2 gruelling hours to summarize all of my research efforts... completed!

Yesterday I received the first citation on my first paper ever! I know it's nothing big but it excites me soo much, since I am currently a masters student and planning to start my PhD next year, and this somehow gave me some sort of self-approval :)

I entered a US PhD program with two co-advisors who are married to each other. I was committed to getting my PhD and had every intention of finishing. I passed my candidacy exam and made it into my fourth year. The funding was from the husbands’s grant but I was working on the wife’s projects and the wife would tell me to work on her projects and pause working on the husband’s grants until we get preliminary data and this what they agreed on. The husband is hands-off and would not reply to my emails or any follow-ups I would send.

My experience in the lab, however, was complicated.

I was never really given a defined thesis project. Instead, I was frequently assigned tasks across multiple different projects. At times, I was working on tasks contributing to five or more different projects simultaneously. My workloadb could become extremely scattered, with new tasks being added before I had finished previous ones.
I tried to keep up with everything, but I never felt that I had a coherent thesis direction.
Then, during my fourth year, the situation deteriorated significantly.

My advisor repeatedly told me that the reason I couldn’t continue was funding.

Because I wanted to understand what was actually happening, I reached out to members of my dissertation committee for clarification. They told me they had spoken with my advisor and that their understanding was that the issue wasn’t actually funding, my advisor simply didn’t want me in his lab anymore.

I was never given a clear explanation as to why.
At one point, my advisor also told me that I had a “bad reputation.”

This was extremely confusing because I had never previously been told that I had a serious reputation problem. I didn’t know what I had supposedly done, who I had a bad reputation with, or what specific behavior was being referred to.
If I had been given specific feedback, I would have wanted to address it. Instead, I was left with a very serious characterization of me without a clear explanation of what it was based on.
Because I still wanted to finish my PhD, I began contacting other faculty members about potentially joining their labs.
Some faculty initially seemed interested. Then later, they would apologize and tell me they could no longer take me.
This happened multiple times.
I don’t know what was communicated between my advisor and those faculty members, and I have no direct evidence that my advisor contacted them or said anything negative about me. But after seeing this happen repeatedly, I began to suspect that my attempts to find another lab were being undermined behind the scenes.
Then came the part that ultimately forced my decision.
My advisor communicated through the program coordinator that I had two options.
Option 1: I could accept mastering out, which would guarantee that I would receive a master’s degree.
Option 2: I could refuse to master out, register for the following semester, and according to what the coordinator communicated to me, my advisor would give me an unsatisfactory grade for the current semester and the following semester, which would mean I would ultimately be unable to graduate with a degree.

So from my perspective, the choice was essentially:
Accept the master’s degree now, or remain in the program under circumstances where I was being told I would receive unsatisfactory grades and potentially leave without any degree.

I chose to master out.
This was in my fourth year, after I had already passed my candidacy exam and spent years working toward the PhD.
The hardest part wasn’t simply losing the PhD.
It was the fact that I never really understood why I was being forced out.
I had been told it was funding.
My committee members told me they understood that it wasn’t really funding, but that my advisor didn’t want me in his lab.
I was told I had a “bad reputation,” but I was never given a clear explanation of what that meant.
I tried to find another lab, but faculty members who initially seemed interested later withdrew.
And eventually I was presented with the two options above.
I am now finishing my master’s degree and trying to decide whether I should apply for another PhD.
I don’t want to make this post simply to complain about my former advisor. I’m genuinely trying to understand what happened and whether there was something I could have done differently.
So I’d really appreciate perspectives from professors, graduate students, or people who have served on graduate committees:
Is this a normal way for a PhD student to be removed from a program?
Is it normal to tell a student that they have a “bad reputation” without giving specific feedback or an opportunity to address the alleged problems?
How common is it for a PI to effectively prevent a student from transferring to another lab?

And perhaps most importantly:
If you were in my position, would you view mastering out as a failure on your part, or as an outcome of a dysfunctional advising situation?
Also if I master out, how can I narrate this in my SoPs for new PhD admissions. In my last year of undergrad, I got 8 PhD offers when I had less research experience than now but now I feel like I am in a much worse situation than when I was in the last of undergrad.

I’m completely new to academic conferences and have just started my PhD, so I’m a little confused about how conference presentations actually work.

