your academic career?  Is there  a scholarship you want? Or are you happy in this case to pass the course and be done with it?  Being honest with yourself, why were these assignments too hard?  In theory the exam is written so that an exceptional student can demonstrate their exceptionality, and an average student can achieve an average grade.  Presuming that this was the case, why didn't that work out for you?  It's easy to say it was "too hard" and that's that, but why?  Was it a time issue? Did you study the wrong things?  Did you not study because you expected to be able to look up what you didn't know?  How can you change your behaviour to avoid this in the future?

Ultimately, it's one course.  Ask any of your instructors what their grade was on a random course exam and I'll bet no one can really tell you.  They might remember "that one really hard exam" or "the exam that I thought was easy until I saw my mark", but they were able to move on from it and so can you.  Use it to get better.

Thank you for your that. Yes, the thing is I know the subject very well because it's related to my PhD project, I've just been unlucky and had a bad exam assigned. I know the theory but the questions are simply far too difficult :(

I think perhaps try to understand why the exam was so difficult.  Was it written with the expectation that you SHOULD be able to solve them all in the time allotted?  If so, you need to reflect on why you weren't able to.  On the other hand, sometimes in grad courses especially the focus isn't on the solution but the process, progress, and communication of your results.  Ask the instructor and ask if that is what was intended.  I have done a few  grad courses where it was simply impossible to answer everything on time and within the space allotted. We were evaluated on what we could finish

the course was delivered remotely so there's no way to talk to the instructor. I think it really is a case of me getting unlucky with the questions and struggling to solve them. I'm not doing to good anyway, I'm nearing burnout due to lockdown working etc.


text:
Peer reviewed article not picked up by Google scholar
I've recently published an article in a fairly well respected journal in the Netherlands but it is not being picked up by google scholar's index.
The journal is not a 'predatory journal' and 3 of the volume's 5 articles have been picked up by google. How come mine hasnt made it?
Thanks for any advice you can spare,
Cheers!

Give it some time?

It's been a month or so already...this doesnt explain why some of the journal's contents has been picked up, but not mine.  But yes, time is a great healer :p I will get over this disappointment one day :)


text:
Is it a good idea to apply for PhD during my second Master degree?
I graduated from M.sc in Applied Social psychology in 2017 (with thesis). And after a year of a research program in Poland, I decided to get an M.Sc in Clinical psychology (2-year program with thesis, I will graduate in 2021). I have been thinking whether it is possible to apply for Ph.D this year without delaying for another year until I complete my current program.
Could you please advise whether it can be done and whether it will look appropriate in my CV if I do so.

I don't understand. Why would it look bad? Do you mean to quit leave your current Master's halfway through?

Yes, if I quit will it look bad in my Ph.D. application and in CV?

Would you start this fall? In the US, it would be generally too late to start any earlier than fall 2021 anyway.

¿ applied social psychology ?

As long as you can justify why you pursued a second master degree at first and why you want to quit (if I well understood), then you will not look bad.
I know many people who worked in the industry after their master and then turned back to academia. They could explain why they want to do a PhD and were convincing.
If you are motivated and have good reasons to do a PhD instead of finishing the second master degree, then go for it. However, remember that any employer will ask about critical decisions in your professional life. Examples include: 1) why did you leave your last job? What motivates you to pursue a PhD? What motivated you to pursue a second master? etc.


text:
Explaining a bad exam result at my annual review
As I posted yesterday, I've just taken an exam and failed (quite badly might I add). The course was externally hosted as part of my PhD training in my first year so it won't look very good on my record which has me very worried. I turned the exam in yesterday but I know I've failed, I left half unanswered. I just don't know what's happened to me.
I don't have an excuse for why I've performed so terribly other than the questions were harder (to me) than previous years And I'm burnt out.
How do I explain this failure to the panel?

What country are you in? What is this "record"? Degree transcript or something else?

@astronat the record of results they keep on my PhD

Will that affect your ability to graduate? Who will look at this record in the future? I come from a system where there are no grades or exams during the PhD, so I'm trying to understand how possibly failing an external course will affect the outcome of your PhD.

@astronat that's why I'm concerned ,they haven't clarified the results of failing it but I'll still have to answer why I didn't pass it

I see two possibilities. One is that the exam was just more difficult than it was intended to be and that others are in the same situation and so it won't really affect you much. Sometimes questions on exams are misstated and lead students astray, for example.
My advice it that sort of situation, in general but too late to implement now, is to say something sensible for every question if possible, rather than just leaving things blank. That might be helpful in future.
The other possibility is that you were expected to know/do things that you weren't prepared for. In that situation, there isn't really much to say other than that you weren't prepared and intend to do better it future.
But in this situation, you can also ask for advice from faculty about what sort of actions you might have taken to avoid the problem. They might have some actual advice and know both you and the topic.
And a single failure on a single exam (other than a qualifying exam) isn't disqualifying for most. It happens. You may just have to move on.

I attempted every question but I couldn't fully answer some of them :(


text:
Any other PhD students getting time anxiety?
Let me explain. I’m a second year student and I’m sharing an office with about 10 other people. We all get on and it’s great now that everyone managed to make it back thanks to the easing of lockdown restrictions.
The thing is I have pretty bad social anxiety and I’m also very obsessive over timings, like I have set timing in which a piece of work must be completed on that specific day so on the outside it looks like Im being really rude but in reality I have social and time anxiety?
How can I learn to chill a bit and be more relaxed?

First see if you can find a counsellor to talk to about methods to ease anxiety. But these sorts of things come slowly and with some effort. They  are unlikely to just go away unless you put some effort into it.
Start slow. Talk to a few people. Have coffee with one or two at your invitation. Make a plan with small steps and practice.
I'm naturally very introverted and that cost me a lot at one point in my studies. Over time, however, I learned to interact with people so that few of my current acquaintances would suspect that introversion. I know others who have done the same.
One famous computer scientist joined a theatre group to learn how to play a role when needed. He is now easy to talk to but, IIRC, was once pretty closed off. Small steps repeated frequently and consciously.
I have no training in this, but just someone who went through some of what you describe. And, yes, many people, probably including some of your officemates, might have some of the same issues


text:
How to deal with fear, anxiety and limiting beliefs while waiting for PhD admissions decisions?
So, it is January 2022 and like me, many are waiting to hear back from the universities to which we applied last month. This period feels like purgatory. Since I am an International student, I didn't go through this during my bachelor's and master's. In my country, decisions are very fast. How did y'all deal with the fear, anxiety, and limiting beliefs while waiting for Ph.D. admissions decisions? To me, it feels like my life depends on it and the overthinking is killing me.

