Meraki

Do you have a policy for this in your syllabus? I tell my students that claiming credit for any ideas/work/writing that is not their own is plagiarism, and that includes AI-generated work. I would address this situation the same as any other plagiarism case, based on your university's policies. For me, I would give a zero on the assignment and report it to the university so it was on their record -- but again, I made it clear throughout the term that this would happen if they turned in AI-generated work, so it wouldn't be a surprise to them at that point. You may want to consult with another faculty member or office of student integrity (or whatever office handles disciplinary issues of this type) to ensure you are following the appropriate procedures.

R and Python are probably the most robust and intuitive. They are both also open source. I would say either is a good choice to learn, and probably pretty popular among faculty if you need assistance with programming. This can vary though by department area within the business school.

It looks like a lot of you already had some interviews, but I can share some thoughts. In business schools, research experience is helpful but most students don't have any, so it isn't a big deal to most faculty. I had research experience due to my background in psychology, and I don't think it helped me all that much. They want to know that you have some interest in their research areas, but don't be concerned if they don't want to hear all the details on your research questions - most students end up changing their interests/research questions as they go through the program and learn new things, so faculty may expect this. You want to have clear reasons though for applying to their program. I hope you all hear good news soon!

An active thread for business PhD applicants, awesome! I'm a current OB PhD student. Good luck to everyone!

This is the best advice. And do it early in your career, since publications take quite a bit of time. Not all projects will make it that far, so you can't count on a publication for each one you embark on. Having a pipeline is important, too. You might not have as many publications, but if you have a few in R&R status (especially a few rounds in, if your journals have the same process as mine), some in manuscript prep status or in data collection status, you clearly are on the right track to maintaining your productivity in the eyes of potential employers.

Do you work in academia or did you go into industry? Keep in mind that if they see you published without them, and feel that they should have been on the paper, this could permanently burn that bridge. So if you need recommendations or anything else from them later down the road, you won't likely get it. Also, if they have contributed anything - or feel like they contributed something - and they see they're not on the paper, they could choose to notify the journal of an unethical authorship practice. In short, this could get sticky. If you take their name off, be absolutely certain they made no significant (i.e., authorship-worthy) contribution to the paper. I doubt it'd go that far, but if the person is really that awful, you never know.

In your first semester, I would worry most about maintaining the minimum required GPA for funding and to stay off probation or getting dismissed (this is often a 3.0). If you're a PhD student heading toward tenure-track professor positions, research productivity (and teaching evals, recommendations, etc.) will usually be much more important down the road. Perhaps Fellowships may have a GPA range, but you should be able to look into that now by searching for a few and seeing what their requirements are. In my program, a B- is considered failing without the professor technically failing you, although it can tank your GPA below the minimum threshold. In other words, getting a C in any one class gets you probation in my program regardless of overall GPA, whereas a B- does not, but if it drags your GPA below 3.0 because your other grades aren't high enough, you're on probation anyway. Your program should have a handbook that details this for you.

Are you first author on these papers, assuming you're in a field that uses author order as a signal of contribution? If so, and since you've graduated, it is likely your call on when a paper is ready to submit to a journal. I say likely, because the specifics of your field may differ a bit from mine. But unless they are the lead investigator, I see no reason to expect them to follow through if no progress was made in 3 years, so communicating a decision to them may be best. However, I wouldn't submit anything to a journal that hasn't received feedback in some form, such as through a presentation, either. They do have a point about making a paper the best it can be to improve its chances of publication.

Every advisor/program is different, but try to think of it this way: There are typically many qualified applicants in any given admissions cycle. The department/advisor does their best to whittle down the list of potential admits based on scores, experience, and research interests. Sometimes, there is a seemingly perfect match - a potential student wanting to do exactly the type of research the advisor does/wants to start doing, but I'd say this is often not the case. The "best" candidate may be only marginally "more qualified" than the second and third choice. Sometimes, as Psygeek said, there's really no difference and it's essentially a coin flip. So it's unlikely that your advisor had an emotional attachment to the idea of working with their first choice student and are now disappointed they have you. Rather, they're probably not bothered either way as long as you are productive and progressing as expected. Sometimes, the second or third choices end up doing better than the first choice, as grades and experience only tells you so much about a person. Ambition, creativity, and the sort are more important once you're in.

