lewin

I'm confused about the difference. Developmental, social, neuroscience, clinical -- any area of psychology, really, can be "experimental". ...though the cognitive psychologists in my department would like to think they have the market cornered on rigorous experiments

^^ That's the biggest challenge for some. It's easy to spend the day on the internet or chatting with other grad students. The way I attempted to do it was treat 9-5 (ish) as my job to do research and some TA work, the evenings and weekends were for reading, coursework, and marking.

You have a scholarship that specifically pays application fees? That's intriguing. Though also consider the time involved; it's better to customize 10 great applications than half-ass 25. (If you have time and money to do 25 great ones, more power to you.) My own strategy was 3 dream schools, 5 realistic ones I'd still love to attend, and 3 that I'd attend but weren't great fits.

I will spell it out: The chick fil a supporters are bigots. Lots of smart people are gay and don't want to live where their neighbours are actively trying to take away their rights. Those people will leave and move to tolerant places. And there are other, non-gay smart people who won't want to live surrounded by bigots either, so they'll stay away too. And a competition that produces 19 awards to men and none to women is plainly sexist (see "disparate impact"). Even the minister in charge admitted things had gone wrong somewhere.

Haha, are you serious? I happen to research discrimination, so I have the home field advantage here. I could provide a hundred research citations that sexism still occurs in academia but two easy examples are: At my university last year they hired about 70 new faculty and at least 65 were men. Second, recently the Canadian government initiated a new academic research chair program. Nineteen research grants, every single one went to men. I didn't say that engineering etc were sexist because they're male dominated. I said they're male dominated and more sexist, on average. Though a causal connection seems likely. And my "dig" at (some parts of) the U.S. was not supposed to be subtle. Not at progressive Americans, but at the ones attending chick fil a appreciation day, certainly.

I'm a little incredulous at anyone who is minimizing the OP's claims because he won't name is specific department. What difference does it make? Engineering, physics, computer science, mathematics -- these are all male-dominated and also (relative to other fields) more sexist; they're probably more homophobic too. If "every field" is receptive to gay people where do all the homophobes come from?!

Oh yes, you're right. The paragraph is ambiguous; my interpretation had been the former (while holding the award). But the latter makes more sense.

"To receive the balance of the award, you must have completed a minimum of one full-time term of studies at the master's level." Maybe they will let you be an MA student for the fall term and start as a PhD in January.

Once you have your PhD, come to Canada! We have lots of incentives to attract educated workers and gay rights are enshrined in law and in social norms. Shitty places that oppress other people can reap what they sow and become intellectual backwaters. Or stay and try and change the culture: Knowing somebody who is gay is the biggest thing that can change attitudes. (See "the contact hypothesis".) And I have to say, I'm astounded that somebody could make a comment like that in an official meeting and people would laugh. I bet (hope) many people were privately horrified.

"Am I being underpaid?" Only to the extent that the entire academic system relies on a cheap labour force of graduate students barely a step above indentured servitude.

hashslinger has good advice and, in the grand scheme of things, these mistakes are minor. Forget about it and move on. That said, resolve to pay attention to details in the future. Undergrads ask inane questions but you don't want to be categorized with them; you're different now. There are people in my program with a reputation for being scatterbrained ("Oh, there's a talk today?" "When's that meeting again?") and the rest of us roll our eyes at them. They are not the people we go to when we need something important done. Get a calendar and read emails carefully. tldr: Forget the past, do better from now on.

There is nothing formal set up, but in my program students are encouraged to work with multiple faculty members and are often admitted under two co-supervisors.

^^ Oh yes, sorry. I was assuming that the OP meant the chance of getting a job at a business school relative to a psych department. You're right in that the job market for professors is shite all over.

I'm my advisor's third student and it has been great. He is motivated to publish and current on the field.

I would avoid. I noticed typos in the fine print (e.g., "American Psychology Association"). I think you're probably fine with a relatively recent introductory text book and, if you want more, a guide from Princeton or Kaplan. They're the two standard prep companies.

^^^^a thousand times this. Mostly the LOR.

I think the above make great points and more assertive confrontation might be a good idea. That's a judgement call. But for me, myself, I would leave it be. From my reading you had the assumption of first-authorship but this was never made explicit (right?) and writing does not necessarily mean first authorship, though it usually does. I would assume that my advisor and I both made assumptions, regret it, and be more explicit next time.