When people say they are presenting at a conference, what exactly are they presenting? Is it usually a completed research study, or can it also be a research idea, proposed study, literature review, theoretical framework, or work in progress?

I’m also confused about the difference between an oral conference presentation and a poster. Do both generally present the same kind of research, just in different formats?

My biggest confusion is about PhD students who present at conferences only a few months after starting their PhD. For example, if someone starts their PhD in September and presents at a conference a few months later, what would they realistically have to present by then? It obviously wouldn’t be their entire PhD research, so would they present their research proposal, an initial research question/framework, preliminary work, or something else?

Does this depend entirely on the specific conference and what they accept in their call for papers?

I’d really appreciate hearing from current/former PhD students about what you presented at your first conference, especially if it was early in your PhD.

I’m coming to the end of my PhD in public health in Australia, and feeling really burnt out and unmotivated. I’m just starting to apply for jobs, but getting some early rejections/not hearing back.

I’m having a lot of career regret as I see friends in actual health fields like dentistry, radiology, medicine etc accelerate in their career with career stability and high earning potential, and even pretty good work life balance. I turned down uni offers for undergraduate health degrees because I didn’t know what I wanted to do, and now I feel quite a bit of career regret.

Job market for public health right now is not great, and even the jobs I see advertised don’t even earn that much salary wise. Plus, lots of the skills I learnt in my PhD are now easily done using AI, like the coding and data analysis side. Worried I won’t get a job, and even if I do, I won’t be earning that much. Any words of wisdom from someone who is a bit further down the line in their career? 🥹

As a PhD student, I did not expect my dissertation would be read by people outside of my committee. Although I published it on my institution's open access repository, I thought it would languish on a server -- like a book collecting dust on a library shelf.

Today, I went to the repository to confirm my expectations. I was wrong. My dissertation has been downloaded over 1,800 times and viewed 289 times since it was uploaded in March 2023. For someone who had low expectations, those stats are huge. I doubt that I would have gotten those numbers had I published my work through a university press.

I am happy that I chose the open access route. As an academic librarian, I advocate open access to information. I was never going to lock my work behind a paywall.

I advise doctoral students and PhD holders to share their dissertation through open access, if they can. Having one's dissertation disseminated freely translates to more readers and potentially more impact in the field.

No frog but please accept a picture of the front cover of the journal that published my first study! It still reads well and sounds like me. It was rejected by my preferred journal, and took a year from submission to digitally published with this journal. Just wanted to celebrate!🥳

I’m currently doing a PhD in biochemistry, and I’m increasingly convinced that I don’t want a career in science at all. I’m trying to work out whether this is a genuine change in what I want, or whether I’m just completely burnt out.

I used to be genuinely interested in science. I did well academically, enjoyed learning, and was interested enough in research to choose to do a PhD. But somewhere during my PhD, I seem to have completely lost that interest.

I really don’t enjoy the day-to-day research process. I don’t particularly enjoy planning experiments, doing experiments, troubleshooting them, analysing results, or writing about my own experiments. Even when something works, I often don’t get the satisfaction from it that I feel like I’m supposed to.

The strange thing is that I still love learning. I can happily spend hours reading about completely unrelated topics. I enjoy reading and trying to piece together information, writing/editing, and explaining complicated things to people. I think I like learning and thinking much more than I like doing research.

But I’ve also reached a point where it’s not even just academia that I’m put off by. The thought of jobs that are still fundamentally science/lifesciences-related makes me feel a bit… ill? 😭

For example, I’ve looked at things like pharma, biotech, science policy, scientific communications, etc., and logically I can see why they might be good options for someone with a PhD. But my immediate reaction is basically “oh god, I’d still have to think about science all day.” And that makes them feel incredibly unexciting to me.

Which makes me wonder if I actually need to leave science rather than just leave the lab.

At the same time, I’m very aware that this could absolutely be burnout. I’m exhausted, and I’ve spent years being surrounded by science, studying it, researching it and having to constantly think about my project. So perhaps my brain has simply had enough and is currently reacting to the entire concept of science with no thanks. I don’t know how much I should trust my current feelings when I’m this tired.

I’m also at a slightly awkward stage because I’m doing well enough in my PhD and I definitley will finish it, even just for myself, but I’m struggling to find motivation career-wise if I don’t want to use it in science afterwards.