Typically readers will want to know enough about your methods to potentially do a replication, if desired. Failure to disclose enough about the methods could lead to a rejection if you are submitting it to a journal, or at least a revision requesting the missing information. Not stating how something was done can also raise some eyebrows as to the validity of the method and subsequent results if the method and/or author is unfamiliar. However, if this is a relatively common method in your field - and you personally just don't happen to know how it's done - you might get away with being more broad, as readers will know what you're referring to or be able to find other sources to inform them. In the latter case, I've seen papers say something like, "The transformation was conducted by a member of the research team as suggested/conducted by Author et al. (2016)." They don't go into details themselves, but rather point the reader to another paper if they care to know the details. However, in order to write it up that way, you still need some idea of what was done and who might have established the method or used it in another paper. Can you reach out to the cooperator yourself and ask if they have a few minutes to discuss the method?

It's typical to have more than one hypothesis in this type of research. It would be difficult, I think, to write a good paper with just one predictor and one outcome variable. Perhaps you could add a mediator and/or moderator to make the study a bit more interesting. As it stands, the hypothesis isn't all that surprising, and I wonder what the contribution might be to the literature. (I do realize this is an undergraduate thesis and not likely aiming for an A-publication, but I think trying to add one or two more hypotheses would strengthen the final product if a grade is involved). Aha - the disenfranchised grief might serve as a moderator depending on the story you tell. You might also want to consider other outcome variables, such as how grief severity might lead to other aspects of a person's wellbeing. In that case, grief severity would become a mediator. You can do a simple regression analysis for this type of relationship. As for the research question, think about what your motivation is for doing this kind of research. Why is it important to do this kind of research - how does it help people experiencing the loss of a pet, and/or how does it help advance research in this area? Your research question should be interesting and address a gap in the research that hasn't been filled. I don't think your original research question was bad, it just needs a little focus. Your subquestions seem to be addressing a few different things and gets messy, but stepping back and trying to draw a clearer path, as you seem to be doing, will help. Feel free to message me if you'd like to discuss further.

If its run by a management agency, you should be able to search online for reviews from prior tenants. I would be more wary submitting a deposit if its just some random person renting out an apartment in a home they own. Are you looking for your own place or a room with roommates? That will make a difference in what you might be able to do to reduce risk. Does the school offer housing to grad students? Many students out of the area may start off there and then move out after the first year (if this is a PhD program. It's not really worth the hassle of moving if it's a shorter program). Being that it's summer, it could be that a lot of students took vacation or are less productive and not keeping up with their email. Depending how long it's been since you reached out to your peers, I wouldn't write it off as empty promises just yet.

I do not know much about emerging technologies research to provide suggestions. However, trying to find research articles that you find interesting and seeing where the authors are from is probably the best thing you can do. You might also consider that some business schools house the economics department at their university, so you can reap some of the business school benefits while staying in the economics field if you like. I'm not sure how common this is, but it might be something to look into. After doing a quick search on Google Scholar, are the below articles the type of research you might be interested in? The PDFs should be available on Scholar. I'm trying to get a better idea of what you're interested in, since you mentioned OB, which is much more micro-level social psychology work. The following articles would stem more from a strategic management specialization, which relates more closely to economics and sociology. If you're interested in either of those fields, strategy is a better fit and would be housed in the management department at schools that offer that specialization. Alva Taylor & Constance Helfat (Dartmouth College). 2009. Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change Wanda Orlikowski (MIT). 2000. Using Technology and Constituting Structures I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this, but I'll supply some thoughts. Business schools tend to pay much higher stipends than other fields. You will also pretty much need to do a post-doc in psych and some other related fields to get a placement, and even then, the job market is much more fierce in those areas. You can get tenure-track placements in business schools without a post-doc, although students may still choose to do them for various reasons. Although the job market is still highly competitive in business, it is healthier than many other fields if you are able to relocate for a job. As for the specific topic area, I mentioned strategic management may be being a good fit with all of the aforementioned benefits. Psychology (social, IO psych) is quite different from how you'd study this topic in economics and even sociology, so I think you need to figure out which perspective is most appealing to you. This may vary by program, but in general, you have more options to work with different people. In psychology, for example, you are typically funded by a PI's research grant, and so you need to work for them and their funded project areas, reducing your autonomy. However, business schools are pretty well funded through their programs, so you're not usually tied to a single PI. This allows you to work with more people and find a better fit. That said, there needs to be *some* overlap of interests in order to get a PI interested in advising your work, and you'll still be working on their projects to gain experience, so choosing a program where no one is doing related work may not be a good fit for you.