In addition to the advice given in the answers so far, remember that we are all experiencing incredible trauma and ambiguous grief from the ongoing pandemic, and that is sure to magnify any anxiety from specific situations like admissions. Make sure you do all the things that are helpful for getting through the pandemic—healthy diet and exercise, human contact with people who uplift you and give you energy, focusing on present goals, and giving yourself every possible benefit of the doubt.

Is there something special about waiting for PhD admissions decisions or, come to that, about anything in Academia?
How does dealing with basic human characteristics like fear, anxiety and limiting beliefs not fit more properly in pages dealing with psychology or personal development?

What's a "limiting belief"? Are you in a country where PhD applications can only be submitted in December? Can't you keep applying to other universities, rather than just wait for the ones you've already applied to? When I was looking for a PhD, I remember sending applications several times a week for several months. I was never "just waiting for one decision".

Just a heads up...you are going to experience this "waiting" throughout your Ph.D. Waiting on grant applications, waiting on journal reviewer responses, waiting on your advisor...and the list goes on.

I'm voting to reopen the question: how people have dealt with fear and anxiety is a fact and not an opinion.

@Stef US (and Canada?) applications are mostly due by December or at the latest Jan. 1.

As a first-year graduate student who applied last year during the pandemic, I understand and sympathize with how you must be feeling. Waiting for results alone is difficult -- and I will never forget the added anxiety that came with a pandemic incredibly complicating matters. For me the waiting period were some of the toughest months I've ever had to sit through, and it's always hard to not take any rejections very personally.
During my waiting period I got very into running. It wasn't much, and it was hard to push myself out the door on particularly hard days, but it really helped. It's only especially evident now how much it helped after looking back now and thinking about how much worse I could've been without running to clear my head.
I encourage you to do the same! Not necceserily running (though it is a wonderful hobby you can joyfully bring along into graduate school afterwards), but some activity you can fully envolope yourself in. I heavily recommend though you do something that brings you outside and gets you active! Bonus points if its something you can do with others, like frisbee or soccer. It'll help get your mind in the right place and, contrary to what you'll believe before you step out the door, will lift your mood afterwards quite a bit.
I'd also like to recommend against opting out for an indoor activity like video games. I tried this at first, but I just found that it rarely helped me feel better, and solving puzzles in games even felt difficult on rougher days. Really try to pull yourself outside and get yourself to enjoy life with people close to you. I remember too well how long the waiting period felt, and just as some reassurance, it does end eventually. I understand the anxiety is from just caring about your passion and hoping to continue towards it.

This will also help during the PhD.

Video games have their place, but they can definitely make things worse. I find that playing games on Easy mode and not having to think hard while getting literally easy wins can help the ego. However, not having to really think at all can help calm the mind better. I dug all the rock out of my gravel front yard (for various reasons) and not having to really think about what I was doing let my mind deal with "all that other cr@p" in my subconscious. I figured some problems out and I simply had less stress as I wasn't stressing out about everything all the time.

I loved this answer! Thanks a lot for your advice. I do enjoy running and am planning to do more of that right now. Besides that, I'll also read novels that I was putting off for months.

@ReillyWard Glad it helped! Happy to hear you're getting into running, and reading novels is also a fantastic way to help keep you sane. I wish you the best in the coming months!

Thank you, Andrew.

Although I'm not religious (and therefore disregard the theistic aspects of the saying), I find that the Serenity Prayer gives the most rational advice on dealing with such situations:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.

These thoughts are actually useful, because they tell you to care about your well-being and security. But too much of them will only cause stress and exacerbate your anxiety. So in the spirit of Ben's good answer, but slightly more secular, you could respond by thinking:

Thanks for caring about my well-being, but I'm good for now.

There are various methods to cope with acute anxiety. One of them is to focus on your body and its sensations. How do your hands feel - cold, warm, tingling? Can you feel the ground beneath your feet or the pressure of your body against your chair, etc.? This helps to interrupt any thought spirals by redirecting your attention somewhere south of your brain.
Another method I found useful is called RAIN:

Recognize what is going on. (Oh, there's that thought pattern coming up again.)
Accept the experience as it is. (No need to punish myself for it or to push it away.)
Investigate it, especially its physical manifestations, with curiosity and kindness towards yourself. (That's how this feels -- I'm getting antsy and my chest feels tight. Let me see if it feels any different now than a minute ago.)
Non-identification: This isn't me, and this isn't permanent. It's just an experience that comes and goes like everything else.

I never knew about the RAIN method. Thanks for sharing this information.

First of all, I think it's a feeling that we all understand. After all, research seems like a hugely important part of our lives, and we want to get into a good PhD program.
The situation is not actually unique to PhD applications. I think here's some thoughts that you can think of instead when stressed:

Since you've already submitted your application, your current thoughts won't really impact the outcome. So there's no guilt in thinking about anything negative.
Beyond PhD, there will be many situations in life that require you to patiently wait. Take this opportunity as a practice. In short, be curious.
Instead of dwelling on these thoughts, focus on something fun. Again, you will be reminded of the negative thoughts, but things will be easier.

I do not know your particular situation, but in general there is a non-negligible chance that one will not receive any offers.  What would one do if one does not get any satisfactory offers?
Most people would look for a job.  Why not just get started now?
On the other hand if your applications are so strong that it is inconceivable that you will not get at least one satisfactory offer then why worry at all?  If you have the resources, I would just take the time off before you are too busy with your studies to just relax.

From where I'm standing (leaving my program this semester), I would strongly advise learning about employment options regardless of whether you think you will definitely get into something. It will inform what you focus on in the program, what you learn on the side while you're in the program, what social connections you should try to make and maintain, etc.

"inconceivable", um, hmmm... https://tenor.com/view/princess-bride-mandy-patinkin-wallace-shawn-confused-gif-3298704

"On the other hand if your applications are so strong that it is inconceivable that you will not get at least one satisfactory offer then why worry at all?" I doubt it is inconceivable that one doesn't get at least one satisfactory offer, people get unexpectedly all rejects each cycle in each field.  Hence, the motivation for OP's post.

I'll give an answer that is not about accepting things that are outside of my control. There is a website called Grad Cafe. Other applicants update this site with their admission decisions.
When I applied for graduate school, I checked the site daily. This way I knew if the decision emails went out to the programs I applied to. Some schools send their acceptance decisions first and then the rejections. So if I didn't get an email, I knew that I had been rejected and I didn't have to wait a few more weeks until I received an email with a decision.
Don't check it too frequently, once a day is fine. Search your school and degree program and you will see if others have received a decision (accept or reject).

