post_id
stringlengths 5
7
| domain
stringclasses 18
values | upvote_ratio
float64 0.5
1
| history
stringlengths 22
39.2k
| c_root_id_A
stringlengths 7
7
| c_root_id_B
stringlengths 7
7
| created_at_utc_A
int64 1.28B
1.67B
| created_at_utc_B
int64 1.28B
1.67B
| score_A
int64 2
43.5k
| score_B
int64 2
43.2k
| human_ref_A
stringlengths 0
10.7k
| human_ref_B
stringlengths 0
10.8k
| labels
int64 0
1
| seconds_difference
float64 0
145M
| score_ratio
float64 1
3.72k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoxe5o | gep0m09 | 1,607,169,172 | 1,607,172,412 | 11 | 18 | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a "queer faculty and staff caucus" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network. | 0 | 3,240 | 1.636364 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geotbtr | gep0m09 | 1,607,164,661 | 1,607,172,412 | 8 | 18 | I am shocked that this is possible in science in 2020 in a 'civilised' country (the US, right?) :'( In AUS/DE/IT where I worked/studied, the culture is 99% gay/whatever friendly. If anything it might make you more interesting. But generally, these things are personal and have nothing to do with science. Don't let it set you against the field or discourage you from your science! Almost all the scientists I know are 'wierd'/unusual in some way, that's one of of my favorite things about it. If you think you'd be punished, maybe try to document everything and wait a little until your closer to graduating before going public. Then get the hell out. If anything, speaking up and making a stand would be considered a positive attribute by any research institute that you would want to be in. | Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a "queer faculty and staff caucus" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network. | 0 | 7,751 | 2.25 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geovf1c | gep0m09 | 1,607,167,003 | 1,607,172,412 | 8 | 18 | Protect yourself first (mentally also), then denounce the shady shit. | Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a "queer faculty and staff caucus" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network. | 0 | 5,409 | 2.25 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geovodh | gep0m09 | 1,607,167,296 | 1,607,172,412 | 6 | 18 | OP, does your organization have an EEO office? You need to put this crap to a stop, but start locally if you can. You say that you’re at an NSF lab, which I’m taking to mean a group funded by NSF. A university or NGO should have some kind of EEO or diversity office or point person. Go to them immediately. Report this. There are steps open to you that start small scale and escalate until this is resolved. | Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a "queer faculty and staff caucus" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network. | 0 | 5,116 | 3 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geouakz | gep0m09 | 1,607,165,750 | 1,607,172,412 | 5 | 18 | You need to talk to your graduate school or your HR department, depending on whether or not you are considered an employee. Don’t talk to your advisor. Universities have procedures and policies for this. And don’t do it anonymously, it’s already happening to you so that won’t help. | Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a "queer faculty and staff caucus" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network. | 0 | 6,662 | 3.6 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | gep0m09 | geotfyo | 1,607,172,412 | 1,607,164,792 | 18 | 2 | Hey just wanted to say I'm really sorry this is happening to you and not all academia is like this. I'm bi and my department has 2 other gay men and used to have a bi woman adjunct married to a woman. My school even has a "queer faculty and staff caucus" where we get together (well, over zoom now) and hang out with other queer faculty/staff. One thing I love about academia is that I can be myself after growing up super religious so it makes me so sad to hear this. I like the suggestion of reporting witnessing harassment and not saying it was you. But if you have less than a year to go I might stay quiet and report it on my way out personally. I don't think either is the wrong decision and it is fine to work in your best interest even if you don't save your whole center from homophobia in the future...that is not actually your job. There is a a great group on facebook called Queer PHD network. | What field, btw? | 1 | 7,620 | 9 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoymzb | geoxe5o | 1,607,170,476 | 1,607,169,172 | 14 | 11 | Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change. | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | 1 | 1,304 | 1.272727 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoymzb | geotbtr | 1,607,170,476 | 1,607,164,661 | 14 | 8 | Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change. | I am shocked that this is possible in science in 2020 in a 'civilised' country (the US, right?) :'( In AUS/DE/IT where I worked/studied, the culture is 99% gay/whatever friendly. If anything it might make you more interesting. But generally, these things are personal and have nothing to do with science. Don't let it set you against the field or discourage you from your science! Almost all the scientists I know are 'wierd'/unusual in some way, that's one of of my favorite things about it. If you think you'd be punished, maybe try to document everything and wait a little until your closer to graduating before going public. Then get the hell out. If anything, speaking up and making a stand would be considered a positive attribute by any research institute that you would want to be in. | 1 | 5,815 | 1.75 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geovf1c | geoymzb | 1,607,167,003 | 1,607,170,476 | 8 | 14 | Protect yourself first (mentally also), then denounce the shady shit. | Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change. | 0 | 3,473 | 1.75 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoymzb | geovodh | 1,607,170,476 | 1,607,167,296 | 14 | 6 | Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change. | OP, does your organization have an EEO office? You need to put this crap to a stop, but start locally if you can. You say that you’re at an NSF lab, which I’m taking to mean a group funded by NSF. A university or NGO should have some kind of EEO or diversity office or point person. Go to them immediately. Report this. There are steps open to you that start small scale and escalate until this is resolved. | 1 | 3,180 | 2.333333 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geouakz | geoymzb | 1,607,165,750 | 1,607,170,476 | 5 | 14 | You need to talk to your graduate school or your HR department, depending on whether or not you are considered an employee. Don’t talk to your advisor. Universities have procedures and policies for this. And don’t do it anonymously, it’s already happening to you so that won’t help. | Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change. | 0 | 4,726 | 2.8 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoymzb | geotfyo | 1,607,170,476 | 1,607,164,792 | 14 | 2 | Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change. | What field, btw? | 1 | 5,684 | 7 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geotbtr | geoxe5o | 1,607,164,661 | 1,607,169,172 | 8 | 11 | I am shocked that this is possible in science in 2020 in a 'civilised' country (the US, right?) :'( In AUS/DE/IT where I worked/studied, the culture is 99% gay/whatever friendly. If anything it might make you more interesting. But generally, these things are personal and have nothing to do with science. Don't let it set you against the field or discourage you from your science! Almost all the scientists I know are 'wierd'/unusual in some way, that's one of of my favorite things about it. If you think you'd be punished, maybe try to document everything and wait a little until your closer to graduating before going public. Then get the hell out. If anything, speaking up and making a stand would be considered a positive attribute by any research institute that you would want to be in. | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | 0 | 4,511 | 1.375 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoxe5o | geovf1c | 1,607,169,172 | 1,607,167,003 | 11 | 8 | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | Protect yourself first (mentally also), then denounce the shady shit. | 1 | 2,169 | 1.375 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geovodh | geoxe5o | 1,607,167,296 | 1,607,169,172 | 6 | 11 | OP, does your organization have an EEO office? You need to put this crap to a stop, but start locally if you can. You say that you’re at an NSF lab, which I’m taking to mean a group funded by NSF. A university or NGO should have some kind of EEO or diversity office or point person. Go to them immediately. Report this. There are steps open to you that start small scale and escalate until this is resolved. | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | 0 | 1,876 | 1.833333 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geoxe5o | geouakz | 1,607,169,172 | 1,607,165,750 | 11 | 5 | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | You need to talk to your graduate school or your HR department, depending