Hi guys,

I have no experience in publishing papers and have submitted a first author one (but not sole author) to a mid level journal two months ago. Today I got a reply that peer review has been completed and I need to do revisions. Three people reviewed it and one person especially wants pretty extensive revisions (although no big re-writes). Some of the revisions are still classified as "major" though.

It would be a dream come true for this paper to eventually be published in that particular journal. My question is: if I complete revisions asked, how likely is it for my paper to still be rejected at that stage?

From what I know a paper can be rejected:

1. Editorially (without even being sent to the peer review)
2. Just straight out rejected after the peer review
3. Rejected after the revisions

I am hope that it is a good sign that I have passed first 2 steps??

I have a fairly new and inexperienced supervisor. Since I started, 2 years ago - he has set a dynamic of very frequent meetings (like more than once a week). Last few months though, he has made some excuses as to not to meet me here and there. Also, a co-worker implied that my supervisor said that I need too much contact or something like that. Supervisor never spoke about this to me directly.

I hate to burden anyone and I would like to say something but am not sure if it's a good idea.I mean, obviously it's easier for me to have more supervision to less supervision so a part of me just wants to keep going with the current situation (and why should I do the supervisor any favours if he can't put limits on his time himself?).

So I have the following options:

1) Offer supervisor less frequent meetings (say once a fortnight) and say that I appreciate his help but I don't want to be taking up too much of his time.

2) Subtly say things like "I don't need a meeting this week" and try to change the dynamic this way as it's less intrusive.

3) Do nothing. Go with the flow and let supervisor set the pace.

Any wise advice?

Yep, I realized my "mistake" but I was keen to reply immediatly and that's what I came up with.

With his second question I am given a chance to strengthen my answer.

BTW in an e-mail prospective new supervisor already asked why I wanted to leave my current PhD.

I replied that I want to relocate to X city for personal reasons but enjoy research and would like to continue down that track and am searching for PhD opportunities in X area.

Of course, he replied to that with "are there any research related reasons at all why you want to leave your current PhD?" while simulataniously setting up an interview. I am yet to reply to that e-mail.

Thanks guys. I am thinking of approaching the interview as I came to see what the new project and supervisor have to offer and if it's better than my current situation (I certainly would be getting twice the money I am getting now too). Perhaps I can be frank and tell that this is a difficult decision to make etc and that I still haven't made it but am keen to interview and see if this is suitable for me.

I can also point out all the things I have learned during my current PhD so that it wasn't a time completly wasted.

It's a long story. I don't feel passionate and motivated about my project. I have made almost no progress in the past year. My main supervisor and me have a weird dynamic where I feel like he underestimates me constantly, babies me, talks over me etc. Second supervisor is overly critical and has pretty much suggested that I quit on a few occassions and I KNOW my work is not that bad. Main supervisor is also very junior, and ended up underestimating what's required of a PhD project and I almsot failed my first year upgrade as a result.

This has been building up over the past year and I just want to quit and be done with it. There is much more to this too.

The other project sounds much more interesting and is right up my alley.

Still, I need a more solid answer than that for the interview.

So after lot of thought, I am truly closer to quitting my PhD than I ever was.

I was browsing ads, and have found an ad for a fully funded PhD project in another city. I don't mind another city that much, in fact I kind of want to start my life over somewhere fresh.

I e-mailed the professor that posted the ad and he replied immedietly and wants to fly me to this city for an interview.

The thing is he will ask me, why do you want to leave your current PhD project and start over from scratch?

What do I say?

======= Date Modified 19 27 2009 00:27:51 =======
1. Because quitting now will mean that I will be a failed PhD student for the rest of my life
2. My parents will commit suicide if I quit
3. I have no better alternatives at present
4. I want to keep collecting studentship money

Those are my reasons. Sad, ain't it?

Adem, I looked it up and my own supervisor is not THAT junior. He has been in academia for 6 years and gotten a couple of promotions during that time. He has other PhD students that he is on a supervisory team for (as third or fourth supervisor), but I am his first and only PhD student that he is the principal supervisor to.