I know about Grad Cafe. For some, checking this website might be helpful. However, for me, it will be extremely detrimental to my mental health. Hence, I choose to avoid checking it every day.

I’ve found the best way to manage these feelings, especially when there’s nothing to be done to influence the outcome, is:

Distract yourself — Exercise, take a trip out into nature, spend time with friends and family, start a personal project that you’ll enjoy.
Share how you’re feeling — With friends, with family, talk about how you’re feeling, any fears you might have. No doubt they, especially older folks in your life, will have experienced similar things. Talking about it can help you manage your anxieties.
Think about alternatives — Sometimes, it helps to know you’ll be okay if the worst comes to pass and sometimes that means imagining your life in such a situation. I imagine you’re on the younger side of you’re applying to PhD programs. Life takes you in strange directions and the unexpected can often be a blessing. Even if you don’t get in, you can always reapply, and challenges tend to breed wisdom.


text:
If I share self-written articles on Academia.edu & then re-use their contents for a book, is it plagiarism?
I'm working on a book but it's far from done, so I'm thinking of uploading much of its content on Academia.edu first, in the form of stand-alone articles. This would be without copyright, I presume, unless Academia.edu automatically adds copyright to articles that are uploaded to its website. So, if I were to do that, would I still be able to eventually publish the book (with copyright), since much of its content would be very similar to the articles I'd have written and shared on Academia.edu. I'd basically be converting the individual articles back into book chapters.
I'd very much appreciate an explanation as to whether I would have to paraphrase/quote from my articles in the book and cite them as sources, and whether I would be allowed to copy and paste large sections from my articles (without paraphrasing/quoting).

The arXiv contains many book chapters and book drafts. A few random examples: https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.06165 https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07809 https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.04780
An example outside academia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martian_(Weir_novel)
Uploading drafts can allow you to get useful feedback. You are still allowed to do what you want with them afterwards. Claims that publishers might object need not be trusted unless they come with some specific evidence.

I would strongly advise you not to upload anything openly on the internet. If you do so, it is extremely unlikely that any decent, good publisher would ever agree to publish your book. In order for their business model to be sustainable, they must have the privileged right to publish your content.
Publishing the majority of the book on the Internet without significant changes makes it almost impossible for publishers to break even. The only exception is if you pay the publisher the exorbitant fees that are necessary to make a book as "Open Access", but even in this situation, you would still be putting yourself in an extremely risky position, as I think most good publishers would still refuse to publish you.
Even when you are transferring previously-published content into a new book (say, your previous journal articles and book chapters), almost every publisher will demand you to either significantly rephrase and expand on the contents of those papers, or ask direct permission from the journal/book publishers to reuse the content (if you handed over copyright to them as a condition for publishing your research). Note however that it is far more common for publishers to force you to rewrite and expand previously-published work.
Reuse of previously-published work is usually only accepted by publishers if the author is already well-known and has had a long, successful career. Furthermore, reuse of materials in a book (without significant changes), that were previously published in the Internet, is generally considered to be a form of self-plagiarism. Of course, if we are talking about an anthology of published work by a reputed author, there is no problem, but that does not seem to be your situation here.
In other words, publishing your work in advance is a very risky, almost certainly a losing proposition. If you go ahead with this plan, it's likely that the only publishers who will agree to publish you are predatory/vanity presses.


text:
What to do?: Completely New Revision Requests a Month after a Defense
I successfully defended my dissertation one month before. My department head even emailed to congratulate me. I was given only one clear set of revision requests to do, for approval signatures.
However, my chair departed from those revision suggestions, and asks for "a survey of every approach in my field" that was not in the original and only set of requested revisions, and was not mentioned on the defense day or years prior to that.
A month after my defense, my chair also deleted a lot of paragraphs in my dissertation as a part of her revision requests. Deletion of paragraphs was also not in the requested revisions. She never asked for deletion of the paragraphs or any paragraph before.
She then went on to complain that I did not do the revision requests from the defense day but did not tell me which specific revision request I did not do. Instead, she went on to give new revision comments that were never given or discussed before, blaming it on my dissertation that passed.
Is this normal? What can be done?

We don't know what the regulations at your school are.  Do you?

It is a state-flag US university. It does not share regulations clearly on their website and the grad school ombudsman was not sure what the policy was and went on to ask the graduate school dean. She said she will intervene if things go off the rails again because, now, it seems that things are back on the rails. Peer universities are very clear about the policy, as David Smith below wrote. Thank you!

These requests appear to be violations of University policies regarding the review and approval of dissertations.
Your dissertation is approved by your committee according to written policies of your university or graduate school, not only by your advisor. It is not unusual for the committee to either request changes or suggest changes or to approve a dissertation subject to certain changes.
Changes should all be minor, mostly stylistic. Substantive changes should have been worked out before the stage of committee approval.
I suggest you get all the history of the requested  changes together and organized to meet with others.
First meet with your advisor/chair and get clarity on agreement or disagreement on with each and every item. Keep in mind that it is your dissertation but it must meet the standards of the university and the profession when having these discussions. Suggestions should be taken seriously and deserve a response but that does not require that your dissertation be rewritten.
At the same time, identify the person or persons at your department or university who is the next step of appeal. Know this person's office, eg, Associate Dean, name, and phone number before meeting with your advisor.
If you and your advisor/chair have different views of whether changes should be made, then ask to meet with your advisor and the named officer together to discuss the next step. If you advisor declines then meet with the named officer yourself. Explain what has happened in detail. Ask the named officer how to proceed according to university policy. Be sure to say this. You are not there for personal advice. You want the university and its faculty, particularly your advisor, to adhere to university policy, absolutely and completely.
Any further recommendations depend completely on the procedures approved by your university or by designated agents, eg, the Dean of the Graduate School in many cases.
Please keep in mind that your advisor might not understand how serious it is to comply with university policy. Your advisor does not get to decide whatever they want will- nilly. You want someone in an administrative position of authority to explain to your advisor what they and you can do now that your dissertation has been approved.
It is possible that you might obtain legal counsel in this matter. A dean or other higher officer knows that and will see to it that university policy is adhered to completely, both by your advisor and by you.
You are not the first. Good luck.

Update: After using your policy-focused words and messages here in an email to her, she completely changed. In her new revisions, none of those willy-nilly comments are there, as how it should have been from the start. It is resolved! I will surely take it to higher-ups if she does it again when she receives the next draft from me. Thank you so much. You saved me from a lot of unnecessary trouble.