on whether or not you are considered an employee. Don’t talk to your advisor. Universities have procedures and policies for this. And don’t do it anonymously, it’s already happening to you so that won’t help. | 1 | 3,422 | 2.2 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geotfyo | geoxe5o | 1,607,164,792 | 1,607,169,172 | 2 | 11 | What field, btw? | I know everyone here has said some variation of: report them. I would say, don’t. It’s easy to say: do the right thing, there are departments to help. Others need it. However, they’re not in your shoes. You are miserable now. If you “report them anonymously” as some have suggested, the slurs and the jokes? They might get worse. Academia is gossipy and everyone knows each other or is two or three degrees separated from each other. In highly specialized fields with these types of grants? World shrinks even more. What about allies to write up a formal complaint or to take up a series of signatures to show this is an issue? You already said people can be openly homophobic and it’s a joke. Hell, they can torment you directly by throwing that shit in your face and nothing happens. If you could find people to sign or support you, how far would that go when they have to decide between being a good person or putting their careers on the line for a possible competitor once they graduate? I’m not trying to be a dick. You have endured homophobic abuse this long while working and this seems like the perfect opportunity to shine a light on this type of abuse. But if you do and it gets ignored, then it might feel super shitty to have put yourself out there and no one gives a fuck. If they do and it’s negative, then it gets worse for you. But, best case scenario: you get some traction, will the environment suddenly change because people have to watch a new training video and get a certificate that says they won’t use slurs in the workplace? I am not trying to say this is not terrible, but I am saying: you are not a coward for wanting to survive. You are being realistic and you are taking care of yourself as best you can in that type of environment. You’re stronger than a lot of us, but you are also exhausted and that’s understandable. I don’t have the right answer. Maybe speaking up is right. Maybe it isn’t. All I know is that you haven’t spoken up before, and having an external source of help might seem like a good idea, but they just evaluate. At the end of the day it’s up to the research center and your direct supervisor to change the environment. If it hasn’t changed, that might be your best indicator of whether this is a fight you want to add on top of your research and work related stressors. **TL:DR** – *speak up or don’t. It’s up to you. Just keep in mind all three scenarios: best case, worst case and neutral/nothing happens case. And be prepared for the most likely, given the current climate and your colleagues, supervisors and administration.* | 0 | 4,380 | 5.5 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geouakz | geovf1c | 1,607,165,750 | 1,607,167,003 | 5 | 8 | You need to talk to your graduate school or your HR department, depending on whether or not you are considered an employee. Don’t talk to your advisor. Universities have procedures and policies for this. And don’t do it anonymously, it’s already happening to you so that won’t help. | Protect yourself first (mentally also), then denounce the shady shit. | 0 | 1,253 | 1.6 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geotfyo | geovf1c | 1,607,164,792 | 1,607,167,003 | 2 | 8 | What field, btw? | Protect yourself first (mentally also), then denounce the shady shit. | 0 | 2,211 | 4 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geouakz | geovodh | 1,607,165,750 | 1,607,167,296 | 5 | 6 | You need to talk to your graduate school or your HR department, depending on whether or not you are considered an employee. Don’t talk to your advisor. Universities have procedures and policies for this. And don’t do it anonymously, it’s already happening to you so that won’t help. | OP, does your organization have an EEO office? You need to put this crap to a stop, but start locally if you can. You say that you’re at an NSF lab, which I’m taking to mean a group funded by NSF. A university or NGO should have some kind of EEO or diversity office or point person. Go to them immediately. Report this. There are steps open to you that start small scale and escalate until this is resolved. | 0 | 1,546 | 1.2 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geovodh | geotfyo | 1,607,167,296 | 1,607,164,792 | 6 | 2 | OP, does your organization have an EEO office? You need to put this crap to a stop, but start locally if you can. You say that you’re at an NSF lab, which I’m taking to mean a group funded by NSF. A university or NGO should have some kind of EEO or diversity office or point person. Go to them immediately. Report this. There are steps open to you that start small scale and escalate until this is resolved. | What field, btw? | 1 | 2,504 | 3 |
k73dy7 | askacademia_train | 0.93 | Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?** | geouakz | geotfyo | 1,607,165,750 | 1,607,164,792 | 5 | 2 | You need to talk to your graduate school or your HR department, depending on whether or not you are considered an employee. Don’t talk to your advisor. Universities have procedures and policies for this. And don’t do it anonymously, it’s already happening to you so that won’t help. | What field, btw? | 1 | 958 | 2.5 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mo9gp | h1mof86 | 1,623,597,661 | 1,623,597,743 | 30 | 153 | If they already got fired or forced to retire, then they won’t be making the environment toxic. Am I missing the point? I’m not pro harassment, of course. I just don’t know if this will achieve anything. If any of these cases went to court, you can access the court files and publish the names if you want to. However, if the person was accused but the case never went to court, there are no records and for all practical purposes, the harassment didn’t happen or it’s hearsay. | This is a terrible idea. The NIH will not defame PIs who have never been convicted of anything in a court of law. You may as well ask them to make public the names of students who have been found guilty of academic honesty or conduct violations so that PIs know to avoid them. | 0 | 82 | 5.1 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mo9gp | h1motsn | 1,623,597,661 | 1,623,597,954 | 30 | 130 | If they already got fired or forced to retire, then they won’t be making the environment toxic. Am I missing the point? I’m not pro harassment, of course. I just don’t know if this will achieve anything. If any of these cases went to court, you can access the court files and publish the names if you want to. However, if the person was accused but the case never went to court, there are no records and for all practical purposes, the harassment didn’t happen or it’s hearsay. | how would the NIH know this? the government isn't all seeing and all knowing. these things happen behind closed doors at the unviversity | 0 | 293 | 4.333333 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mo9gp | h1mpkkq | 1,623,597,661 | 1,623,598,342 | 30 | 75 | If they already got fired or forced to retire, then they won’t be making the environment toxic. Am I missing the point? I’m not pro harassment, of course. I just don’t know if this will achieve anything. If any of these cases went to court, you can access the court files and publish the names if you want to. However, if the person was accused but the case never went to court, there are no records and for all practical purposes, the harassment didn’t happen or it’s hearsay. | No thanks. Keeping lists of harassers (accused or otherwise) unless they’ve actually been found guilty in a court of law is a really bad idea. Something like this could easily be abused by trainees that think they were treated unfairly from their perspective but just maybe didn’t gel with a PI who is highly motivated and a bit pushy. If a PI is victimizing people, let the institution and authorities deal with it rather than keeping a list like some vigilante. | 0 | 681 | 2.5 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mq1mj | h1mo9gp | 1,623,598,580 | 1,623,597,661 | 43 | 30 | uh why/how would the NIH even know this? | If they already got fired or forced to retire, then they won’t be making the environment toxic. Am I missing the point? I’m not pro harassment, of course. I just don’t know if this will achieve anything. If any of these cases went to court, you can access the court files and publish the names if you want to. However, if the person was accused but the case never went to court, there are no records and for all practical purposes, the harassment didn’t happen or it’s hearsay. | 1 | 919 | 1.433333 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mpkny | h1mq1mj | 1,623,598,343 | 1,623,598,580 | 18 | 43 | Just sharing this since it is relevant to the post: https://academic-sexual-misconduct-database.org/incidents | uh why/how would the NIH even know this? | 0 | 237 | 2.388889 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mo9gp | h1mqds8 | 1,623,597,661 | 1,623,598,756 | 30 | 35 | If they already got fired or forced to retire, then