Crikey. So how did it get published then - through some administrative error? And if intentionally then for what purpose?

I think she sounds like a very good supervisor! You were lucky to be honest! But that doesn't mean you should do a postdoc with her...

At a recent advice session/seminar for early career researchers, I heard that by sticking with the same people throughout it can appear that you actually are not independent (even if you are in reality)... and that you should aim to demonstrate your success in a different context/with different people post PhD. This may even mean suggest moving institutions. The point you raise about her liking to control everything and not letting you explore ideas for yourself is making lights flash as well - for the same reason outlined here. I reckon you should try to move on : )

That sounds like an ideal opportunity to leave. I guess you could even explain this situation to your referees if you wanted them to understand why you are again asking for references having been accepted somewhere once.

A smooth transition to a new PhD would be ideal but even if you have to find a temporary job while applying for new PhD opportunities (depending on your finances) I guess at least you will know that you have left a PhD that wasn't for you and are looking for something better. All the best in finding something quickly : )

Hopefully some one else can give some more advice/different views. Good luck with it - and try to keep positive - at least you know early on that you want to leave (-:

Hi Jols

Re explaining the 8 months - I wouldn't worry about that at all. When you have the completed PhD under your belt (or whatever else you go on to do) no one is going to care that you started on and then left. It isn't a gap on your CV - you were doing something.

I think focusing on reason 1 is the most important thing to do. It is fine to explain other things too - I think my friend did this as well. I think it just depends on the situation. Open-ness will probably be appreciated. Does your funding from the EU mean that you can take it with you, or it is only linked to the current project and supervisor?

You are right - if you give details of your current supervisor then the prospective one may contact him or even know him. I am not sure to be honest. Personally, I wouldn't tell my supervisor what I was doing (unless you want to leave immediately?) I would just do it, and tell him when he needed to be told, (i.e., when I had been awarded funding elsewhere). Re the prospective supervisor - if you don't put the details of your current PhD on the application then they won't have details or be able to contact him. I think that is what I would do - it may come up in the interview though so you would need to be prepared with an explanation. Either that or be completely open with your current supervisor...

Finally, picking up on what Tree of Life said up there... it is very true... the grass isn't always greener on the other side. On the other hand - there are some situations where things genuinely aren't good/do not suit you, and so it is good to leave. I'm sure you've considered all of this. It does sound as though your situation really is negative - given that even others in the lab are advising you to leave. Have you managed to find some alternative projects to apply for (or supervisors to whom you could take your own proposal idea)?

Just a bit of advice. When it comes to telling your current supervisors why you are leaving, contacting your old referees, and indeed communicating with your new prospective supervisors, it would be wise to stick to the reason number 1 for why you are moving on to a different PhD (not 2-4 - as these could be perceived as criticism of the supervisor and an illusion that you think the grass will be greener on the other side). Elaborate on 1 - say what does interest you, and how this deviates so greatly from the current PhD and its scope, and how that what you are NOW applying for does interest you greatly. All parties should understand and respect your decision to change if they perceive that it is motivated (largely) by your research interest.

A second bit of advice... personally I wouldn't bother trying to contact your referees until you have actually found the new opportunity you're applying for. And I wouldn't mention it to those in your lab or the current supervisor until it was actually set in stone.

Ps. I believe my friend got her reference for the new PhD from the same person who had done it before (her old masters supervisor).

Hopefully someone else can provide you with more specific advice/information. I just wanted to let you know that a friend of mine recently quit her PhD when she was just under 12 months into it. She only quit it once she had already secured her funding to do a PhD at a different Uni. It ended quite amicably. She just explained that it was not for her and she had found a different one that suited her better.

There is no point hanging around if it is not suiting you at all and you don't see yourself finishing it/enjoying it in the least. You are still in the early days of it so leaving isn't such a big deal. That is my opinion anyway.

All the best

I have heard that a year before you expect to finish is a good time to start thinking about it (supervisors have said "you need to start thinking about it now"). Why is this? Does the application process take much longer than a normal job?

Sorry for hijacking this thread - but it is on topic at least.

By accept the circumstances and move on, I mean continue and finish your PhD - not leave! Sorry if I am not writing very clearly!

Do you have an academic advisor you can talk to? They may be able to help you out/advise on how to talk to your supervisor and make changes.

How much of your PhD is left? When does your timetable say you'll be finished? I think those are the questions I'd be asking myself if I was seriously considering leaving. And having already spent 4 years, I'd be sticking it out if the end of the PhD was in the foreseeable future.

Good luck!

Me too! Which is why I am making sure that I write up some papers from my PhD - during and after.

I actually first learnt about it happening from my own supervisor. She told me that HER ex-supervisor (a very famous person in the field) published HER data several years after she had completed her PhD. She said she couldn't believe her eyes when she saw her work published without her name! As far as I know - the two are on talking terms!

And then on a separate occasion - my supervisor told me that she had just received an angry email from a former Masters student who had seen a paper by my supervisor that was based on her Masters dissertation! My supervisor wrote back explaining to her - sorry - but I am the custodian of the data and this is how it works when you leave.

Crazy eh?

From what I know it is common practice for supervisors to write papers based on your data later once you've left the scene. I know people who have been shocked to see that their ex supervisor has published a paper based on their data.

It is also common for the student to write papers (with the supervisor named as co-author) - but when this doesn't happen during the longevity of the PhD or while the two are working together, the supervisor then has the right to do what they want with the data - as they are usually the "custodian" of the data.

If I were in this situation, I would say something like "I want to write up a paper (or papers) based on my dissertation, and am happy to have you as co-author. I take it this is what you meant?"

This is less than a week ago and these are busy people! If you haven't heard in a week or so from now then give them a nudge! Don't panic! : )

Do you mean that you never had to enter the details of the reference yourself? This is what I can stand doing - for the 20% or so that don't seem to autofill in Mendeley. I should do it really because it makes it easier in the long run. But I am trigger happy and Google Scholar is instant!