All's well that ends well - William Shakespeare


text:
Publishing a paper on research with a previous employer, funded by my current employer
I will be an author or co-author on a few papers at an upcoming conference. The papers are on work that I did as a government contractor. As of a few months ago, I accepted a position with the government, working on the same things with the same people, continuing my previous research. The abstracts were submitted when I was a contractor, and I stated my affiliation as being with that company. My question is: when submitting and publishing the final paper, should my affiliation be with my previous employer or the government?
Some relevant info:

At the time of publication, the government contracting company will no longer exist.
The government will be funding my travel to this conference.
Although the contractor was paying my bills when I was conducting this research, we were under a cost-plus contract and the government was funding everything.

An acknowledgement would be proper: Researcher X was previously funded in this research by Z.
It keeps it clean. While the company may no longer exist, its principals still do.
In general, acknowledging liberally is preferred over being stingy.

I agree with this, but after "previously funded in his research by Z" you might add something like "under contract 314159 with [name of government agency that paid]."

It doesn't hurt to be precise.


text:
How should I handle disinterested/unorganized adviser?
I've been working with Dr.X since the summer of last year. Things were going well until this past fall. He mislabeled some research files and asked me to do some analysis to help me determine if they were "A" or "B". I've done this type of research before in UG and never came across this level of disorganization. In any case, everyone makes mistakes so I tried to make the best out of it. After spending 2 months analyzing dozens of files, I told him many were too similar to separate confidently. Worse, the files that were supposedly labeled correctly (IE. "the same") were dissimilar. At this point, I was starting to get very frustrated (I didn't share that), because I wasn't doing actual "research". I told him I was supposed to state our research progress to the department and he decided we shouldn't (obviously) because nothing was done. I thought this reflected poorly on me, but I agreed. I was then out for the rest of the semester on maternity leave. I wrote him some code to process the files once he figured out which files were which. He may have just guessed. I really don't know what happened. Fast forward to this spring, he was away fixing equipment but stated we simply had to make great use of the time we had available. I agreed to meet him one morning and he completely flaked. He didn't email me. He showed up hours later and tells me he has to "go" and just rants about equipment breaking. Then he tells me to just read some paper, which I do. He also said he doesn't remember where we left off last semester. I reminded him and he said he wasn't sure if he ran my code yet. I told him we need to present research this spring, and he hasn't emailed me back (this was weeks ago). I emailed him this week asking him if we could do work remotely and have heard nothing...yet. I am losing respect for him and don't even want to work with him anymore. Is this a typical scenario? Oh, and there are rodents living in his office because he is so messy. I'm not joking. He was actually written up by the school. Our department is so tiny I don't know how to handle this situation. I did tons of research in UG and have published work, but have nothing started research-wise in my program. I'm a second-year student at a competitive school. Am I overreacting? TIA

It's time you changed advisor. As soon as possible, if you can. Someone who is messy to the point of having rodents in the office is dangerous, not unorganised. And I wonder why the university doesn't take action against such a serious health threat.

Thanks for your response. I'm writing the chair tomorrow since he isn't even responding to my emails. I've done all he's asked, but he's ghosted me. I know he's around because he sat in as a secondary instructor in one of my online classes and all of his traveling research has been canceled due to the virus.

Consider if your advisor might have attention deficit disorder.  It's very common.  If he does, that will not tell you the answer to your question, but it might help you decide how to respond.

I do not think you are over-reacting.  It seems like you are not reacting at all, and you should.

I sent a less pedantic email to the chair recently. I'm looking forward to actually doing research again.
"It seems like you are not reacting at all" LOL
I feel like I just lost 100 pounds of mental baggage.

Advisors are not expected to be perfect but they are expected to do their job. Yours doesn't, he's endangering your PhD and his institution (probably his career too but that's not the point).

Is this a typical scenario?

No.
Sure, some researchers are disorganized, have a messy office and/or hard drive, it's quite common. Some advisors are also known to occasionally abuse their role and give their students jobs which aren't related to their PhD, that's frowned upon but often tolerated. But whatever their shortcomings, an advisor must be able to fulfill their professional duties, and your advisor doesn't.

Am I overreacting?

Not at all.
Contact the head of the department, the institution ombudsman or whoever is in charge. It's not too late but it's time. Don't hesitate to go over the department, your institution has a responsibility to provide you with proper supervision.


text:
Is working from home a sustainable model for PhD students and academia as a whole?
I suppose it has its advantages but I’m really starting to struggle with the lack of social contact that working from home entails.
I’d very much like my university to start considering options for a campus based return when the new academic year starts. Considering that I started my PhD and and worked the better part of an entire year remotely, I feel that I’m more than ready to make a campus return.
I suppose my question it this—for people who’ve also worked remotely, is it sustainable and would a face to face return benefit you?

Some people love work from home. Some people hate it. Depends on many personal factors. Therefore I'm voting to close as opinion based.


text:
I fear academia may not be for me. What should I do?
I've grown to realise that despite being nearly a year in, I've made little (if any) progress towards completing my objectives and it feels like I'm working in a vacuum since I'm not allowed back on campus thanks to covid. Lifeless and unproductive zoom meetings punctuate days spent staring at articles and screens. It's also very lonely since I'm the only PhD student in the group.
I feel as if I'm at the lowest point I've ever been at- the deeper I delve into the research area the more I realise it's simply not interesting to me. I also feel as if I don't have a very good relationship with my supervisor since all they seem to do is bark orders and criticise me rather than hold productive conversations. It feels as if every supervision meeting is a chore to them and that I'm preventing them from doing their research. I had a meeting last Monday that nearly made me burst into tears after they criticised the code I've spend 4 months writing and working on (with no feedback).
After recently attending a 3 week conference searon I'm even further convinced I've made a grave mistake picking this research area since not a single talk grabbed my interest the way what I studied as an undergraduate did.
I don't even know how to handle this since I can't really quit a year in or really tell my parents. To summarise, I'm feeling truly unhappy and distraught about it all and I'm losing interest by the day. It's surely not normal to dread every single day of work?
I feel terrible, what should I do?

Honestly, I think all of this is due to remote learning. Once things open up, you will get to collaborate with people in person--- and that could make the whole difference.

I sympathise. It sounds like you are very burnt out. Take a break -- a real, proper break -- of at least two weeks. More if you can manage it. Don't do anything research-related in that time. And talk to someone -- a friend, your parents, a professional -- about how you feel. A problem shared is a problem halved.

"3 week conference" what? how can a conference last 3 weeks? and, if nothing similar to your topic appeared, it must have been the wrong conference! What is your topic?

I have suffered mentally quite a bit last year due to the pandemic. My productivity was at the lowest point in 2020. I was mostly thinking about and working on how not to die with covid and how would I help others to do the same. So, ditto to user758469, once things open up, things would get better.