they won’t be making the environment toxic. Am I missing the point? I’m not pro harassment, of course. I just don’t know if this will achieve anything. If any of these cases went to court, you can access the court files and publish the names if you want to. However, if the person was accused but the case never went to court, there are no records and for all practical purposes, the harassment didn’t happen or it’s hearsay. | I've upvoted because I'd like to get this more visibility and conversation around this, but I have to admit I have a handful of concerns with this approach: * You mention "it's time the NIH takes a bold approach"-- why? Why the NIH out of all of the funding agencies out there? * If they've been found guilty and removed from their position, isn't that the problem solved? Why taking this extra step? * What steps are taken to ensure (to the extent that that's possible) that this doesn't become a mechanism to enable witch-hunts? I would also point out that I would view "found guilty of sexual harassment" as being very different from what I would consider "toxicity in academia": the difference coming down to competitiveness versus an actual crime. This feels like a problem better solved on an institution-by-institution level. Of course, there already are policies at that level, but it sounds like in your view these aren't sufficient. What makes them insufficient? I'm asking that more as a general trying-to-understand-the-problem thing. Perhaps putting together a more universal set of policies, and then pushing an initiative to have institutions get on board to enact them, might end up being more effective? | 0 | 1,095 | 1.166667 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1mqds8 | h1mpkny | 1,623,598,756 | 1,623,598,343 | 35 | 18 | I've upvoted because I'd like to get this more visibility and conversation around this, but I have to admit I have a handful of concerns with this approach: * You mention "it's time the NIH takes a bold approach"-- why? Why the NIH out of all of the funding agencies out there? * If they've been found guilty and removed from their position, isn't that the problem solved? Why taking this extra step? * What steps are taken to ensure (to the extent that that's possible) that this doesn't become a mechanism to enable witch-hunts? I would also point out that I would view "found guilty of sexual harassment" as being very different from what I would consider "toxicity in academia": the difference coming down to competitiveness versus an actual crime. This feels like a problem better solved on an institution-by-institution level. Of course, there already are policies at that level, but it sounds like in your view these aren't sufficient. What makes them insufficient? I'm asking that more as a general trying-to-understand-the-problem thing. Perhaps putting together a more universal set of policies, and then pushing an initiative to have institutions get on board to enact them, might end up being more effective? | Just sharing this since it is relevant to the post: https://academic-sexual-misconduct-database.org/incidents | 1 | 413 | 1.944444 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1ol0zn | h1ndogf | 1,623,632,974 | 1,623,610,218 | 13 | 9 | Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them. | I see your point, but I would ensure this is carefully crafted. They could theoretically post reports of this through the office of research integrity. The issue is I’ve found that people are less likely to report something that will have an impact on someone’s future. They are too likely to give a benefit of a doubt. So if you’re publicly reporting this, I bet people will be less likely to report it at the institutional level. And what level of harassment will constitute discipline? Theoretically any, but truly there’s a difference between someone who has implicit bias they need to work on and someone who routinely harasses trainees and young faculty. Harassment is too often ignored or swept under the rug in the “faculty club”. That being said hiring institutions could potentially be able to ask NIH if there’s reports against a faculty member. Maybe the NIH could bar any PI accused of certain types/levels of harassment from obtaining a trainee supplement to an R01 or an R35? They should also just incentivize great mentoring. So often the good mentors can’t make it to the top because great mentoring is not incentivized in granting R01s. At the end of the day institutions are there to pay the bills and if their reporting will chase off a high grant earning PI, I bet they are less likely to do that. If the NIH prohibits those PIs from obtaining certain types of funds like R35s, maybe that puts the pressure on. I just saw NINDS has a mentoring award that comes with an 100k supplement! What a great start at lifting up the good mentors. | 1 | 22,756 | 1.444444 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1ne1iu | h1ol0zn | 1,623,610,394 | 1,623,632,974 | 7 | 13 | Why do you think NIH has a list of faculty who have been “found guilty” of harassment? Even if they do have information about which faculty have been found by their institutions to have committed harassment, NIH would never publicize it because they’d get their asses sued for defamation. The faculty in question haven’t been “found guilty” in a legal sense, and a government agency declaring them guilty without a trial is clearly not going to hold up in court. That’s pretty unrealistic. | Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them. | 0 | 22,580 | 1.857143 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1nnjgc | h1ol0zn | 1,623,615,028 | 1,623,632,974 | 9 | 13 | IMO one thing should be taken into seriously consideration is how to improve the efficiency of reporting and investigating misconduct without the students fearing that they will have retribution or that the matter will not be taken seriously because the prof is tenured or famous or something | Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them. | 0 | 17,946 | 1.444444 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1ol0zn | h1n9jsl | 1,623,632,974 | 1,623,608,219 | 13 | 6 | Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them. | I’d use a different word than toxic since that can mean things as small as being rude to coworkers or more broadly a competitive, up or out atmosphere, you are clearly interested in different stuff. That said, I don’t know if moving to a trial by the court of public opinion is a great idea long term. | 1 | 24,755 | 2.166667 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1nofmv | h1ol0zn | 1,623,615,463 | 1,623,632,974 | 6 | 13 | We all learned about Nassar not too long ago. Forgive me for not completely trusting institutions to keep people safe while they are busy saving face. There is a database already of public information. Thanks for the other comment or for posting the link here! | Even if this would work, it wouldn't tackle the problem because OP assumes only PIs are toxic. Moreover, it assumes universities care about toxicity versus, for example, grant funding., This is like making drug dealers' names public. Sure, they might be part of the problem but doing that doesn't solve the problem as long as there is a need for them. | 0 | 17,511 | 2.166667 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1ndogf | h1n9jsl | 1,623,610,218 | 1,623,608,219 | 9 | 6 | I see your point, but I would ensure this is carefully crafted. They could theoretically post reports of this through the office of research integrity. The issue is I’ve found that people are less likely to report something that will have an impact on someone’s future. They are too likely to give a benefit of a doubt. So if you’re publicly reporting this, I bet people will be less likely to report it at the institutional level. And what level of harassment will constitute discipline? Theoretically any, but truly there’s a difference between someone who has implicit bias they need to work on and someone who routinely harasses trainees and young faculty. Harassment is too often ignored or swept under the rug in the “faculty club”. That being said hiring institutions could potentially be able to ask NIH if there’s reports against a faculty member. Maybe the NIH could bar any PI accused of certain types/levels of harassment from obtaining a trainee supplement to an R01 or an R35? They should also just incentivize great mentoring. So often the good mentors can’t make it to the top because great mentoring is not incentivized in granting R01s. At the end of the day institutions are there to pay the bills and if their reporting will chase off a high grant earning PI, I bet they are less likely to do that. If the NIH prohibits those PIs from obtaining certain types of funds like R35s, maybe that puts the pressure on. I just saw NINDS has a mentoring award that comes with an 100k supplement! What a great start at lifting up the good mentors. | I’d use a different word than toxic since that can mean things as small as being rude to coworkers or more broadly a competitive, up or out atmosphere, you are clearly interested in different stuff. That said, I don’t know if moving to a trial by the court of public opinion is a great idea long term. | 1 | 1,999 | 1.5 