This could be highly program specific. In mine, we do not receive a separate reading list or really have any way of preparing for exams other than to be organized with past notes and ideally have a reference software. But we aren't asked about specific topics or papers we've read in the past. We're meant to apply our critical thinking to critique new papers given at the start of the exam week and then create our own theoretical relationships. It's the sort of thing where you should know what you're doing by now and if not, you're screwed. But I know other fields or even programs in my same field that do things quite differently. OP's program kinda sounds like mine for qualifying exams, although it's definitely something to ask other students about early and often, and especially ask students a year ahead of you when they're fresh from completing their own exams. It's amazing how quickly we put that stuff behind us and forget the details of the experience.

It sounds like you're weighing reviewer/editor comments more heavily than your advisor's if you would rethink the logic only after hearing their comments, but not after hearing your advisor's comments. I would be careful having that discussion, as that suggests you can't learn as much from your advisor or that you don't trust his judgment. Also, if your paper is rejected, you can't always resubmit it to the same journal unless there are substantial changes - though this may differ by field/journal. That's why it isn't wise to "test" things or use reviewers as tie-breakers as it may close doors for a particular project. It's great to have confidence in your logic and abilities, but you also want to keep an open mind so you don't miss out on opportunities. At this point, your advisor will have much more experience with what journals are looking for. Now, you asked if you shouldn't feel this way. I think it's fine to question the process and we all feel unmotivated at some point (or many points) during our programs, so it's completely normal. But there are certain expectations we have to learn if we want to build good relationships and be successful. This is my least favorite part of the process - learning the politics - but this can be very important to some advisors, departments, and fields. Take each experience as a lesson learned even if it doesn't go your way, and you'll be fine. You will gain freedom in your projects as you progress through the program, and you may feel grateful for those early guardrails when you look at your past work.

I agree with what @TwirlingBlades suggests. I would like to state though that there are two types of literature reviews you might be referencing. First, there is a paper that in itself is a review of the literature and has no empirical study. It serves to identity either all research on a given topic (a systematic literature review), or the most significant studies relating to a given topic. These kinds of papers are meant to compare and contrast various findings on a topic, identify the strengths and the limitations of this research, and identify gaps that still need to be explored in future research. These are true literature reviews, but they take that extra step to offer a thoughtful critique of the review. For this kind of review, I suggest finding a review paper in your field in a top journal and study it. They usually have "A Review of..." or something similar in the title. Dissect each paragraph and note what it contributes to the overall goal of the paper. The paper's purpose is usually clearly stated early in the introduction, and summarized in the discussion. After reading a few, you should start to see themes in what the authors are trying to accomplish, even if the reviews are on different topics. Second, there is the literature review section of an empirical paper. This usually follows the introduction and leads up to the hypothesis development section, although it isn't always called the "literature review" - it could be the "theoretical background" or something similar. This isn't really a review the way I discussed above. Rather, this section identifies research on your topic that is directly related to your research question, which gives the reader an understanding of why the topic is important, where the gaps are that you hope to fill with your research, and connects to your hypotheses in a clear and convincing way. Again, I suggest looking at a few empirical papers and dissecting the lit review/theory sections. The best way to learn how to write a lit review is to practice writing them and get feedback from faculty and more experienced peers. It takes time to get a feel for it, and it gets easier as you gain expertise on a topic and know what you want to say (and can easily cite your point) without having to go out and read through a bunch of articles to find a relevant point. It's also important to be very organized, as this will help you work efficiently. I think there's a thread on this forum if you search for literature reviews where people shared their processes; someone suggested a Google Docs form, others use Excel spreadsheets, others use programs like Mendeley or EndNote, which can be super efficient when citing sources. The other bit of advice I have is learning how to "read" books and articles without actually reading everything, or even most of it. Everyone has different methods, but I suggest looking at some videos or articles on how to read journals articles and books. Some people just skim abstracts to see if an article is relevant; others will skip the theory section and just look briefly at the methods and then the results. Others only read the intro and discussion. It depends on what you're looking for, and again, you'll get better at this with time. Once you've identified articles that are relevant to your paper, you can sort them by topic, method, or whatever category you'd like and then dig in a little deeper. This is separate from my suggestions above to dissect literature reviews; in that suggestion, I recommend reading line-by-line through at least a few papers to note patterns, whereas doing an actual literature review for your own paper should involve the latter suggestion for skimming and sorting. I'm not entirely sure I understand what you mean by irregularities. Do you mean that you can't always find articles to support what you want to say? Sometimes you may need to make logical arguments using relevant studies and then draw your own conclusions, perhaps using an example to illustrate a point that isn't directly supported by a research study. I'm not sure if that is what you meant or if that helps. It's true that we may knock out three 20-page papers per semester, but it's definitely not easy. I think a lot of students feel the way you do in the beginning, and have no idea if those three 20-page papers are any good. When you look back on your early work a few years later, you'll definitely think they weren't good ? But it is a learning process, and you get better through practice. It might begin as imitation, but at some point things will "click" and you'll realize the value of doing things a certain way, so that it becomes strategic rather than imitation. Again, this comes with time and practice. There really is no quick and easy way to learn to write literature reviews. I haven't seen any good books or articles on it that go beyond what is discussed in this thread. In my program, we're mostly taught to evaluate others' works and discuss why they did things, rather than just be told why. You'll learn from your peers as well as your faculty. Don't feel like you're behind the ball because you don't understand the lit review right now. Every first-year student I've known has had these exact same concerns, and one day they just start to get it. Seek out as much feedback as you can on your work and join in class discussions, and you will be fine.