I notice you asked roughly the same question last month, and a month before that and four months before that. I realize this is a difficult decision, but we can't give you any more advice now than we did before. You might consider editing your question to explain how the previous advice helped (or didn't) and what is different about your question this time.

There are alternatives to quitting. You may have a terrible advisor, or, at least, an incompatible one. You may be in the wrong group. You may have chosen an uninteresting problem, or had one thrust upon you.
The alternative is to make a change. Even a change to a different university to make a clean break. I did so, and had a completely different experience at the new place. But I had a strong advocate that made it possible.
Other explanations for your dilemma: Burn Out comes immediately to mind, in which case a break or big change might be needed. The pandemic has been hard on everyone, but not uniformly hard.
And, you can talk to your parents, and others, about how badly you are treated in your current situation. Think about all your options. There are more than just accepting the current situation versus quitting altogether. Think about your goals nd about your assets.


text:
Are one journal editor able to see decision of other journal editor in same publisher?
My manuscript rejected by the editor of Journal A (MDPI publisher). Then I submit my manuscript to Journal B (MDPI publisher), it rejected again by the editor of Journal B. My question is editor of Journal B is able to see Journal A editor`s decision? Simply different journal editors in the same publisher are able to see each other`s decision?

If both journals are in the same publishing house then both editors have access to the same database of records so yes.
Editor B probably searched the database for your name as a first step and the result of editor A was listed...
Only a guess but possible.

Let's assume that the editor has access to all the records of all journals in the publishing house, it is really unethical to 1) use external data about the paper without informing the authors, 2) decide about the paper based on previous decision. Some venues asks for precious reviews (although they are in the same submission platform and from the same community) to check if the authors have responded to the review comments.

Thank you for your kind answer. Journal B editor asked me Please confirm the title of XXX XX, Mr. or Dr.?. His title is MR. so in my manuscript there are only two students, there is no either supervisor or DR titled person. I replied to the editor`s email. After 10 minutes  I got a kind email that written REJECTED by Editor. So the title of the authors impact to the editor decision? There has to be Professor or DR titled person in manuscript?

@Younes what pray, are precious reviews?

No. You can see the decisions of papers submitted to your journal, but not to other journals, even if they are by the same publisher. An employee of the publisher with access to both journals might be able to, but not the members of the editorial board.

I have got an email from an editor: Other MDPI journal editors are able to see the decision of this manuscript.

@Furqat would be shockingly unusual, and given the ambiguities in that sentence, I would not be surprised if your interpretation of it is incorrect.

@Furqat, an editor X (and all members of the editorial board) with all the duties he/she has (most likely to be a professor, teaching, writing papers/proposals, reviewing papers/proposals, supervising students, etc.) and the tens of papers he/she receives. You think, he/she will search for your submission (that will have different id) if it is rejected from another journal in the same publishing platform (which has a very very low probability).

@Furqat, If he/she has so much free time and does this, he/she is a very bad editor (which I don't think so) if he/she considers the decision of another journal to make a decision about your paper. Your paper is rejected only because it is not good enough for the journal and you have definitely received an email listing the reasons. If it is about the quality, then work on it and resubmit it (if recommended). Otherwise, your paper is out of scope and you need to submit it to the right journal

@Furqat I joined MDPI and have an insider's view now, so I can interpret that sentence better. Chances are, by "MDPI journal editors", the sentence is referring to MDPI employees that handle the journal - so yeah, the original answer I wrote is correct, an employee of the publisher can see the decision but not members of the editorial board.


text:
Are niche topic textbooks normally published by vanity presses or traditional ones?
My understanding is that while a traditional publisher invests its own resources to market and publish a book with the hope of getting enough revenue to cover their costs, vanity publishers charge the author a fee and then the author takes the risk. With the latter, this allows for less regulation in what exactly is being published.
Now I’m sure that, for textbooks covering (reasonably) broad topics,  traditional presses exist along side vanity presses.
I also am aware that out there exist some incredibly niche ‘textbooks’ (some might be a bit thinner than a stereotypical textbook due to their niche-ness but fill the same purpose) over a variety of hyper specialized topics in various fields.
For these hyper niche textbooks (let’s say something you wouldn’t read unless you had a graduate level background), the target audience is incredibly small, so are there traditional presses for these kinds of textbooks?
Surely sales on the textbook will be small since the target audience is so small, which means less of an incentive for a traditional press because of less sales. If they don’t use traditional presses, does this force authors for these kinds of textbooks to use vanity presses or is there some kind of special type of press that deals in these? Or do most use self-publishing?

Traditional publishers definitely publish this kind of book. They're known as "monographs".
Here's an example of a monograph series published by Wiley.

Surely sales on the textbook will be small since the target audience is so small, which means less of an incentive for a traditional press because of less sales.

Yes - these books usually sell a couple of hundred copies at best. It's also why they are so expensive. Even then there's not much profit per monograph. That's partly why publishers are constantly looking for new projects.

Research monographs are often sold to university libraries.  In many cases a library will have a standing order for all of the books in a series.

Publishers like Springer, Elsevier, Wiley, De Gruyter, Cambridge University Press, etc. do publish graduate level textbooks.  Sales for these books are typically a few thousand copies rather than hundreds of copies.

Contrary to the assumption in the question and other answers so far, highly specialized academic books are not bought and sold individually.  While they are often advertised individually for sale at high prices to the public, that is not how the business works.
In reality, libraries of wealthy universities purchase academic books in bulk at a discount.  Academic book publishers sell a certain quantity of books in bulk, and then they find enough book authors to fulfill their sales contracts.  The librarian who purchases the books in bulk relies on the publisher's editor to select the books.  The librarian does not buy self-published books or books from vanity presses because they only buy in bulk from familiar publishers.
The number of libraries making bulk purchases of books matters.  That number is declining.  The number of people who want to read an individual book does not, because the buyers are not selecting books one at a time.

highly specialized academic books are not bought and sold individually. - Well, I think this may be changing too.  E.g., my library doesn't have standing orders on all the series it used to, and now titles in these series are only individually purchased on request  from faculty/students.

@Kimball Let me know your experience, but I would expect that if you request a purchase, get an interlibrary loan instead (unless nobody's purchased it and it can't be had that way).

No, our library (at a public US university) has money set aside to purchase requested books.  If a lot of people make requests, they can't get all of them, but in my experience they have been pretty good about making requested purchases for books still in print.  (Though it does take awhile, so ILL is also recommended if you want a copy soon.)

Just after WWII, public appreciation of science was at its top, and uni libraries could just describe to any monograph series out there. But over the ensuing decades, the tax payers' willingness to stock uni libraries has declined, and the number of publishers taking the p*ss has grown exponentially...