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1nnjgc | h1ne1iu | 1,623,615,028 | 1,623,610,394 | 9 | 7 | IMO one thing should be taken into seriously consideration is how to improve the efficiency of reporting and investigating misconduct without the students fearing that they will have retribution or that the matter will not be taken seriously because the prof is tenured or famous or something | Why do you think NIH has a list of faculty who have been “found guilty” of harassment? Even if they do have information about which faculty have been found by their institutions to have committed harassment, NIH would never publicize it because they’d get their asses sued for defamation. The faculty in question haven’t been “found guilty” in a legal sense, and a government agency declaring them guilty without a trial is clearly not going to hold up in court. That’s pretty unrealistic. | 1 | 4,634 | 1.285714 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1ne1iu | h1n9jsl | 1,623,610,394 | 1,623,608,219 | 7 | 6 | Why do you think NIH has a list of faculty who have been “found guilty” of harassment? Even if they do have information about which faculty have been found by their institutions to have committed harassment, NIH would never publicize it because they’d get their asses sued for defamation. The faculty in question haven’t been “found guilty” in a legal sense, and a government agency declaring them guilty without a trial is clearly not going to hold up in court. That’s pretty unrealistic. | I’d use a different word than toxic since that can mean things as small as being rude to coworkers or more broadly a competitive, up or out atmosphere, you are clearly interested in different stuff. That said, I don’t know if moving to a trial by the court of public opinion is a great idea long term. | 1 | 2,175 | 1.166667 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1nnjgc | h1n9jsl | 1,623,615,028 | 1,623,608,219 | 9 | 6 | IMO one thing should be taken into seriously consideration is how to improve the efficiency of reporting and investigating misconduct without the students fearing that they will have retribution or that the matter will not be taken seriously because the prof is tenured or famous or something | I’d use a different word than toxic since that can mean things as small as being rude to coworkers or more broadly a competitive, up or out atmosphere, you are clearly interested in different stuff. That said, I don’t know if moving to a trial by the court of public opinion is a great idea long term. | 1 | 6,809 | 1.5 |
nyxfmg | askacademia_train | 0.81 | Trying to change toxicity in Academia Hello all. Myself and a group of faculty and students are trying to get together a group of signatures from faculty, postdocs and trainees in multiple institutions in the USA. Our goal is to ask NIH to make public the names of PIs that have been found guilty and fired (or asked to retire) after being found guilty of harassment (sexual or not). There are too many stories where PIs move from institutions, repeating the toxic behaviors and maintaining their reputation and ability to keep NIH dollars. It's time the NIH takes a bold approach at stoping toxic environmemts. If you want to be part of this movement, please send me a private message. We plan to make calls for media attention, get in contact with NIH leadership (we have already started this), make a web page and use social media. We need as many signatures as possible to make our voices heard. We look forward to hear from you! | h1paa26 | h1ovacl | 1,623,649,304 | 1,623,638,872 | 6 | 2 | This has a potential to turn into a vector for mob justice. But even ignoring the moral aspect, you're trying to have institutions retaliate against people who haven't been found guilty in a court of law. This is a shitstorm of defamation lawsuits in the making. No institution will open itself to that kind of risk. | Nice way to intensify an already unnecessarily intense shit show. As an early career researcher with a few very lazy PhD students who are both likely to graduate without publications _through no fault of my own_ I can see me being put on a list like this as retaliation when they inevitably find themselves not getting postdocs due to competition with people who have several publications after their seven year American style PhDs. | 1 | 10,432 | 3 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq74uc1 | hq74vo5 | 1,640,641,837 | 1,640,641,852 | 87 | 222 | 1) Email the authors directly or via social media 2) Request through research gate 3) Embrace the pirate life | If you have time, just email the researcher. I've done this a handful of times and it gives me an excuse to establish a new professional connection. Researchers are always delighted to share their papers for free; the only entity who benefits from these paywalls is Elsevier. | 0 | 15 | 2.551724 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq76n6c | hq74uc1 | 1,640,642,590 | 1,640,641,837 | 93 | 87 | I don’t know about in other countries but in the UK, if your own university library doesn’t have access you can request an inter-library loan and get access to anything that way. | 1) Email the authors directly or via social media 2) Request through research gate 3) Embrace the pirate life | 1 | 753 | 1.068966 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8c0j7 | hq7qpq3 | 1,640,660,889 | 1,640,651,271 | 59 | 53 | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | Interlibrary loan through your university library should be an option. At my workplace I often get them within 6 hours or so - at least during the week. | 1 | 9,618 | 1.113208 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7n2sz | hq8c0j7 | 1,640,649,668 | 1,640,660,889 | 12 | 59 | I'm surprised. sci-hub just works for me when I can't be bothered to go on my uni's VPN. All Elsevier journals should be working. The other option is the #icanhazpdf hashtag on twitter. Tweet the journal article and an email address with the hashtag and someone should be able to provide the pdf. | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | 0 | 11,221 | 4.916667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8c0j7 | hq85xhj | 1,640,660,889 | 1,640,658,106 | 59 | 10 | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ. | 1 | 2,783 | 5.9 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8c0j7 | hq7xdzp | 1,640,660,889 | 1,640,654,268 | 59 | 8 | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | r/Scholar is an excellent place to ask folks to send you papers that you need. They are pretty quick to respond to requests. | 1 | 6,621 | 7.375 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8c0j7 | hq7fuug | 1,640,660,889 | 1,640,646,501 | 59 | 8 | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | I totally agree with what was previously mentioned: asking the authors or the institute directly. You can also lookup on ResearchGate. A lot of scientist have freely accessible copies of their papers there. booksc.xyz is also sometimes helpful when sci-hub or libgen do not have what you are looking for | 1 | 14,388 | 7.375 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7x3ex | hq8c0j7 | 1,640,654,136 | 1,640,660,889 | 3 | 59 | /r/Scholar | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | 0 | 6,753 | 19.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq87dno | hq8c0j7 | 1,640,658,771 | 1,640,660,889 | 3 | 59 | Email the author, get an ILL and look on pubmed central. Anyone who has federal funding has to make the paper open access within a certain time limit. I find it hard to believe that the first 2 don’t work. | If you need to download paywalled articles and resources and don’t have institutional access, here are some tips to jump the paywall: 1- Check the authors’ personal website(s). In many cases you’ll find version of the article you need archived there. If not, you’ll find their email addresses, which you’ll need for option #2. 2- Ask the author: If you email the author and ask nicely, they’ll most likely email you back a copy. 3- Check the “All versions” link in Google Scholar search results: (https://scholar.google.com/). Run a Google Scholar query then click on “All…versions” found under each of the search results. Sometimes you can find free/open mirrors for paywalled articles within these expanded search results. 4- Crowd-source access to the article: Several options here, but the most well-known are the#ICanHazPDF hashtag on twitter (https://twitter.com/hashtag/icanhazpdf), for which you obviously need to be on Twitter, or the /r/Scholar subreddit on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/scholar). In either option, you post a request with the relevant URL or DOI and see if someone can access and upload it for you. 5- Sci-Hub: http://sci-hub.cc/ is essentially the academic equivalent of the Pirate Bay. (be advised that it is blocked in many countries, but you can always find an online mirror). Up-to-date information on Sci-Hub’s status are found on the /r/Scholar subreddit. Sci-hub also has a Tor address scihub22266oqcxt.onion 6- Library Genesis: Similar to Sci-hub, but is an actual massive repository of articles as opposed to a scanner for open proxies like Sci-Hub. Also like Sci-Hub, has several mirrors. At the time of this writing this mirror is online http://gen.lib.rus.ec/ | 0 | 2,118 | 19.