Acdemic B has worked in academia for 22 years, was principal supervisor to 12 students and secondary supervisor to many more. His experience and expertise are second to none, HOWEVER if he is too busy or too lazy to read what I send him in detail, his comments can still be somewhat of the mark. Also he has zero tact when delivering the cristicisms, and one of his favorite saying to students is "I feel like with you the lights are on, but noone is home". I mean how condecending can you be? With all due repsect to him , he is an arrogant, insensitive a$$hole.

You know, what pisses me off with this criticsm is this: the document I have produced is supposed to outline the simulation study I am planning to do. I mean, I will end up writing computer code based on this plan. The plan is not supposed to be a formal piece of writing in any sense, and was a long way off from being polished enough to include it into thesis. I merely wanted to get technical details right and thought that is what the meeting will be about. I planned to start coding after I get the details right, and then after I finish with that, go back to the document and give it appropriate structure and finishing touches for inclusion into thesis. Sup B went on and on about how it is not clear from my document the motivation for doing the simulation study and what are my data sources etc. Well, I have written documents on both data sources and motivation for doing this study in previous meetings which he seemed to have completly forgotten. This was not meant as stand alone document, and I will have previous chapters in my thesis explaining everything in detail before including this (polished) description of the simulation study. I mean I don't just plan to stick it into thesis as is as the first chapter or something.

I feel lots of supervisor B comments stemmed from the fact that he was too lazy to read technical details of the document so he sort of skimmed through it and because he had to say something, he decided to thrash my general writing style (even though again, this document was not even close to ready for inclusion in the thesis). UGH.

Exactly! My supervisor A went through my 5 drafts of this document with fine tooth comb and we produced what was considered rubbish by Sup B together! Yet, sup A sat there nodding and silent, letting me take all the c#ap... I considered saying something along the lines of what you said either in front of sup B or alone with just sup A, but I held back. Thoughts like "Don't bite the hand that feeds you" came to mind and I didn't launch into any attacks on sup A. After all, I have no other support and can I really expect a supervisor to stand up for me even though it looks bad for him? I mean I have to be realistic: of course supervisors put themselves and their carreers first. We as students are lucky if we can any consideration at all....

I had another talk with supervisor A via e-mail now. He re-assured me that discussing quitting with him was a good idea, in fact he feels that other PhD students should be in more frequent contact with their supervisors and able to speak openly with them about issues they are facing. In turn I re-assured him that I won't quit. He said that he is grateful for that and said that he can not think of a single reason on why I should quit and he can think of MANY reasons why I should stay. He suggested getting another advisor but not a formal supervisor, just someone to get occassional advice from on a specialized part of my thesis.

I feel better, and it seems we have worked things out for now :)

Hey Bilbo and Streesed,

Thanks for your comments. Yep, I prefer straight forward honest communication. Now thinking back, I didn't lose it or cry or anything I just wanted clamly to discuss quitting. I am South-European and naturally m ore direct and temperamental (I just found this to be true generally) and English people seem to shy away from direct confrontation.

I am also probably more impulsive and dramatic than most people, which makes the PhD experience so much harder.

I currently feel so distressed, do you guys think it's OK if I don't go to the deparment Chrissy party? This is a huge deal with us, and everybody looks forward to it and goes. I just don't feel like it at the moment.

Sigh. I really thought that when supervisor B said that my writing is not up to PhD thesis standards, he was really implying that I should quit. Supervisor A says that Sup B didn't imply that at all. I have decided that I will sit down this weekend and put a 100% in producing another version of that document, according to Supervisor B preferences. If he still thinks it's rubbish, I will re-visit considerations of quitting.

Hi, no - I am not making my decision based on how it will affect my supervisor. Not at all. To be honest, one of the hardest things in this all for me is having to live the rest of my life as a failed PhD student (if I quit). I know I should be motivated by love of research etc, but trutfully previous sentece is what really motivates me to stay.