Anita Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 So I got into the *perfect* program. Top 10, perfect advisor interest match, great city, etc. Needless to say, I was psyched...until I visited. Turns out this advisor has a history of being a nightmare (apologies for the weird unisex pronouns - can't risk being identified here). Their lab had a 75% attrition rate, their former students graduated with no pubs because they didn't bother to read their papers and refused to let the students submit papers themselves (many have left academia because they couldn't find jobs), they seem to enjoy overworking and verbally abusing their students, and various other horror stories. After spending a total of around 30 hours interviewing 7 of their current and former students, with various backgrounds and degrees of academic success, who all testified to their advisor's sadism, I've been reduced to a nervous wreck. By April 15, I have to say yes or no. I'm seriously considering forgoing the acceptance, getting an RA job (or just taking the year off if I can't find any) and applying again next year. Now, my dear GC'ers, my question is, how common is this type of advisor? Will I have a better chance of avoiding them by applying again? What are the signs I should look for before applying? All I want is someone who doesn't hold up my publishing productivity, and doesn't terrify their students. Before suggestions crop up for essentially making the best of a bad situation, no, I can't switch advisors without abandoning my research interest; and no, no conclusive strategy has ever been found for making this person more productive/agreeable. The only advice that her students agreed on was "have thick skin". Thanks GC; I trust y'all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewin Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 In my own experience the relationship with one's advisor is incredibly important, maybe the most predictor of success in graduate school. If you had other acceptances the decision would be much easier: drop this person and choose another school. That being said, is it better to take a chance with this person than be an RA for another year? Hard to say. You might arrive and mesh with this person, or succeed in spite of him/her. If somebody is known to be difficult, that person's students get extra credit for surviving. Another thing to consider is that politically it's bad to reject a school in this way (i.e., instead of rejecting so you can attend somewhere else). They will probably wonder why you applied in the first place if you were going to end up rejecting them. Academics is a small world. This isn't a reason in itself to go, but something to be aware of. I would talk to a trusted faculty member (honours advisor?) rather than us on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialpsychg Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 In my own experience the relationship with one's advisor is incredibly important, maybe the most predictor of success in graduate school. If you had other acceptances the decision would be much easier: drop this person and choose another school. That being said, is it better to take a chance with this person than be an RA for another year? Hard to say. You might arrive and mesh with this person, or succeed in spite of him/her. If somebody is known to be difficult, that person's students get extra credit for surviving. Another thing to consider is that politically it's bad to reject a school in this way (i.e., instead of rejecting so you can attend somewhere else). They will probably wonder why you applied in the first place if you were going to end up rejecting them. Academics is a small world. This isn't a reason in itself to go, but something to be aware of. I would talk to a trusted faculty member (honours advisor?) rather than us on this board. Agreed. Although intuitively I don't think rejecting is too bad if you're not re-applying next year. Try to be purposely vague, and hope the person doesn't inquire or dig too deeply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eucalyptus Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 So I got into the *perfect* program. Top 10, perfect advisor interest match, great city, etc. Needless to say, I was psyched...until I visited. Turns out this advisor has a history of being a nightmare (apologies for the weird unisex pronouns - can't risk being identified here). Their lab had a 75% attrition rate, their former students graduated with no pubs because they didn't bother to read their papers and refused to let the students submit papers themselves (many have left academia because they couldn't find jobs), they seem to enjoy overworking and verbally abusing their students, and various other horror stories. After spending a total of around 30 hours interviewing 7 of their current and former students, with various backgrounds and degrees of academic success, who all testified to their advisor's sadism, I've been reduced to a nervous wreck. By April 15, I have to say yes or no. I'm seriously considering forgoing the acceptance, getting an RA job (or just taking the year off if I can't find any) and applying again next year. Now, my dear GC'ers, my question is, how common is this type of advisor? Will I have a better chance of avoiding them by applying again? What are the signs I should look for before applying? All I want is someone who doesn't hold up my publishing productivity, and doesn't terrify their students. Before suggestions crop up for essentially making the best of a bad situation, no, I can't switch advisors without abandoning my research interest; and no, no conclusive strategy has ever been found for making this person more productive/agreeable. The only advice that her students agreed on was "have thick skin". Thanks GC; I trust y'all I wouldn't go if I were you. Your relationship with your advisor is too important; if your advisor is evil, your chances of dropping out are going to be really high. Why put yourself through that? Five years is way too long to be miserable, and plus if this advisor makes it hard to publish, you're potentially sacrificing the rest of your career. And if this prof acts the same way towards their colleagues as to their students, their LORs won't mean as much and you won't be able to build off their network of other academics. Evil/sadistic advisors don't seem to be all that common in psych; most often, it's just personality mismatches that cause people to switch advisors, not professors who are outright impossible to work with. Applying again next year definitely gives you a good chance of avoiding a crazy advisor! Make sure to take a look at their students' CVs before you apply - they should look like they're progressing and doing exciting things. You've already shown that you can get into a great program, and with another year of experience you're only going to be more desirable. Finally, I know you said that you won't be able to switch advisors without giving up your research interests, but I've seen a number of cases where people have switched advisors without switching projects; a lot of profs are willing to accommodate a really surprisingly wide array of research projects, especially for a student who's having issues with their advisor. If you haven't already, I'd at least talk to a couple of grad students and see if there are any of those "umbrella" profs around in the department (they're usually older profs with wide interests). Good luck! Kinkster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Social Psyc