Did you stop reading my post halfway through, before I said: "If something about your circumstances changed between applying and now, then I take this back and apologize for assuming." ? But if it's a matter of everyday finances then I stand by what I said. Part of being responsible enough to complete a PhD is planning ahead and being conscientious. That doesn't necessarily mean saving money, but it could mean having external scholarships or loans arranged in advance. I would say the same thing about any other foreseeable circumstances (e.g., "I applied to graduate school but my girlfriend/boyfriend has a year of undergraduate left so I decided to defer."). It suggests the candidate is unprepared or disorganized. ETA: And much of this forum is about informing people about the unanticipated effects of their actions so I thought it worth mentioning in case the OP didn't hadn't fully thought through that asking to defer isn't necessarily a consequence-free decision.

By the way, I want to point out that you're probably asking to defer, not telling them you'll defer. I don't know anything about your program but at my university if somebody wanted to defer we'd just accept somebody else and they'd have to chance it again next year. And not to be a jerk, but it doesn't reflect well that your financial situation wasn't in order before applying. I knew I couldn't self-fund my graduate studies so I only applied at places that guaranteed full funding, to avoid situations like this. As TakeruK pointed out, the admissions process is a lot of wasted effort if you already know you're not attending. (If something about your circumstances changed between applying and now, then I take this back and apologize for assuming.)

OB > sociology. Sociology might be easier to get into now, but it will be harder to get a job later, which is more important.

Wow! 1. Ten weeks sounds like an astoundingly short time to prep studies and collect data. Was that always the plan? Presumably your internship is 10 weeks but the grant is longer, right? 2. It's not uncommon for PI's to rely on PhD students for the day-to-day managing of research assistants. The grad student leaving is unfortunate but while the PI might seem to be "missing in action" (from your perspective) she might really be working on other, just as important things. 3. Of course the PI wants to continue collecting data! She's not a 10 week intern. Your wording is slightly ambiguous, but are you saying that YOU don't want to continue with the project, or that you think it should be abandoned altogether? If it's the latter, that she shouldn't continue with the project, you'll look incredibly bizarre if you tell her that because interns don't "tell" PI's anything, really. If it's the former, disregard. In sum, if you don't want to burn a lot of bridges, I think you need to adjust your expectations about your role in this project, how labs operate (especially in the summer), and your attitude.

I feel like telling off your advisor in that way is a quick trip to lost opportunities. It's a crappy power imbalance but that's how it goes. I do agree that (diplomatic) clarity is important for future projects.

Thanks for the update! And I want to compliment your quick thinking in saying, "Oh, like a PI on the lab he supervises?" That was a good hint on your part and it's too bad he didn't take that opportunity to switch things back. From your transcript it looks like you pushed as hard as you could without it getting weird. Though his comment, "In some fields..." is a bit disingenuous. Other fields don't matter; only yours does. And in my field people only make the "last = main contributor" assumption when the last author is very clearly senior. Grad students don't get that courtesy. I have a major paper where another grad student and I are first and second author, our advisor is third. He joked, "I don't mind being last, they'll assume it was my idea anyway." In humour, truth. And being vague about changing it is squirrely too. He should grow a spine and own up to his decisions. (Though it is easy to flip track changes off temporarily so it's not impossible that the other prof did it.) In the future it might be a good idea to (casually) get important things written down in an email. ("I just want to confirm what we talked about today in our meeting....") ETA: "They don't look at authorship- they just look at research work. They won't care that you're not first author." In my field this would be blatantly false.

Wow, 25 programs! Is that typical nowadays!? Apparently five years post-applications I am now out of touch.

The arrangement where you write but are not lead author isn't completely uncommon but, as others have mentioned, in retrospect there should have been a frank discussion at the outset so you could make an informed decision. For example, my advisor has approached grad students to say, "I have these data but no time to write them up. Do you want to write the paper and be second author?" You could consider letting this paper go but saying to your advisor, "I really like these ideas and enjoyed writing them up. Is there a possibility that I could have more direct involvement with the followup studies and take the lead on phase two of the project? [insert awesome study ideas here] " ETA: Also, while this situation stinks because of the lack of transparency, it's not necessarily out of line for your advisor to be first author. Authorship isn't just determined by the writing, but also by providing ideas, strategy, study design, data analysis, etc....