Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

blog.usejournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 148 posts

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#91

Post by rossdavidh »

vkou wrote: post #44
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #29

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton The underlying issue is the huge power differential between advisers and students. Whenever there is such a power differential, abuse is almost inevitable. I fear that unless that power differential gets addressed, any solutions are going to just be superficial band-aids on a festering wound.

Power corrupts, but more importantly, power reveals. You can only get a real measure of a man, or woman, when they have power over you.

Eh, I think if you replaced all the people with others, but left the power structure in place, you'd get a similar result. That's why it doesn't just happen at MIT, but at pretty much every university I've heard the inside scoop on.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#92

Post by rossdavidh »

m0zg wrote: post #13

Fair warning: you _never_ get the full picture if you only hear one side of it. It is possible that the advisor is a manipulative asshole (though it's unlikely that they are to such an extent), or it is possible that the author grew up always getting participation trophies and now isn't getting any (far more likely, IMO). So before you render your judgment, wait for at least some semblance of corroboration.

I would think so, if it weren't for the fact that similar stories come from so many different Ph.D. programs, at so many different universities, over so many decades.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#93

Post by harry8 »

m463 wrote: post #67
croissants wrote: post #16

Unsolicited advice for any potential PhD students choosing between schools/advisors: you should try very hard to talk to current PhD students, preferably in person or at least over the phone or video call (at any rate, not in writing). Try to talk to as many as possible. Good advisors will probably have a few students who will speak up for them, and great advisors almost certainly will. In contrast, bad advisors will…

I think this is how Steve Jobs worked out who was good. He would go to people and say "I heard so-and-so sucks" and if he didn't suck people would adamantly stand up for so-and-so, but if he DID suck, there would be a lackluster response.

Good way to find out who is liked. Terrible way to find out who is good. Stalinist managment style. Pretty vile.

I heard Steve Jobs is totally amazing and wonderful and cool and wise but sucks so hard at noticing talent he has fall back on techniques like randomly claiming people suck and seeing the response. Bet you'd get a lacklustre response from that.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#94

Post by gaze »

djaque wrote: post #78
wegs wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physics and bio departments tend to be the most toxic. Students have no BATNA.

Actually, I've heard that chemistry departments are a standout in terms of abuse and that seems true just from the students I've talked to at my institution. There's like this weird old school attitude of "this is the way we've always done it" so I'm going to pass you through the flames too. Add that to the motivation of "if I can just get through this then I can get a cushy pharma job". Come to think of it, the news…

Chemistry leads the pack in toxicity. See E.J. Corey. Physics is pretty okay these days on average, though I've heard of a few icky groups.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#95

Post by z3ncyberpunk »

harry8 wrote: post #93
m463 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is how Steve Jobs worked out who was good. He would go to people and say "I heard so-and-so sucks" and if he didn't suck people would adamantly stand up for so-and-so, but if he DID suck, there would be a lackluster response.

Good way to find out who is liked. Terrible way to find out who is good. Stalinist managment style. Pretty vile. I heard Steve Jobs is totally amazing and wonderful and cool and wise but sucks so hard at noticing talent he has fall back on techniques like randomly claiming people suck and seeing the response. Bet you'd get a lacklustre response from that.

He wasn't that wise either though, his only real talent was and marketing and being able to give a charismatic speech

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#96

Post by dgacmu »

wegs wrote: post #51
croissants wrote: post #16

Unsolicited advice for any potential PhD students choosing between schools/advisors: you should try very hard to talk to current PhD students, preferably in person or at least over the phone or video call (at any rate, not in writing). Try to talk to as many as possible. Good advisors will probably have a few students who will speak up for them, and great advisors almost certainly will. In contrast, bad advisors will…

Former students too. Talk to them, and look up what they're doing. If a lot of former students ended up where you see yourself in 10 years, that's a great sign. If a lot of former students are in dead-end careers, that's a bad sign. Of course, that discriminates against tenure-track faculty, but avoiding tenure-track faculty is good advice too. Tenured professors have the luxury of being able to care about you. Tenur…

Speaking as a tenured professor, I disagree with this -- the trade-offs are more varied than you present them, and the individual differences are probably larger than the categorical differences. It's probably true in general that the younger professors are more likely to both stay up until 3:00 in the morning writing a paper with you and expect you to stay up until 3:00 in the morning writing that paper, but I don't think there is any difference in how much they care or don't about their students.

(The flip side of this advice is often presented as the junior faculty are more likely to help you write a lot of papers, if that's your goal. But again, look at the person. )

(I agree completely with talking to former students, of course. More information is always good. )

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#97

Post by jp0d »

This article seems to talk about one particular professor, if I'm not wrong. Does anyone know if the majority of the advisors at MIT behave like this? Has anyone else on this forum had any experience like this? I'm sure if the advisor is an influential person who brings in a lot of research money, the administrators would try to ignore these complaints. I recently read about a case in Melbourne Uni. The professor was accused of sexual harassment and the uni only gave him a voluntary retirement and protected him from prosecution.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#98

Post by mhh__ »

wiredfool wrote: post #38
neolog wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there labs with more than one recent suicide?

I’m a little hazy on it now, but my sister's lab had at least one while she was there, and it directly led to her death a few years later. It was ... not a healthy environment. Some warning signs would have been easier to see from the same coast, and some of them were obvious in hindsight.

That's horrible.

I suppose there's a poetic irony that even in places where you can really transcend people still find a way to hurt eachother.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#99

Post by thaumasiotes »

MereInterest wrote: post #60
wiredfool wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another bit of advice, see if the lab has had any suicides in recent memory. Also, if one or more occurs, gtfo before the stress gets you.

Divorces, too. A family member was applying to med schools, and during one of the visits there was a boast of a >100% divorce rate among students. Every married student who entered that program was divorced by the end, as were some who got married during the program. To have such a stressful program is bad enough, but to boast about it as a sign of prestige and dedication is even worse.

> there was a boast of a >100% divorce rate among students. Every married student who entered that program was divorced by the end, as were some who got married during the program.

Meh. Sounds like the number of divorces was still less than the number of students. And possibly less than the number of marriages -- the definition provided doesn't even establish that 100% of marriages among the students failed.

Re: Abuse isn’t an “advising style”: Consequences of MIT sheltering abusive mentors

#100

Post by totemandtoken »

wiredfool wrote: post #38
neolog wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there labs with more than one recent suicide?

I’m a little hazy on it now, but my sister's lab had at least one while she was there, and it directly led to her death a few years later. It was ... not a healthy environment. Some warning signs would have been easier to see from the same coast, and some of them were obvious in hindsight.

My deepest condolences, very sorry to hear that
Post reply on HN