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7n2sz | hq7qpq3 | 1,640,649,668 | 1,640,651,271 | 12 | 53 | I'm surprised. sci-hub just works for me when I can't be bothered to go on my uni's VPN. All Elsevier journals should be working. The other option is the #icanhazpdf hashtag on twitter. Tweet the journal article and an email address with the hashtag and someone should be able to provide the pdf. | Interlibrary loan through your university library should be an option. At my workplace I often get them within 6 hours or so - at least during the week. | 0 | 1,603 | 4.416667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7qpq3 | hq7fuug | 1,640,651,271 | 1,640,646,501 | 53 | 8 | Interlibrary loan through your university library should be an option. At my workplace I often get them within 6 hours or so - at least during the week. | I totally agree with what was previously mentioned: asking the authors or the institute directly. You can also lookup on ResearchGate. A lot of scientist have freely accessible copies of their papers there. booksc.xyz is also sometimes helpful when sci-hub or libgen do not have what you are looking for | 1 | 4,770 | 6.625 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7fuug | hq7n2sz | 1,640,646,501 | 1,640,649,668 | 8 | 12 | I totally agree with what was previously mentioned: asking the authors or the institute directly. You can also lookup on ResearchGate. A lot of scientist have freely accessible copies of their papers there. booksc.xyz is also sometimes helpful when sci-hub or libgen do not have what you are looking for | I'm surprised. sci-hub just works for me when I can't be bothered to go on my uni's VPN. All Elsevier journals should be working. The other option is the #icanhazpdf hashtag on twitter. Tweet the journal article and an email address with the hashtag and someone should be able to provide the pdf. | 0 | 3,167 | 1.5 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8rcb3 | hq85xhj | 1,640,668,416 | 1,640,658,106 | 11 | 10 | You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way. | you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ. | 1 | 10,310 | 1.1 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq85xhj | hq8fobh | 1,640,658,106 | 1,640,662,577 | 10 | 11 | you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ. | Lots of the researchers keep PDFs of their papers on their personal websites. Not always, but this is common in some fields. | 0 | 4,471 | 1.1 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq85xhj | hq7xdzp | 1,640,658,106 | 1,640,654,268 | 10 | 8 | you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ. | r/Scholar is an excellent place to ask folks to send you papers that you need. They are pretty quick to respond to requests. | 1 | 3,838 | 1.25 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7fuug | hq85xhj | 1,640,646,501 | 1,640,658,106 | 8 | 10 | I totally agree with what was previously mentioned: asking the authors or the institute directly. You can also lookup on ResearchGate. A lot of scientist have freely accessible copies of their papers there. booksc.xyz is also sometimes helpful when sci-hub or libgen do not have what you are looking for | you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ. | 0 | 11,605 | 1.25 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7x3ex | hq85xhj | 1,640,654,136 | 1,640,658,106 | 3 | 10 | /r/Scholar | you got two options: contact the researcher and ask for a copy. Or ask for a loan through your library from another Univ. | 0 | 3,970 | 3.333333 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7xdzp | hq8rcb3 | 1,640,654,268 | 1,640,668,416 | 8 | 11 | r/Scholar is an excellent place to ask folks to send you papers that you need. They are pretty quick to respond to requests. | You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way. | 0 | 14,148 | 1.375 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8rcb3 | hq7fuug | 1,640,668,416 | 1,640,646,501 | 11 | 8 | You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way. | I totally agree with what was previously mentioned: asking the authors or the institute directly. You can also lookup on ResearchGate. A lot of scientist have freely accessible copies of their papers there. booksc.xyz is also sometimes helpful when sci-hub or libgen do not have what you are looking for | 1 | 21,915 | 1.375 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8ls5l | hq8rcb3 | 1,640,665,488 | 1,640,668,416 | 6 | 11 | Interlibrary loan? Personally, I don’t consider it piracy if the research was publicly funded. | You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way. | 0 | 2,928 | 1.833333 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7x3ex | hq8rcb3 | 1,640,654,136 | 1,640,668,416 | 3 | 11 | /r/Scholar | You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way. | 0 | 14,280 | 3.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8rcb3 | hq87dno | 1,640,668,416 | 1,640,658,771 | 11 | 3 | You know, I have never really appreciated the access that I have to different databases (Elsevier) included until I saw how even tenured professors struggle to access these papers. I have access to many databases thanks to my university... I'm not even in a top tier university so I have no idea why I can access so many databases. Usually professors message me to access different papers/book chapters etc. 99% of the time I can access them. They know me from conferences and research groups. Try to network around with others and be in groups. Usually people request papers that way. | Email the author, get an ILL and look on pubmed central. Anyone who has federal funding has to make the paper open access within a certain time limit. I find it hard to believe that the first 2 don’t work. | 1 | 9,645 | 3.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8fobh | hq7xdzp | 1,640,662,577 | 1,640,654,268 | 11 | 8 | Lots of the researchers keep PDFs of their papers on their personal websites. Not always, but this is common in some fields. | r/Scholar is an excellent place to ask folks to send you papers that you need. They are pretty quick to respond to requests. | 1 | 8,309 | 1.375 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8fobh | hq7fuug | 1,640,662,577 | 1,640,646,501 | 11 | 8 | Lots of the researchers keep PDFs of their papers on their personal websites. Not always, but this is common in some fields. | I totally agree with what was previously mentioned: asking the authors or the institute directly. You can also lookup on ResearchGate. A lot of scientist have freely accessible copies of their papers there. booksc.xyz is also sometimes helpful when sci-hub or libgen do not have what you are looking for | 1 | 16,076 | 1.375 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8fobh | hq7x3ex | 1,640,662,577 | 1,640,654,136 | 11 | 3 | Lots of the researchers keep PDFs of their papers on their personal websites. Not always, but this is common in some fields. | /r/Scholar | 1 | 8,441 | 3.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq8fobh | hq87dno | 1,640,662,577 | 1,640,658,771 | 11 | 3 | Lots of the researchers keep PDFs of their papers on their personal websites. Not always, but this is common in some fields. | Email the author, get an ILL and look on pubmed central. Anyone who has federal funding has to make the paper open access within a certain time limit. I find it hard to believe that the first 2 don’t work. | 1 | 3,806 | 3.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7x3ex | hq7xdzp | 1,640,654,136 | 1,640,654,268 | 3 | 8 | /r/Scholar | r/Scholar is an excellent place to ask folks to send you papers that you need. They are pretty quick to respond to requests. | 0 | 132 | 2.666667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq96f2u | hq8ls5l | 1,640,678,463 | 1,640,665,488 | 7 | 6 | Do we think it’s actually piracy if an intermediary like Elsevier acts as a mere repository, charges fees for search and retrieval services and not for the research paper, and pays the authors of the papers nothing? | Interlibrary loan? Personally, I don’t consider it piracy if the research was publicly funded. | 1 | 12,975 | 1.166667 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq96f2u | hq7x3ex | 1,640,678,463 | 1,640,654,136 | 7 | 3 | Do we think it’s actually piracy if an intermediary like Elsevier acts as a mere repository, charges fees for search and retrieval services and not for the research paper, and pays the authors of the papers nothing? | /r/Scholar | 1 | 24,327 | 2.333333 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq87dno | hq96f2u | 1,640,658,771 | 1,640,678,463 | 3 | 7 | Email the author, get an ILL and look on pubmed central. Anyone who has federal funding has to make the paper open access within a certain time limit. I find it hard to believe that the first 2 don’t work. | Do we think it’s actually piracy if an intermediary like Elsevier acts as a mere repository, charges fees for search and retrieval services and not for the research paper, and pays the authors of the papers nothing? | 0 | 19,692 | 2.333333 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq96f2u | hq948a7 | 1,640,678,463 | 1,640,676,791 | 7 | 2 | Do we think it’s actually piracy if an intermediary like Elsevier acts as a