I am in a different, but related field. I think it makes perfect sense to want to learn marketable research skills, and although neuropsychology is still young, interest in this area will only grow over the next decade. I wouldn't stress that you haven't learned these skills in your first year though, but they should be on your radar in coming years as you progress in your program. Right now your advisor may just be concerned with you having a strength in traditional methods before developing more complex skills. If your pilot experiments aren't working, can you identify reasons why? If the reasons are not clear and you don't have a plan for what to do next, then I would discuss this concern with your advisor. If you have an idea why they aren't working and your next step is already planned, that would require a different approach to the conversation with your advisor, since you'd be abandoning something that there is hope for. I think if you are going to speak with your advisor about a different project, you should first know if that is permitted or discouraged in your program or by your advisor. I suggest you speak with students further along in the program who may have been in this situation before and have insights into these norms. If you find that this is not discouraged, you should be prepared to offer your advisor a new, well-thought-out idea (or two) and reasons why this new venture would be fruitful. Hopefully by now you have a better idea of where your advisor's interests and priorities lie, so you can develop ideas she'd be most likely to support. You should also have reasons why your current project is worth abandoning, without suggesting that it's not complex enough. Behavioral studies still publish, and depending on your advisor's expertise, you don't want to imply their work isn't valuable if that's what they've made a name for themself doing. I would therefore recommend focusing more on selling the value of the project than the methods you'd like to learn.