The answers given are correct. There is a lot more to be said about the topic from both historical and economical perspectives, but let me just highlight one point, which is that traditionally, putting out world quality monographs adds to the academic range of a publisher, which adds to its prestige, even if not a lot of money is made.
If you can only find a vanity publisher for your work, chances just might be that it is not world class, but I do not mean to presume or offend.
It is true that vanity-published work is generally viewed as worthless.


text:
Listing acknowledgements on CV as a final year undergraduate student?
I have read a lot of threads on this forum and others where listing acknowledgements in research papers on CV is mostly advised against, but then again it seems like most of these advice are directed towards people who already have publications under their belt. As an undergraduate student, I participated in some experiments and got acknowledged in papers. So, I was wondering if it is okay to list that in my CV as a sort evidence of my involvement in research studies. Or would it still look like I'm trying too hard to find something to fill my CV with? FYI I'm submitting my CV to an academic for a research position
Edit: wording

What sort of "position" are you applying for? Doctoral study? Something else?

It would still look like you are trying too hard to find something to fill your CV.
On the other hand, you can put your involvement in those research studies as working/education experience. No need to provide proof for them: either your referral will mention "I supervised OP during his activity in the research study XYZ" or these things will be discussed/asked at the interview.
The important point is whether you fully understand the paper you have been acknowledged, that you can discuss them, or if you simply participated in the data collection/collection of data preparation/data pruning.
If you fully understand the papers, you may think of bringing/mentioning them at the interview, discussing how much you learned and understood while helping in that study, if you are not ready to discuss them in depth better to leave them rest in peace: you were not the author, but you proved yourself you can contribute to the authors'work.
I personally think you are not ready to discuss the content of the papers, since you are "only" in the acknowledgments, but you show you can contribute to research work in a dependent way (i.e. you were not in the authors) and you feel you can do independent research work (i.e. you think you can be author of a scientific publication in the near future).
Good luck!

not ready to discuss the content of the papers, since you are "only" in the acknowledgments --- As an example for the OP, I'm cited in the Acknowledgment section at the end of this paper, but I know essentially nothing about anything in the paper. To a lesser degree, this also applies to a few other papers . . .


text:
Difference between Thesis and Research paper?
My query is about whats the main difference between thesis and research paper, and as i am undergrad, which is more easy for an undergrad to do!!

"which is more easy for an undergrad to do"?? It is not clear what this means... You might want to add more details of what you already know...

I think this could be a good question if you add a small additional amount of context.

An undergraduate thesis (or dissertation) is: a document submitted in support of candidature for an academic degree, which presents the author's findings.
By comparison, a research paper (when differentiated from undergraduate life) is: an academic work containing original research results or a review of existing results, which are typically published after a peer-review process successfully checks suitability.
For an undergraduate, I suspect an undergraduate thesis is easier, since I believe the bar for acceptance is generally lower than the bar for acceptance of peer-review.

The ordinary meaning of a research paper is an undergraduate or secondary school assignment.  Surely this is what the asker means.

@AnonymousPhysicist According to Wikipedia, there are four types of research paper, which includes an academic work and a thesis. We can discount thesis here, and I assume an academic work is most likely, since the alternatives - a position paper and a term paper - don't seem like substitutes for a thesis. Of course, I may have assumed incorrectly and will refine my answer if the OP clarifies.

@user2768 What i meant by research paper is that, I want to publish a paper on my own with some external help and this paper is not to get a degree or to get credits for my college work.

@yashkarbhari That sounds like an academic paper. Since this paper is not to get a degree or to get credits for my college work, I presume you are wondering how hard it is relative to a thesis, in order to decide whether you should pursue it? Perhaps you can edit your question to make it clearer.

A thesis might be longer and might be written over a longer period of time.  There is not guaranteed to be any difference.

https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4471/academia-varies-more-than-you-think-it-does-the-movie#4478

I am not sure if this suits as an answer...


text:
Mention getting an offer to the adcom when in waitlist
I got waitlisted at Northwestern University for their Master's in Analytics program. I recently received an offer to join the MSE in Data Science at the University of Pennsylvania. Should I email NU and let them know about my offer to have a chance of reconsideration?

I don't think that notifying them will change anything. And it might even work against you if they know  you have another possible situation already. There might be rules that prevent dropping you from the waitlist. But if not, you are more likely to be dropped than advanced.
They won't, in particular, put you ahead of another candidate rated higher on their list for learning of your other offer.

Thanks for the inputs! I have heard different opinions on this matter but will likely stay put and hope for the best as you suggested.


text:
Inspiration: Mathematicians/Physicists who are both passionate/active in research and teaching
I am a second year PhD student in mathematics.
I often feel like research is emphasized much but teaching is not as compared to research.
I enjoy both aspects of my job. But worry if I may lose motivation on putting my effort into teaching later in my career. Therefore I am seeking some inspiration from other fellow mathematicians.
Could you share stories of mathematicians/physicists, or perhaps yourself on how you managed both in research and teaching, and still find joy in both aspects?
Edit: I live in the U.S.

Service (including "outreach") can also be an important element of an academic career.  Nearly everyone is expected to do some service, and some faculty end up doing a lot of it.

It might be worthwhile to mention your country, since things like the balance between teaching and research might depend on your country (and on the different career paths available there).

Possibly useful is this summary from a 1995 panel discussion about keeping your research alive, especially in a low research focused college/university environment.