mere repository, charges fees for search and retrieval services and not for the research paper, and pays the authors of the papers nothing? | F**k Elsevier, JSTOR and all the others. They actively make science more difficult. My first recommendation is to use a VPN, or make one, to bypass any mechanisms of censorship you may encounter. Diversify your search engines; don't rely on Google. Use long-tail keywords with search operators (also called dorks) as you will find relevant information much more efficiently. For research, these serve me well: + Core + Library Genesis + sci-hub + Science Open + Scinapse + Semantic Scholar + Unpaywall + Z Library While it wasn't mentioned explicitly, this may help. Zotero is an open-source program which I think does quite well in helping to organize research. I prefer it over Mendeley and whatever others you may know. As others have suggested, emailing researchers is a good option. | 1 | 1,672 | 3.5 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq7x3ex | hq8ls5l | 1,640,654,136 | 1,640,665,488 | 3 | 6 | /r/Scholar | Interlibrary loan? Personally, I don’t consider it piracy if the research was publicly funded. | 0 | 11,352 | 2 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq87dno | hq8ls5l | 1,640,658,771 | 1,640,665,488 | 3 | 6 | Email the author, get an ILL and look on pubmed central. Anyone who has federal funding has to make the paper open access within a certain time limit. I find it hard to believe that the first 2 don’t work. | Interlibrary loan? Personally, I don’t consider it piracy if the research was publicly funded. | 0 | 6,717 | 2 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq948a7 | hq9f5sz | 1,640,676,791 | 1,640,685,598 | 2 | 3 | F**k Elsevier, JSTOR and all the others. They actively make science more difficult. My first recommendation is to use a VPN, or make one, to bypass any mechanisms of censorship you may encounter. Diversify your search engines; don't rely on Google. Use long-tail keywords with search operators (also called dorks) as you will find relevant information much more efficiently. For research, these serve me well: + Core + Library Genesis + sci-hub + Science Open + Scinapse + Semantic Scholar + Unpaywall + Z Library While it wasn't mentioned explicitly, this may help. Zotero is an open-source program which I think does quite well in helping to organize research. I prefer it over Mendeley and whatever others you may know. As others have suggested, emailing researchers is a good option. | I think it worth noting that not just students are fed up with it. Last year, the majority of the editorial board of Journal of Combinatorial Theory Ser. A (owned by the doomed Elsevier) resigned and established their own journal: https://twitter.com/FedericoArdila/status/1471972511013167105 | 0 | 8,807 | 1.5 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq97w8t | hq9f5sz | 1,640,679,611 | 1,640,685,598 | 2 | 3 | Napster gave us Spotify instead of CD:s. Piratebay gave us Netflix instead of VHS. Internet gave us open access of low quality publications, which lead to open access of high quality. Elsevier is doomed. | I think it worth noting that not just students are fed up with it. Last year, the majority of the editorial board of Journal of Combinatorial Theory Ser. A (owned by the doomed Elsevier) resigned and established their own journal: https://twitter.com/FedericoArdila/status/1471972511013167105 | 0 | 5,987 | 1.5 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq948a7 | hq9gf2e | 1,640,676,791 | 1,640,686,641 | 2 | 3 | F**k Elsevier, JSTOR and all the others. They actively make science more difficult. My first recommendation is to use a VPN, or make one, to bypass any mechanisms of censorship you may encounter. Diversify your search engines; don't rely on Google. Use long-tail keywords with search operators (also called dorks) as you will find relevant information much more efficiently. For research, these serve me well: + Core + Library Genesis + sci-hub + Science Open + Scinapse + Semantic Scholar + Unpaywall + Z Library While it wasn't mentioned explicitly, this may help. Zotero is an open-source program which I think does quite well in helping to organize research. I prefer it over Mendeley and whatever others you may know. As others have suggested, emailing researchers is a good option. | In case of academic articles, using sci-hub is not "simple" piracy (although it is by definition). Remember these facts: \- Your professors are paying to be published in these journals \- They don't pay anything to reviewers, although they are literally the guardians of scientific publication system \- They also demand obscene payments from students, researchers etc. for each paper or journal/conference subscriptions. and for what? just for showing these papers in their website and putting their logo on them. Understand that these companies are just doing everything in their ability to protect status quo and continue to receive payments without actually doing nothing. This is not like pirating a book or a movie or a game where their authors have actual financial benefits and publishers and creators have fiduciary responsibilities to each other. I am really looking forward to see a blockchain solution where "miners" will be the paper reviewers for replacing these academic charlatans. Please read about Alexandra Elbakyan. | 0 | 9,850 | 1.5 |
rpy669 | askacademia_train | 0.98 | Accessing Elsevier papers First of all: F**k you Elsevier, for making contributions and most importantly access to science damn expensive, especially for the students (such as me) that really need these papers. This leads me directly to my question: Unfortunately in my field a lot of relevant papers are constantly published in Elsevier Journals, which I can’t access through my university, Sci-Hub also doesn’t help with these in a lot of cases. Any further ideas? I do not endorse piracy, but it drives me nuts if I can’t access the relevant papers in my niche research field close to the end of my PhD. Especially for my theoretical part I would need this access. | hq9gf2e | hq97w8t | 1,640,686,641 | 1,640,679,611 | 3 | 2 | In case of academic articles, using sci-hub is not "simple" piracy (although it is by definition). Remember these facts: \- Your professors are paying to be published in these journals \- They don't pay anything to reviewers, although they are literally the guardians of scientific publication system \- They also demand obscene payments from students, researchers etc. for each paper or journal/conference subscriptions. and for what? just for showing these papers in their website and putting their logo on them. Understand that these companies are just doing everything in their ability to protect status quo and continue to receive payments without actually doing nothing. This is not like pirating a book or a movie or a game where their authors have actual financial benefits and publishers and creators have fiduciary responsibilities to each other. I am really looking forward to see a blockchain solution where "miners" will be the paper reviewers for replacing these academic charlatans. Please read about Alexandra Elbakyan. | Napster gave us Spotify instead of CD:s. Piratebay gave us Netflix instead of VHS. Internet gave us open access of low quality publications, which lead to open access of high quality. Elsevier is doomed. | 1 | 7,030 | 1.5 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv2q1v | fpv2h06 | 1,588,932,758 | 1,588,932,494 | 131 | 91 | Honestly, that hasn’t been my experience at all. I find that the same critical thinking skills my colleagues have tend to transfer to other arenas outside of our tiny speciality areas. Of course some academic folks have some views that are “out there” or seem ridiculous. But that occurs across all populations. For example: I’m a criminologist. Everybody has opinions about crime (and most are wrong). When I speak with other academics about issues related to crime, nearly all the time, they get it. Or, at the very least, they are able to view the issue from angles outside of their own opinion. But when I talk about it among non-academics, I find that many people can’t get past their own views to analytically think about the topic. | The domain transfer fallacy is real. Just because you have a Ph.D in Industrial Engineering does not mean you have expertise or even good sense about anything else. You might...but there is no guarantee. I can’t remember who it was but someone made a comment decades ago that each Ph.D degree should have an footnote that notes “the holder of this degree is certified to be knowledgeable only on the topic of the dissertation and closely related areas.” Edit: Typo | 1 | 264 | 1.43956 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv8jsf | fpvaw5o | 1,588,938,434 | 1,588,940,360 | 38 | 84 | Judging from: * my one colleague insisting that artificial sweeteners "give you cancer" * my colleagues that ignore decades of evidence-based educational knowledge in the design of their courses * my colleagues utterly incapable of seeing the relative merits of methodological approaches from other domains I'd say... yeah. | Relevant comic. | 0 | 1,926 | 2.210526 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvaw5o | fpv8w51 | 1,588,940,360 | 1,588,938,730 | 84 | 21 | Relevant comic. | "\[T\]he typical citizen drops down to a lower level of mental performance as soon as he enters the political field. He argues and analyzes in a way which he would readily recognize as infantile within the sphere of his real interests. He becomes a primitive again." \- Joseph Schumpeter, *Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy* (1942) | 1 | 1,630 | 4 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvaw5o | fpvar8b | 1,588,940,360 | 1,588,940,254 | 84 | 13 | Relevant comic. | I've noticed this quite often. I admit that I am this way too. For me, I try to have hobbies and do activities unrelated to my field of study. For instance, I study earth sciences, but I've been reading some Greek mythology and philosophy lately. I think that opens the mind up to different ways of thinking. But yes, over the years, I've experienced some people, from postdocs to professors, who spend their whole life doing one thing - their work - and don't really have any life outside of that, and it's difficult to carry on conversations with them about anything other than work. Some just don't want to talk about anything other than work, even when we're having beer in the evening after a conference, they still talk about nothing but their research. | 1 | 106 | 6.461538 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv6ooe | fpvaw5o | 1,588,936,741 | 1,588,940,360 | 6 | 84 | I see you've met my MIL. | Relevant comic. | 0 | 3,619 | 14 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv6ooe | fpv8jsf | 1,588,936,741 | 1,588,938,434 | 6 | 38 | I see you've met my MIL. | Judging from: * my one colleague insisting that artificial sweeteners "give you cancer" * my colleagues that ignore decades of evidence-based educational knowledge in the design of their courses * my colleagues utterly incapable of seeing the relative merits of methodological approaches from other domains I'd say... yeah. | 0 | 1,693 | 6.333333 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvdcil | fpvbf0w | 1,588,942,169 | 1,588,940,763 | 25 | 24 | There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a "weird thing" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc. | 100%. This is an opinion of industrial RnD but the trend probably still applies outside of it. I work at a company with lots of chemistry PhDs but unfortunately (all of these guys tend to be retirement age boomers) a good chunk don’t believe in climate change, even though our company’s entire long term business strategy is structured around climate change. | 1 | 1,406 | 1.041667 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv8w51 | fpvdcil | 1,588,938,730 | 1,588,942,169 | 21 | 25 | "\[T\]he typical citizen drops down to a lower level of mental performance as soon as he enters the political field. He argues and analyzes in a way which he would readily recognize as infantile within the sphere of his real interests. He becomes a primitive again." \- Joseph Schumpeter, *Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy* (1942) | There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a "weird thing" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc. | 0 | 3,439 | 1.190476 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvdcil | fpvar8b | 1,588,942,169 | 1,588,940,254 | 25 | 13 | There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a "weird thing" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc. | I've noticed this quite often. I admit that I am this way too. For me, I try to have hobbies and do activities unrelated to my field of study. For instance, I study earth sciences, but I've been reading some Greek mythology and philosophy lately. I think that opens the mind up to different ways of thinking. But yes, over the years, I've experienced some people, from postdocs to professors, who spend their whole life doing one thing - their work - and don't really have any life outside of that, and it's difficult to carry on conversations with them about anything other than work. Some just don't want to talk about anything other than work, even when we're having beer in the evening after a conference, they still talk about nothing but their research. | 1 | 1,915 | 1.923077 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvdcil | fpvcqw8 | 1,588,942,169 | 1,588,941,745 | 25 | 8 | There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a "weird thing" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc. | In my experience these kinds of academics will end up maybe in a lecturer position or possibly a professorship, but won’t end up in leadership positions, even within their field. Sure a professor is a leader of sorts (e.g. in a PI capacity), but those who gain influence above that capacity (e.g. directors, heads of departments, international recognition) usually are those who exhibit much more open-mindedness and well-roundedness. They realise the limits of their expertise and don’t try to hide it. Rather, they are open to learning from everyone. I think that’s what distinguishes a successful academic from a leader. | 1 | 424 | 3.125 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvdcil | fpv6ooe | 1,588,942,169 | 1,588,936,741 | 25 | 6 | There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a "weird thing" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc. | I see you've met my MIL. | 1 | 5,428 | 4.166667 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvda8v | fpvdcil | 1,588,942,126 | 1,588,942,169 | 5 | 25 | As a physician in training, my experience with lots of my professors was, yes. Absolutely yes. There are some exceptions but most of them are, oh god... | There is a discussion of this topic in the book *Why People Believe Weird Things* by Michael Shermer. He argued that smart people believe weird things because they are good at defending their beliefs that they came to for not-smart reasons. He defines a "weird thing" as anything not supportable by scientific evidence: young-Earth creationism, Holocaust denial, alien abductions, Bigfoot, psychics, etc. | 0 | 43 | 5 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv8w51 | fpvbf0w | 1,588,938,730 | 1,588,940,763 | 21 | 24 | "\[T\]he typical citizen drops down to a lower level of mental performance as soon as he enters the political field. He argues and analyzes in a way which he would readily recognize as infantile within the sphere of his real interests. He becomes a primitive again." \- Joseph Schumpeter, *Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy* (1942) | 100%. This is an opinion of industrial RnD but the trend probably still applies outside of it. I work at a company with lots of chemistry PhDs but unfortunately (all of these guys tend to be retirement age boomers) a good chunk don’t believe in climate change, even though our company’s entire long term business strategy is structured around climate change. | 0 | 2,033 | 1.142857 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvbf0w | fpvar8b | 1,588,940,763 | 1,588,940,254 | 24 | 13 | 100%. This is an opinion of industrial RnD but the trend probably still applies outside of it. I work at a company with lots of chemistry PhDs but unfortunately (all of these guys tend to be retirement age boomers) a good chunk don’t believe in climate change, even though our company’s entire long term business strategy is structured around climate change. | I've noticed this quite often. I admit that I am this way too. For me, I try to have hobbies and do activities unrelated to my field of study. For instance, I study earth sciences, but I've been reading some Greek mythology and philosophy lately. I think that opens the mind up to different ways of thinking. But yes, over the years, I've experienced some people, from postdocs to professors, who spend their whole life doing one thing - their work - and don't really have any life outside of that, and it's difficult to carry on conversations with them about anything other than work. Some just don't want to talk about anything other than work, even when we're having beer in the evening after a conference, they still talk about nothing but their research. | 1 | 509 | 1.846154 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv6ooe | fpvbf0w | 1,588,936,741 | 1,588,940,763 | 6 | 24 | I see you've met my MIL. | 100%. This is an opinion of industrial RnD but the trend probably still applies outside of it. I work at a company with lots of chemistry PhDs but unfortunately (all of these guys tend to be retirement age boomers) a good chunk don’t believe in climate change, even though our company’s entire long term business strategy is structured around climate change. | 0 | 4,022 | 4 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv8w51 | fpv6ooe | 1,588,938,730 | 1,588,936,741 | 21 | 6 | "\[T\]he typical citizen drops down to a lower level of mental performance as soon as he enters the political field. He argues and analyzes in a way which he would readily recognize as infantile within the sphere of his real interests. He becomes a primitive again." \- Joseph Schumpeter, *Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy* (1942) | I see you've met my MIL. | 1 | 1,989 | 3.5 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv6ooe | fpvar8b | 1,588,936,741 | 1,588,940,254 | 6 | 13 | I see you've met my MIL. | I've noticed this quite often. I admit that I am this way too. For me, I try to have hobbies and do activities unrelated to my field of study. For instance, I study earth sciences, but I've been reading some Greek mythology and philosophy lately. I think that opens the mind up to different ways of thinking. But yes, over the years, I've experienced some people, from postdocs to professors, who spend their whole life doing one thing - their work - and don't really have any life outside of that, and it's difficult to carry on conversations with them about anything other than work. Some just don't want to talk about anything other than work, even when we're having beer in the evening after a conference, they still talk about nothing but their research. | 0 | 3,513 | 2.166667 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvcqw8 | fpvwakv | 1,588,941,745 | 1,588,952,983 | 8 | 9 | In my experience these kinds of academics will end up maybe in a lecturer position or possibly a professorship, but won’t end up in leadership positions, even within their field. Sure a professor is a leader of sorts (e.g. in a PI capacity), but those who gain influence above that capacity (e.g. directors, heads of departments, international recognition) usually are those who exhibit much more open-mindedness and well-roundedness. They realise the limits of their expertise and don’t try to hide it. Rather, they are open to learning from everyone. I think that’s what distinguishes a successful academic from a leader. | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | 0 | 11,238 | 1.125 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpv6ooe | fpvwakv | 1,588,936,741 | 1,588,952,983 | 6 | 9 | I see you've met my MIL. | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | 0 | 16,242 | 1.5 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvmpr3 | fpvwakv | 1,588,947,851 | 1,588,952,983 | 5 | 9 | Yes. Beyond ignoring best practices of teaching as though there's never been any research there (as one poster pointed out), I've been in so many faculty meetings where they can't grasp the completely obvious. Then one of two things happen: a) later in the meeting someone will bring up the same point and many will say, Oh, wow, good point, but by then they've already passed the motion at hand or b) they pass some idiotic motion because they didn't think through what a few faculty had brought up, and then months down the road they realize how what they passed is detrimental to what they do. Sometimes I think that faculty fall in line with Mestrovic's idea that today people are either nice or indignant, and therefore they try to act that way (nice with colleagues, indignant against senior administration) or they try to pigeon hole other faculty into those roles. So, anyone who offers real critical views on something must be an indignant problem creator and so the nice people collude with other faculty, and with admin, to label and marginalize that critical faculty member on those grounds. Even more generally I think the lens of domain expertise links with a lens of agenda and blinds many to what they actually ask from their students: to be open to other ways of doing and thinking. | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | 0 | 5,132 | 1.8 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvwakv | fpvnovb | 1,588,952,983 | 1,588,948,384 | 9 | 5 | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | I find the opposite - where people over apply the logic of their field to the world around them. Is there a word for reverse anthropormophizing? I first heard this years ago about dog trainers basically being assholes because they treat people like a pack of dogs. It turns out that it's generally true. | 1 | 4,599 | 1.8 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvda8v | fpvwakv | 1,588,942,126 | 1,588,952,983 | 5 | 9 | As a physician in training, my experience with lots of my professors was, yes. Absolutely yes. There are some exceptions but most of them are, oh god... | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | 0 | 10,857 | 1.8 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvhbcb | fpvwakv | 1,588,944,766 | 1,588,952,983 | 5 | 9 | Yes and no. The "ability" to solve a problem is definitely transferable and is not impacted by the domain. However, the capability to recognize or ideate might not be. For example, if you are a CS PhD moving to say biotechnology or biomed. The way experiments are done is very very different. CS research is mostly program oriented and so you can scale an idea quickly and depending on how smart you are you can obtain results fairly quickly. But in biomed, if your experiments involve observing cell division then you have to wait for the cell to divide. So in my opinion, if you are a PhD grad and someone presents you with a problem from their discipline you would be able to attempt a solution. On the other hand, you might not be able to come up with an interesting problem in their domain. | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | 0 | 8,217 | 1.8 |
gfp87y | askacademia_train | 0.96 | Do you find that many people in academia have "tunnel vision" where they are excessively preoccupied with their field of study and that critical thinking doesn't transfer to other domains? It would appear at first glance that the skills of reading a technical paper and logically critiquing it would generalize to thinking rationally in other areas of life as well. However, I've increasingly seen that many professors are often able to be brilliant in their own field, while having silly opinions in real life, apparently without experiencing much cognitive dissonance (of course, this is a generalization...). The kinds of arguments that they advance for their opinions in real life would get them laughed out of the park if they were applied to their own field of scientific inquiry. I have a strong suspicion that academia self-selects for those people who are highly intelligent but have "tunnel vision" in the sense of having singular interests (or very narrow interests) and are rather conformist in their beliefs otherwise. Is it just me? What has been your experience? Have you felt the same way? (For my background: I'm a STEM masters student, and this came up quite often in a group consisting of masters and PhD students.) | fpvwakv | fpvgit6 | 1,588,952,983 | 1,588,944,270 | 9 | 3 | Certainly some people suffer this. Actually, I think an even more significant and equally common problem is when folks think their expertise transfers to other tangential fields. We often say that the least qualified are the most sure of themselves, but I've found that some of those with the most diehard opinions are actually renowned experts in allied fields. I work in epidemiology, the pandemic gives us an excellent example. You see dozens of papers on medrixv by data scientists, machine learning folks, engineering modelers, economists, and physicists, who have never touched the field of epidemic modeling*. They're legitimately excellent at modeling their own field, so it is easy to assume this knowlege transfers. But in truth some domain expertise and context is important, and it's easy to go wrong without it. * There are some who do both, have significant experience in the field, and are excellent at it. In this case I specifically refer to those who never touched the subject before March and now are trying to publish on it without any collaborators in the field. Another excellent example is John Sununu, the adviser who convinced President Bush (41) that climate change was a farce. He was a brilliant guy. A PhD from MIT, and a known engineering modeler. He felt his modeling expertise was sufficient to evaluate NASA climatologist James Hansen's models, and he decided they were bullocks. Until this point the entire focus of the debate was "*how much economic growth will we sacrifice to deal with this problem?*" But Sununu's criticism gave the deniers new life and credibility. After Sununu publicly denounced Hansen and convinced President Bush to abandon any greenhouse gas regulating treaties the US was entertaining, the entire debate shifted to "*is it a hoax or not a hoax*". We've been fighting that once since then. The entire world changed because one brilliant guy decided his admittedly impressive expertise translated to another field he didn't understand well. The relevant GRE word of the day is: ultracrepidarianism! | Yes, had a friend who was working on developing prosthetics. He was super happy that he could develop them at a percentage of the "cost" that the current manufacturer did. One minute after I shared it with a group, marketing prof asked, "did he account for how much the insurance will be on these items? Medical stuff has high insurance costs." Dude never realized it. Now, that I think about it he may have been comparing production costs (no other costs included) vs. retail price. Completely different things. But yeah, it could happen in any discipline. Also, ask them about their profession and you will find that they think they are the only ones who face a tough job market, a gig economy, stagnant salaries, more work for the same pay, etc. | 1 | 8,713 | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.