In response to some of the above posts, I agree that it's important to have adequate social support. However, I hope to reemphasize a previous point given the continuing conversation. When you are publicly sharing a significant number of details about you, your work, and your specific situations to the point where another person could identify you, you are putting yourself at risk professionally. You're no longer talking to a bunch of strangers on the Internet. One of our current (or future) faculty or peers might be reading our posts, recognize us, and form an opinion of us that affects our relationships with them. That is why I will emphasize that a person does not need to agree with the feedback they receive to be appreciative (respectful, professional) of it. I think this is what some other posters have been touching on as well. It is worth considering how we might feel if we look back on our own messages a year or two down the road. What impression did we make? Choosing the right outlet for support is important. Being vulnerable online is risky. But the only thing we can ever really control is how we react to the things that happen in our lives. Actions speak louder than words, and we will be judged by them. I think the reason others have jumped onto the "dog pile" was because their message was outright rejected, which struck me (and others) as a concern for OP's success. I don't think I've seen anyone here wish the worst for her. I do think it crossed a line when someone stated she should not pursue a PhD, or that she won't be successful. Her tenacity is a quality that will serve her well if she continues on an academic path. But I think all of our remarks were made in effort to help her identify potential solutions to help her situation. None of us know the root of the problem, of course; we merely serve as guides to be taken "with a grain of salt," as someone else suggested. So feel free to ignore the advice, or acknowledge and then ignore it, or clarify a point relating to it. But when you show a blatant lack of appreciation, you can't expect further assistance from people who took time out of their days to offer insights. I will also note that OP did not state that the failing mark was out of jealousy (her friends or family stated that), but to quote yet another poster, "what is the point" of discussing it beyond those friends and family? It is not a constructive use of one's time to discuss it with an advisor, even if you have that kind of relationship, and to further spend time writing about it online. Again, be choosy about the details you share and in what context you share them. I don't think many of us misunderstood OP's original explanation about these conversations, although we were accused of such. I just wanted to air that out briefly. One last point to the OP - asking in other threads about how to publish a book and how to turn coursework papers into publishable articles, and then stating in this thread that you "know how the publication system works" are at odd with one another. I think it's awesome that you want to publish a book and have submitted manuscripts to journals, but the publication process can be highly political and the points I discussed above and previously are relevant to navigating that process. It can takes years to hone your skills, and although you are on that path, it is a bit naive to assume that you know how it works and can't benefit from another's insights and experience.

I will also state that some of us have been where you are (you are not facing a unique situation), and are passing on feedback based not only on what helped us, but what students ahead of us passed on to us. This is the "social support" that I receive as a PhD student from my peers. Hopefully you will be so lucky as to receive similar when you move past all this and onto your PhD studies.

I completely agree with these posts. When you post as much detail as you have, you are not only inviting many varied opinions on your situation, but you are putting yourself out there to be easily identifiable by potential colleagues and you have to consider how you are being perceived. I don't think any of these types of responses were rude, but were stated as kindly as can be expected with the intention of helping you. No one here, including you, knows what the reviewer's true reason was for failing your thesis. But from what you shared, she was professional about it and you seem to have a clear idea of what you need to do to improve your work. Not all reviewers are this professional. If you submit your work for publication, it is (unfortunately) not uncommon to receive harsh and unhelpful -even unprofessional - comments from reviewers at even top quality journals. I would take this as an experience to help you prepare for the difficult publication process in the future. There is nothing wrong with needing to vent, but you need to choose appropriate outlets for certain content and be aware of what you're putting out into the public. Say what you want with friends, and if you have that sort of relationship with your advisor, great. But you can't expect everyone on the Internet to respond in kind. Saying, "she must be jealous; she wasn't fair; I'm so sorry for you" might make you feel good in the short term, but in the long term, it is completely unhelpful even if it is true. Suggesting that you take her words as constructive criticism to improve your work, because maybe it isn't meeting standards, helps you to build a professional attitude toward this kind of experience that you WILL continue to experience on the PhD journey and beyond. Even highly-published experts in your field deal with these types of situations with reviewers on a regular basis. That all being said, my impression from your posts is that you're checking off boxes to please the reviewer without really seeing how these points are making you a better writer, researcher, etc. Faculty have their own quirks and preferences, but some of these points may be things you'll need to keep in mind for future papers. I completely understand the pressure you are under, and how hard it is to separate your feelings so you can see it all clearly, but taking a few days away to attend a conference might be exactly what you need. The closer you get to your work, the harder it is to see it clearly. And peer-reviewed work is always going to require this process; you work for months on a paper, submit it to a journal, and if you're lucky you get a revise & resubmit; and then another revise & resubmit, and just maybe, a conditional acceptance after many rounds of editing and catering to reviewer concerns. And the paper usually turns out much, much better than what the authors initially thought was good. That all being said, you do not need to agree with feedback to be respectful of it. People are spending their time reading your posts and responding. If you do not appreciate this, and demonstrate such a sentiment in your responses, then you will receiver fewer, and perhaps less helpful, responses in the future.

I'm really sorry to hear about the situation. I will say that I am impressed with how you've already pulled together a plan and are not being too hard on yourself. It is unfortunate that you did not have the guidance you needed. It's great that you have a good relationship with your advisor, but I think it was wise to ask about having another set of eyes on your work. You have clear feedback and it seems you have good odds at pulling through. I wish you the best of luck.