You might really enjoy https://matheducators.stackexchange.com

Everyone works out the balance differently. My own focus was primarily teaching and for a lot of my career I wasn't in a situation that advantaged research in any case.
Unless you have something like a TA position, which is "teaching adjacent", it is typical to not get any teaching experience in grad school. However, for those of us who did hold TAs it was possible to be assigned a section of a low level (intro Calc, say) course of our own. We had most of the responsibility other than course design, which had to meet the institutional standard. But we had full responsibility for around 30 students. But this was only possible after several terms of lesser responsibilities (grading, recitation sections, ...).
Most institution have a blended mission; research, teaching, service. Most will be willing to tell you what the expected percentage of "effort" should be applied to each. For a research focused university, something like 60/20/20 might be the norm. But some people will actually be successful there with 80/15/5. Zeros are not helpful (damn those committee meetings...). Others might focus, especially later in their career, on teaching, perhaps focused on doctoral students only if they are still research-active.
For an assistant professor, one needs to adhere fairly closely to expectations in most (not all) cases. Later you have freedom to do more of what you like, though annual reviews might affect what your salary trajectory is if you deviate too much.
My own career was a bit weird since I graduated at a time of no real opportunities for mathematicians. We had just landed on the moon and federal support for math and science, which had been high, went to about zero. This was the fallacy of the last move: "OK, done that, nothing more to do". So, I taught in a place that put zero value on research and high value on teaching - primarily first gen college students. Later positions were more balanced, all with a teaching focus, though research was also valued and supported (travel money especially). I developed a very large set of collaborators, not all of them with the same focus. This gave me entry to a lot of ideas to which I could contribute though teaching was still the main focus of the job itself. I also got a fair number of corporate grants to support ideas I had. At every point, however, I found joy in both teaching and in exploring new ideas, whether formally "research" or not. (Dealing with foolish/idiot administrators was another issue, though.)
If you really want to teach undergraduates, look for job opportunities  at places that place high value on that. Same for other preferences.
Note that some liberal arts colleges (my undergrad alma mater, say) are primarily teaching focused but still place high value on research and will back that up with funding as well as advancement/promotion.
I studied at a large R1 (research university). At the time, the regular faculty was required to teach two courses per term. They might be small, advanced, courses (upper division or graduate math) or they might have been large courses for undergraduates, managing many TAs. Research was the main job.
Dartmouth College (really a comprehensive research university in spite of its name) had (has?) a rule that faculty teach four courses per year, which is really one per term since they are on the quarter system. You can concentrate those if you like, within limits, to get a term off from teaching. But teaching there is very intensive, since the students are good and hard working.

Caveat: I'm a mathematician who mostly taught and worked in CS. What I say above may be relevant to both fields, but perhaps not in physics - especially experimental physics. As you get older, lab management and guiding grad students might be the bulk of the job. Others can comment.

If you are afraid that you lose making enough effort on teaching, I would suggest to focus on research intensive institutions only. This is not a simple task, since research intensive positions are very competitive.
I, for example, am much more passionate about research than on teaching. Therefore, I make a great effort to maximize my research time on the expense of teaching/service-admin. This means working very hard on my research in all sorts of ways to justify a decreased teaching load (grants, output, etc.).
Moreover, in many places (though less so in the US probably), research universities allow you to focus on advanced courses teaching. Teaching very advanced courses is really a part of your research to a certain extent, since you can learn new subjects or results through their teaching.

+1 I'd add to your last paragraph that in my experience also teaching more "elementary" courses can be very helpful towards research, though maybe in an indirect way. For instance, I was involved a few times in a first year course in linear algebra (several times as a TA, where I essentially had to come up with the homework problems, and once as the lecturer), and I learned a great deal each time.


text:
Effect of audit courses on graduate admissions if they are properly graded
I am a chemistry major and I want to shift towards the more computational and "data-driven" side of things later on. Towards that end, I have started taking relevant courses outside my major.
However, since we are only allowed a limited number of electives per semester, hence I thought about taking the remaining related courses as audits.
Now in my university, taking an audit course has very strict evaluation guidelines. You have to attend all the classes (that is, pass the 70% attendance criteria), submit all the assignments regularly, and appear in all the examinations (including mid-semester and end-semester exams).
All these evaluations will be graded in a similar fashion as credited courses, and a final grade will be issued which will be printed in my transcript under an additional section called "Audit/Additional Courses".
In fact, the only difference between "regular" credited courses and such audit courses is that the final grade obtained in the latter will not be considered for CGPA calculation.
Barring that, all modes of evaluation are held at the same standard as the actual credited courses (meaning that you can even fail audit courses if you don't clear the exams)
Given the "rigor" of imparting audit courses at our university, will taking up such courses help in making graduate applications more competitive in such a scenario?
(Attached below are the official guidelines on audit courses at our university for reference.)

Given the rules, I suspect that nearly everyone would treat these as regular courses since there is a grade on the transcript. Of course, we can't know what is in the minds of others and the rules are unique enough that there are unlikely to be policies that govern the application.
Admissions varies a lot, but the CGPA alone is unlikely to be the only thing a committee or potential advisor looks for in the transcript unless they are overly lazy. If the courses are important to the field of study the grades will most likely be considered. If not, they have lesser weight. So, a chemistry student taking a philosophy course for audit won't see much consideration given to any grade in that course.

Yes I have a clear-enough idea of the relevant courses I wish to take related to my field. However, since the rules for audit courses at my university doesn't necessarily match with the common idea of "audits" around the world (for us audit courses are seriously graded, in other places "audit" is mostly a term to just sit in a class). So would I have to somehow explicity clarify this on my application for the admissions committee?

You might want to point people to the policy, say on a website. But it is also possible that the policy appears on the transcript itself. But seeing "audit" along with a grade will be enough for some and others may ask if they are confused.


text:
What is the best way to list code snippets in a undergraduate thesis?
For some reason I am having difficulty figuring out a good way to list code snippets in my undergrad thesis. My project is on development of some software and I've thought about doing this.
Algorithm 1 - description of what the code does
But then I realize algorithm really isn't the right word. I've thought about using the word procedure but then again I don't know if declared classes count as procedures. Can someone offer some advice?

What's wrong with "snippet"?

@AzorAhai Thought there was a better word for it, but appearently not. Thank you.

How about code extract?

What does your supervisor say?

Listing is another word that gets used sometimes. It sounds a bit unnatural to me though; maybe it is in wide use just because it is used in a certain Latex package.

Maybe that is why 'listing' remains widely used now, but the word was definitively widespread already before the birth of TeX, thus predating the package by at least a decade. And the practice itself of printing lists of instructions goes back at least to 1970, but I'm not sure when it acquired its name.


text:
Same citation in multiple paragraphs (undergrad paper)
What I currently have is:
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
paragraph 3 [1].
With that I want to show that I am citing all 3 paragraphs from the same source. But appearently this is not right. Is it enough that I do?
paragraph 1 [1]
paragraph 2 [1]
paragraph 3 [1].

You need to follow the citation style your professor specified. Also, I think your question is defined wrong compared to your question title. You are not citing the same source in multiple paragraphs. You are including a multiple paragraph, inline quote. Your title's answer is already on this site (https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/125537/citing-a-reference-multiple-times) and your other question seems to answered here https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4769/how-do-i-appropriately-use-inline-citations-for-multiple-quoted-paragraphs

How about, assuming that [1] was written by Smith:
Smith notes, that ....... [1, p. 42]
Furthermore, Smith asserts that .... [1, p. 13]
Smith is also of the opinion that .... [1, p. 92]
You want to give the EXACT reference so that your reader can find it. And you want to clearly mark what is from you and what is from Smith. It goes without saying that the text in your paragraphs MUST be in your own words and not copied from Smith. Otherwise you need quotation marks.


text:
How should I mention on my CV that I will leave my current PhD program when I apply to a new one?
Currently, I am a PhD student on paper. However, I would love to apply for a PhD program abroad. I do not intend to finish my current PhD. I am doing nothing for it. I am just a student. However, I have been striving to find a PhD program abroad and become acceptable (money issues, language skills etc.) for a long time.  My goals are concrete about my academic development and I feel I am highly motivated. I would love to complete my studies in a more respected university and experience a new academic environment. My current supervisor and former supervisor from MA fully support my decision and intention. In case of getting a certification of acceptance from a new program abroad, I will definitely leave the current program. I have to do that. So, how should I mention or imply on my CV that I will leave my current PhD in case acceptance for a new one?