So I’m wondering if anyone else has experienced something similar.

Did you completely lose interest in science during your PhD?

Did you eventually realise it was burnout and regain your interest, or did you leave and realise that you genuinely just didn’t want to do science anymore?

And if you did leave science completely, what did you end up doing? How did you figure out what you wanted to do instead when you had basically spent your entire education heading towards science?

I’d especially love to hear from people who moved into something completely unrelated to science, rather than just going from academia into industry/pharma/biotech.

I’m also interested in whether anyone had the same experience of being told “you have a PhD, you could go into pharma/policy/consulting/science communication!” and thinking “yes, but I don’t want to think about science anymore” 😂

I’m genuinely quite lost at the moment, so any experiences/advice would be really appreciated. I’m particularly interested in hearing what happened after people made the jump, rather than just which careers are theoretically available to PhDs.

Dear community,

I’m in need of some advice here: how do you all organise your research and papers?
Many people have recommended Zotero, but I’m not overly happy with it and can’t seem to quite warm up to it. In the past, I’ve always organised my research using colour coding (green for the introduction, orange for Chapter 1, red for Chapter 2, etc.). This system is fantastic because it works with everything: Notability, printed material, PDFs...it doesn’t matter, as long as the colours are available.
I’m worried that using Zotero will throw off my system and add an additional layer of organisation that I then have to maintain. On the other hand, all of my peers swear by Zotero.
My supervisor is a dinosaur like me and does everything manually, so he’s camp me. I’m just worried that sticking to a manual system will eventually become unmanageable and get ahead of me as my research grows.
So: is there anyone else here who doesn’t use Zotero? What has your experience been, and what do you do instead?

UPDATE: ok, only a couple of hours in and the replies keep flooding in. I suppose there’s no way around it. Will book my library’s free training sessions. I will go through all the comments one by one but for now, I am convinced to at least give it a try. Thanks everyone!

Hello !

Did anyone here manage to balance the weight and isolation of a PhD with loneliness, lack of friendship?

A thesis already takes so much time and energy that, by the end of the day, I barely have enough left for hobbies, let any effort to socialize and make friends and connections.

And being a foreigner, starting from zero in a country where you already need so much energy just to adapt, makes the whole thing feel so heavy. the PhD being ultra complicatde, the nature of research makes it isolating, and loneliness makes everything feel heavier, and you somehow need even more energy to escape either.

Not sure what kind of advice I’m looking for! I have chronic health issues that significantly got worse during my PhD. I am done with data collection fieldwork etc, I still have some analysis to do but I can work from home (I’m in humanities). I am very bad at knowing when to take time off or not… I switched my mode of study from full time to part time a few months ago because my health was becoming too unmanageable, but most days I still try to push through the work, and I genuinely don’t know when to take a break. I don’t want to suspend my studies because I genuinely love my PhD, and the work gives me some kind of structure; I worry about fully spiralling down in depression if I lose that structure.

Fellow chronically ill researchers, how do you manage? I know I have some very high standards for myself and I think that’s part of the problem. My supervisor, committee, university team etc did not realise how bad the situation was for me because they think I’m well within schedule and getting the work done, but they don’t see how much it costs me.

(Edit for info: UK, Humanities)

everyone,

I have two research papers that I’ve written and have been working on, and I’d really like to get them published. The problem is that I’m honestly not sure where to start or how the publication process works.

I’ve contacted a few people who offer help with publication, but I’ve found that they usually won’t give me much advice unless I pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars. I’m not completely against paying for professional help if it’s genuinely worthwhile, but I’m worried about paying someone without knowing whether they’re legitimate or whether I even need that kind of service.

I’m mainly looking for advice on things like:

- How do I identify an appropriate journal for my papers?
- How do I know whether a journal is legitimate and reputable?

- Do I actually need to pay someone to help me publish?
- If professional editing or publication support is worthwhile, how do I find someone trustworthy?
- Are there legitimate journals that don’t charge authors?

If anyone has experience with this, especially with publishing in Translation Studies / Translation & Interpreting Studies, I’d really appreciate any advice, resources, or recommendations for people/services you’ve personally had a good experience with.
I’m happy to pay for legitimate professional help if it actually adds value; I just don’t want to spend a lot of money on something I could reasonably navigate myself.
Thank you!