I'd like to add that grades are NOT indicative of your ability to succeed as a researcher. I've seen students struggle through coursework only to end up published sooner and with better job offers than their 4.0 peers. I also struggled my first year and have made huge strides since. You need your grades to be good enough to be in good standing (I mean objective standing where you're not on academic probation), but I wouldn't spend loads more time shooting for the 4.0 or highest ranking if you could instead put that time toward improving your research skills and making headway on your projects. I also find it really odd that your professor ranks students. I've not heard of this before and like I said, ranking based on grades is not indicative of your success in the program or potential career success. As for the advising situation; I seem to hear similar concerns quite often. I think most students feel ill-prepared, even if they haven't changed fields, and don't feel like they're getting enough direction. It may help to know you're not alone and that some of these feelings are normal and will pass with time and experience. I agree that the guitar-playing is pretty disrespectful, unless he struggles with some kind of attention-deficit or anxiety and needs it to stay focused (I would consider whether he acts like that with everyone or if it's just you). What I recommend is speaking with other students who have worked with him to get a better idea of what he expects and how you can better approach a project you don't know a lot about. If you have a good peer group that is not super competitive, they can be a great source of support and learning. I would ignore his comment about hand-holding students since you don't know what was meant by it and it doesn't seem like he's given you negative performance feedback at this point. I agree with seeing a school counselor to help you work through your situation and find effective coping strategies. If changing advisors is an option, you might want to explore that - but be sure to do your research first, as you could end up in the same (or worse) situation with another advisor. Talk to your peers, observe the faculty's interaction with students if you can, and decide how much of a personality vs. research fit you need to be successful.

I would be concerned about being the first author on a paper I don't fully support or can't properly explain. The order of authorship and what it means can vary by field (I am in the social sciences), but it sounds like you're feeling the same way. In my field, the first author should be the one who made the greatest contribution to the study or paper, and is typically the point of contact if anyone has questions or comments about the paper once it's published. I would be honest about your hesitation to take the lead on something you don't understand. Considering you're "brand new to academia," I wouldn't push about the method being wrong until you've learned more and have the knowledge and tact to effectively argue against it. I would frame the discussion around your lack of understanding, and either ask how/where you can learn more or ask if he or another co-author could take the lead. I don't think "aiming high" or "setting the scope" has anything to do with using an inappropriate method for a study. I mean, I sometimes see papers in lower tier journals with poor methods, small samples, poor analytic technique; it's possible that he's shooting for low hanging fruit to publish things quickly to get tenure. However, if a method is simply wrong, then aiming for lower tier journals isn't really going to help. But he's published using this method before, which makes me think there's something to it, even if it's not the best method for your study's purpose. I would expect that just citing his previous paper isn't enough to support the use of the method if it's unconventional, but again, reviewers may be less concerned about this at lower tier journals if some other aspects of the paper are compelling. I recommend trying to learn more about the method, starting with looking at how he frames it in his previous paper and if he cites any other relevant papers you can learn from.

I have a few thoughts. First, I think it's an awesome bucket list goal, and publishing a book is on mine as well. I wonder how motivated other academics will be to put time into a less academic project such as this. I think the book idea is great, and not all academics only write academic books, but it might be a reason you didn't get an eager response from your advisor (though she could certainly just be busy). My second thought is that you may want to consider what you can contribute at this time. If you have a coauthor who can add more hands on perspective for experienced readers, then great. But if you can't accomplish this, do you want to look back on your first or only book and realize it wasn't as impactful as you wish it had been? If you can't get a coauthor and don't believe you can make a meaningful contribution right now, it may be worth holding on to and revisiting as a future project.

You will want to introduce yourself and your purpose, but you will also want to emphasize what you have to offer the company in exchange for their time, such as a summary of findings. I always offer to discuss their unique interests and needs and then will try to include variables they are interested in in the study to further add value for them. The initial contact should be brief - they will probably only spend a few seconds glancing over it. And you will not hear back from most of the companies you contact, so prepare to contact many. Reaching out to smaller organizations (not massive corporations) may yield better response rates.