Are you a "student on paper" in the sense of that you do literally nothing for the study and are only enrolled because of student discounts etc.? If so, I don't think you need to mention it on the CV (may depend on the country!)

yes, something like that. Being a student has been advantageous for me. However, I had to enroll in the current program in my country. It is because I did not have enough language requirements and personal savings. On the one hand, I feel moral responsibility towards that in myself. On the other hand, I feel worried as if it will be a huge problem. Will it be like hiding something?

If you are really talking about a CV (as in "a selection of the best things I did" or "the important things of my life", I don't think you hide anything (especially if you did something useful in that time). If somebody really wants a list of "all university proframms you were ever enrolled" or if you did something like writing a paper etc I think you would hide something.

What if a university does not ask a cover letter? I just try to find a statement that does not invite questions. Could I ask what the statement "not in progress" would imply when I list a PhD program, which is never intended to complete, on the CV?

Your CV is not the right place to mention this. Instead, you should write a brief explanation near the beginning of your personal statement or cover letter which explains your reasons for applying to a new PhD. I would advise that you think carefully about how you explain your motivations. If you sound like an uncommitted student (even if that is down to your environment rather than yourself), a new supervisor or department are unlikely to want to take you on.
Make sure that your CV is an honest record of your past employment and education. You should not omit your current position as a PhD student, even if you aren't really working for it.

Actually, I doubt that it needs to be mentioned at all. It would be obvious to anyone, I think, that if you want to join a program you won't continue in other similar programs. But, yes, the CV is not the place for this. And also yes, don't seem uncommitted to your studies or your field.

I have reference letters and the professors writing them support my decision. I guess the letters would show my determination and commitment somehow, right? I just try to find a statement that does not raise questions, even if when I apply to individual PhD programs without funding. For example,what would the statement "not in progress" would imply when I list a PhD program, which is never intended to complete, on the CV? I think to back up my applications with reference letters for individual programs. As I said, I just need a formal and clear statement on CV briefly reflecting my situation.


text:
Using legal mononym only for publications
I don't use a surname, implying I just have my first name in all my legal documents, and I intend to keep it this way. I got my first accepted submission in a conference lately where I added my name in this format: (eg.) "Meredith - ". Now my name is appearing as "-" in the list of contributors on the submission website.
I don't wish to add a surname, how do I deal with this?
This work will be added to ACM Digital Library where they do add full names as far as I know.
(PS: I want to be cited with my first name only in my future work as well.)

Does this answer your question? I have only one name shown in my ID card. How do I write my name (surname) in research paper or article?

Also relevant: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/112178/68109


text:
What does preliminary degree overview mean?
I am reviewing the documents needed for a graduate program application. One of the documents is degree certificate. But for those who have not yet received it, it is stated that they can upload preliminary degree overview instead. What exactly is preliminary degree overview?

When applications for graduate programs are due, often the applicant does not have the degree qualifying for the graduate degree already in their pocket.
However, there is often the possibility to get an official document that shows the achievements of the student until the issuing date of the document. The "preliminary degree overview" is one name for this, while "transcript" is another (probably more common) one.
For applications, this document needs to show grades and courses that you took. An official letter stating for how long you have been studying will almost surely not do.


text:
Is it possible to become an editor for a journal in a field you don't have research experience in?
I have a PhD in Materials Science and have published quite a bit (10 papers in >4 Impact factor journals) on surface engineering topics.
I have left academia 2 years ago and have been working as a scientific editor at a major publishing companies for over a year now. I was a managing editor there and was involved with rejecting out of scope papers for a 5 IF journal on batteries/super capacitors.
Now, I have been offered a permanent position of in-house scientific editor at another prominent publishing company for a journal where 90% of the papers will be on batteries, energy devices and nanomaterials. I will be working along with external editorial board and have the responsibility of rejecting, sending out for review and accepting articles.
It would be a high (>8) impact factor journal with high reputation. Though I have taken some courses during my grad school on the topics and have some basic fundamental understanding, I do not have any research experience on these topics. I just have one coauthored paper in a very adjacent field (corrosion studies).
Now, as my role would involve sending out papers for peer review and making the final editorial decisions,
do you think it is possible to be a good scientific editor for a field you do not have research experience in? Any suggestions to perform decently on the job?

First check if you are dealing with a reputable journal.

It depends on what you kind of editorial work you are doing. Your description is vague enough that there are different possible interpretations of your responsibilities.
It's true that you will inevitably run into problems which you have not the faintest idea how to solve. Coursework helps, but it's not sufficient. An example of such an issue is if the reviewer says do X, the authors say they won't do X because [reasons], and the reviewer is not happy. You won't be able to arbitrate without at least some subject expertise.
On the other hand, you have described the position as "a permanent position of in-house scientific editor at a major publishing company". With few exceptions, most journals have an editorial board that are not full-time in-house employees, and they will make the actual tough decisions like the one described above. The problems you will have to solve are much simpler (e.g. if Y reviewer is a suitable person to review Z paper, is Z review constructive or should you find another reviewer, etc.). Therefore, chances are you can do the job. You won't be the best imaginable editor, but you can do it better than most. If my experience in publishing is anything to go by as well, chances are you can do it much better than the other journal staff, as well.

If the position is something like "managing editor" where the primary responsibility is dealing with editors, rather than authors and reviewers, then probably yes. But that assumes some managing ability.
However, if you are on the "front lines", so to speak, then you need enough experience and knowledge in the field to be able to quickly recognize nonsense and poor-work. Otherwise your relationship with reviewers won't be very good as you will pass them too much dreck.
But, that doesn't mean research experience, necessarily, and the required knowledge could come with some practice over a period of time.
A bit risky, perhaps, if you give up other things to do this.

This position is on the "front lines". It is for a reputed journal which is attempting a different workflow. I will work with external editors who are academics in universities but my role would be same as theirs. I feel that I can do well in the role with some practice. Just am feeling overwhelmed at the responsibility.