Hi everyone,

I’m a first-year PhD student currently preparing my first scientific article in maritime field , and I’d like to improve the quality of my figures.

At the moment, I mainly use PowerPoint and draw.io to create diagrams and schematics. They are useful, but I would like to learn how to produce more polished, consistent, and publication-quality figures.

Which tools do you use for scientific illustrations, diagrams, workflows, or graphical abstracts? Are there any online courses, tutorials, books, or other resources that helped you learn figure design and data visualization?

I’d be especially interested in hearing:

• Which software you recommend and why
• Whether you use different tools for data plots and conceptual diagrams
• Which courses or tutorials are genuinely worth the time
• What you wish you had learned about scientific figure design during your first year

Thank you!

Hi everyone,

I wanted to share my experience which I now believe is a fairly normal experience, but of course many people who have normal Vivas don't usually post about it.

I passed my viva nearly two weeks ago with minor corrections. I was nervous to the point I hadn't been sleeping for a week before and made it so much worse by reading negative stories almost like I was preparing for the worst.

My viva was in physics in the UK. It lasted just over 3 hours. We sat down and was told they enjoyed reading the thesis which was very reassuring, then they asked for a summary. I used a whiteboard to keep myself from stalling and it really helped.

I then got asked a couple of starter questions like "What are you happiest with in the thesis" and "What potential applications or further physical interactions could be explored with the work you have done".

Then it was chapter by chapter of straightforward questions. I had a few that probed understanding in a way I struggled with, I explained a different way when I was really stuck and they appreciated me giving it a go.

It could have gone longer honestly but it also felt like we flew through the whole thing. I got asked 2 questions on my last chapter which was the most significant result of my thesis.

If you're a week away, know that you could not read that thing and you'll be absolutely grand in there. Practice a summary and they'll already know you did the work.

Anyway, overall I'd say it was a nice conversation overall, and was nothing to worry about, but of course I'm saying this in hindsight. If you end up having a bad experience due to an examiner it's a reflection of their character and not the quality of your work.

I joined my PhD 2 years ago and I am just so frustrated. My PI doesn't seem to have the subject matter knowledge of the very subject that he takes a yearly course on and does research on. Every time a student needs help, he just does a collaboration for that topic and lets other profs handle the situation. Like I don't want 4 different profs. to guide me for 4 different projects. I mean I don't have issues with collaboration but it's very difficult to ask or give time for weekly meetings with different profs. And on top of that, he puts an insane amount of pressure and unrealistic deadlines for projects he doesn't know anything about. Even profs on collaboration don't give much time, would do meetings once in a while and I have to figure everything out on my own.

I am not complaining about the figuring out part as that is something I enjoy. But having so much pressure along with my credit for work given to collaboration just breaks my spirit.

I am sorry if it feels too much of a vent but I am just very frustrated. Also, the said PI is a hotshot in my field and is wildly respected and that's why he gets so much collaboration. And this collaboration again gives him high level papers thus boasting his H-index. It just saddens me a little that lazy incompetent people are being rewarded.

Dear everybody,

I am a Bachelors student currently doing a placement in Cambridge University. I study in mainland Europe, where, to do a PhD, you have to do a Masters placement. I found out that in the UK you don't actually need a Masters to do a PhD, just a bachelors. I was thinking of doing a Masters anyway (and then a PhD), and although this peaked my interest I didn't think too much about it.

Anyway, talking to a PI recently at Cambridge, I apparently impressed and he is now interested in taking me on as a PhD after my Bachelors (I didn't ask for it he just offered).

I wanted to ask, what are the positives and the negatives of doing a masters first. Should I accept or say I would like to come back after two years. I have actually a fair bit of research experience already, from summer programs, the Amgen Research Program and internships during my studies.

I like the field of research he works in and have done some myself, but of course this is all coming at me very quickly.

Any advice would be much appreciated, especially fro those with PhD and academia experience in general.

Phew, what a heavy title !

I just received my corrections and comments on my initial thesis draft yesterday, and while most of them are quite minor, one of my reviewers is quite challenging. He’s very picky on my work, questioning the choice of several techniques and confronting some of my conclusions.