Researcher Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 So Anita, Is this based on your experience and the reviews of others? You talked a lot about how other students felt about the advisor but I didn't see you mention your experience with this person. Did you meet them? How did you feel about them? Obviously it is cause for concern that so many others have had difficulties with this advisor, but how did you feel when you met them? More than once i have heard that someone is awful from other people (and while I may have been able to see where the others were coming from) did not share the negative sentiment once I met the person. With that said I would be very hesitant to take the position, especially if you have met them and you still feel the same reservations. I interviewed with one POI and felt awkward and belittled in our conversations (although they said they liked me and showed continued interest in me), it doesn't sound nearly as pervasive as what you are describing but I was kind of hoping I would not get an offer because I didn't think this would be an ideal person for me to work with. As some other posters said, your compatibility with your research advisor can make or break your research career. So while one POI may have overlapping research interests, tons of publications, etc. they may not be as helpful for your research career as a smaller name, lesser know university, etc. if you two have compatible personalities, working styles, etc. Lastly, I am not sure what stigma would be worse... rejecting your only offer or trying to switch to a different program once you have already started. I would think that once you are in you are in and it would be very hard to switch or reapply to another university. Good luck! Kinkster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsychPhD Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 A few thoughts from newly minted PhD: 1. Not accepting an offer for grad school is not a big deal. Yes, academia is a small world, but grad students (or in your case, future grad students) overestimate their importance in that world. If this were a job offer and you had already made a name for yourself with multiple top-level publications and you snubbed a department there *might* be some hard feelings. You are a prospective grad student who didn't accept an offer--they will merely move down the list and move on. I've witnessed many grad school application processes and they do not mourn losses or hold grudges--they probably won't even remember your name next year (but I definitely advise against applying there again; you'd still have to work with that person in some capacity). Professors are busy people. Also keep in mind that for all they know you couldn't attend for personal reasons; no harm no foul. 2. Advisors from hell are quite common in big, important, prestigious departments. How do you think they get all that grant money and those publications? I'm not saying this is always the case, I'm just saying that it is easy to be a famous and productive researcher when you treat your grad students like pawns in your publication machine. You don't have time to be nice and supportive to ALL your students, just your favorites, so you just abuse and/or neglect the rest. So if you think you got what it takes to be the favorite (and want to deal with jealous lab members), by all means go for it. Just realize probability is not in your favor (especially as the 'lowly' first year in the lab; you have to earn your favoritism). 3. Advisors from hell are unacceptable. Run the other way. There are PLENTY of productive and supportive advisors that care about your future as much as their own. Your advisor is your career mentor who you strive to model your professionalism after. Do you want to model your career after a sadist (or after someone that many people are happy to call a jerk)? Is that the kind of academic you want to be? If many people are happy to tell a complete stranger (that is, you) about abusive behavior while they are supposed to be RECRUITING you, imagine how bad it must really be when you get there. 4. Warning signs: Complaints from students and lab attrition(which you've encountered), many publications as solo author(meaning grad students help write it but don't get credit), few publications with grad students as first author (again, less credit), shows impatience for the learning process and focuses only on results (and wants it perfect the first time!), disregards work and personal boundaries, isolates students from other labs/colleagues, and insults or belittles other labs/colleagues in the department. Unfortunately, many of these things are tough to recognize until you get an interview, so apply to as many programs as you can! With that said, I had a FANTASTIC advisor that supported my career objectives and my independent research (resulting in both first author and collaborative publications in the double digits). I have had the most productive and happy five years of my life. Sadly, I have many grad school friends that cannot say the same. So, keep working on research and finding work experiences that will bolster your resume and go at it again next year (applying to lots of different schools). You will be just fine, and it will be worth it! CJD, Quant_Liz_Lemon and Anita 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anita Posted April 10, 2010 Author Share Posted April 10, 2010 Thanks everyone! I think I'm not going, and I'm going to find an RA job and apply again. In response to some recurring questions, no, I don't have a bat's chance in hell of being the rare student who gets along with this person. It has happened before, only a handful of times in their 30-year advising career. Those students always 1. were extremely smooth interpersonally, and 2. shared the advisor's sports obsession. I'm neither (in fact, arguably the opposite) of both of those. Their less fortunate students have tried absolutely everything to get this person to 1. publish more with them 2. treat them less shittily. Needless to say, no one succeeded. Also, this program is extremely small (3 profs, all of whom have well-defined and sharply different interests) so I'm pretty sure switching isn't a practical option (though it is in theory). PsychPhD, I'm honored to have your first post be in my thread So the verdict, I think, is that outside of R1 programs, I have a pretty good chance of avoiding sadistic advisors? I seem to sense a trend for public unis to be more depressing than private - am I wrong? Does anyone know which departments are known for happy, productive students and low attrition rates? I heard Stanford has a zero attrition rate, for example. Anyway, thanks everyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 I seem to sense a trend for public unis to be more depressing than private - am I wrong? Does anyone know which departments are known for happy, productive students and low attrition rates? I heard Stanford has a zero attrition rate, for example. I'm at a public uni and I'm extremely happy here and I don't see any unhappy grad students here (except a few lazy ones who blame all their problems on the professors). This is also a top school for social psych. You may want to consider applying here next year because I know that most people are happy here and have not heard of high attrition rates. Also my adviser is probably the best adviser I could have got.. I wouldn't trade places with anybody (I would reject an offer from Berkeley, MIT, Stanford, etc) now that I've gotten to know him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now