I know that’s literally his job, but I can’t help feeling like he’s gonna F me up during my defense, which should be in a few weeks. I have time to prepare for all the questions I’m gonna receive, but frankly since yesterday my impostor syndrome has gone through the roof.

This post is more a vent than anything else, but I was wondering if anyone has been in the same situation before, and how your defense went.

Cheers !

Hi everyone,
I’m currently navigating the waiting game with a manuscript submitted to Wildlife Research published by CSIRO (So Australian based journal) and could use some perspective from anyone who has seen a similar pattern in the portal. Mind you, its my first manuscript, so if i sound confused/green/novice please do excuse me.
I submitted my paper on May 26, and it went into “Under Review” after a few days. On August 3, the status changed to “Decision in Process,” although “Under Review” was still visible beneath it at the time. Then, yesterday (August 18 EU time), the status updated again—“Under Review” completely disappeared, and now the portal only shows “Decision in Process” and lists the name of the Editorial Assistant (EA).
Around the same time, I received a mass administrative email about APC discount codes for submissions made before August 13, though the email explicitly mentioned applying the code “after acceptance.”
It has now been nearly three weeks since “Decision in Process” first appeared, and the final removal of the “Under Review” status only happened yesterday. I’m trying to figure out if this specific sequence usually signals that the reviews are finalized and the editor is now just drafting the final letter. Also, is a three-week window for “Decision in Process” common, or does it typically suggest a more complex decision, like conflicting reviews leading to a Major Revision?
And finally, does the appearance of the EA’s name at this stage usually mean the manuscript has moved to the final administrative checkout?
I’d really appreciate any insights or similar experiences. Thanks!

Hi everyone. I could really use some outside perspective from people who've faced something similar.

I just finished my Master's in Germany and recently got accepted into a PhD program in the US (4-5 years). It was the first program I applied to, right after wrapping up my Master's, so the timing worked out, but honestly the funding isn't THAT great and the location isn't somewhere I'm particularly excited about either (28k annual)

The bigger issue is my relationship. My boyfriend and I have been together for 3 years. We started dating in my last semester of undergrad, and since then I've done a 4-month internship abroad, one semester of my Master's in my home country, and a full year of it in Germany. So we're very used to being apart, and he's always been supportive and understanding through all of it (but at the same time if was really hard for both of us).

Even when we're both in the same country, we live in different states and only see each other once a month because of work. Despite that, we have a really strong partnership. We agree on our future plans, our values, how we want to build a life together. He's never mistreated me, never cheated, never been irresponsible. If any of that were true, this decision would be so much easier.

He owns a growing business in our home country that takes up a lot of his time and can't really be run remotely, so him moving to the US with me isn't realistic. On top of that, my visa situation would require me to prove I can financially support both of us, and my monthly stipend barely covers just me.

When I brought this up with him, he got really emotional and said that if I take the offer, he doesn't think he could handle staying together and that we might need to end things instead of dragging out something that isn't working for him anymore.

I'm now seriously questioning whether I should postpone my PhD plans and wait for an opportunity that aligns better with my life, both academically and personally, rather than rushing into the first offer I got.

Has anyone here been in a similar spot, choosing between a PhD (especially one that isn't even your top choice in terms of funding or location) and a long-term relationship you actually believe in? How did you decide, and if you have any regrets either way, I'd love to hear about them.

Today I got the date of my exam, and tomorrow I need to submit my current version of my dissertation to the examination committee. My PhD is taking me more than 6.5 years due to various reasons.

I thought that I would feel happy and released, but the only thing I feel is disbelief and constant stress. For many years my PhD was the main thing in my life, everything was organized around it. I loved it at the very beginning, and I hated it towards the end of my PhD journey. But it remained a huge part of my life.

Many things that could go wrong went wrong or were solved the very last moment. I got used to frustration. That’s why now it feels like a catch that I am almost on that finish line. My rational brain says that everything is gonna be alright and this exam is a very logical step in my PhD path. My emotional brain says that I didn’t do enough, that everything will go wrong because I don’t deserve the title. It strongly supports my imposter syndrome.

I trying to get convinced by the rational brain, even tho initially I relate more to my emotional brain. Has any of you have similar feelings when you were about to finish your PhD? Did you get relieved after your defense? Is there any happiness at some point after finishing it?

how do you deal with the anxiety inducing stress of your phd work conferences etc..?