> When she expressed her doubts, the adviser snapped at her, “Don’t ever say that!”
I don't know whether the advisor was referring to collegial decorum in how good faith research is discussed, or more like whisper networks about bad faith that are impolitic or scared to speak aloud.
But I did actually once get a snap response like that. I was chatting with another grad student, who'd mentioned a student who'd just arrive, who'd be working for Prof. X. I hadn't worked with Prof. X, but I happened to see them treat multiple students poorly over time, belittling the student, disciplining them in front of groups of others, giving them non-research chores like a personal assistant rather than a research assistant, not letting them pursue their research, etc., so I blurted out, concerned, "Oh no!", and that X was a bad advisor.
This other grad student surprised me by snapping back at me, sternly, "You shouldn't say that!", and something about reputations. That other grad student's parent was a prominent academic, so I figured they were admonishing me in some decorum that they were brought up in, and which they knew better than me.
It might've been weeks later, that same grad student came back to me, apologetically, and spoke with surprise, of how miserable the new student was, once they realized the career disaster that they'd stumbled into.
Epilogue: A long time later, that grad student, who'd admonished me and then apologized, contacted me about a different professor, because they knew a prospective new student of that professor, they had some suspicions, and they thought that I might know something. The truth was much worse than they suspected, and the student fled after hearing only a little, in vague terms.
BTW, there's apparently a lot of all kinds of poor behavior, but the people doing it are almost never cliched evil, IME. For example, a couple times I saw Prof. X do something kind, and I think probably they had something like a very stern taskmaster upbringing that caused their other side. There was also another one, who was kind to me, but I later learned that they were decidedly unkind to some others, and were actually nudged out. And one of the most body-count professors I saw was actually genuinely warm and charismatic and humble in some ways, and I don't think they realized that they seemed to have emotional/cognitive problems that they let kill other people's careers in an awful way. Off-the-record gossip with grad students and (later) professors will tell you of all sorts of other misbehavior, especially by people who aren't all bad, but very driven and pressured. (Raging narcissist/psycho, however, seems relatively rare, or their trail of bodies doesn't survive long enough to complain about it. Maybe the worse people tend to go for careers with more money and power?) And, back to this article, I once met with Ariely, and he came across as empathetic, down-to-earth, and of goodwill, so -- iff it turns out that he's found to have done something academically dishonest -- again, that would seem like a bit of human frailty, in a more wholesome larger picture.
(Note: I've been a grad student a few places, and have talked with people at countless other places, so am not calling out a particular school or person. A lot of people have seemed paranoid about saying anything at all, myself included, so please don't speculate, or I think that would have even more of a chilling effect than already exists.)
This is exactly the result when you have a large power differential. The people in authority may not be intrinsically mean or evil, but they're not getting the proper amount of feedback about their own behavior, and the reason is that they have too much power and the people they're dealing with have too little. Everything about the grad school (esp. Ph.D.) power structure is wrong, giving the student virtually not recourse and the advisor way too much authority.
Power differentials experienced too long can create character flaws, even when originally used constructively and with all good intentions.
I saw the cliche of a professor taking a students original and significant work, done without their direction, and quickly presenting it as mostly theirs, after adding their critical professorial value by waving the result around for their colleagues to congratulate them on.
The nice short paper that resulted was notable for an author list starting with the professor, followed by at least a dozen of the professors colleagues, and ending with the student who had solved the problem whole by themselves.
I also watched a professor's highly evolved and useful ability to dodge and protect his team from endless administrative performative/mata/made-up work in a university department translate badly to a business partial-ownership situation where their slippery ability to shirk work onto others gave them strong leverage over a project. Leverage that had much worse indirect effects than the obvious direct one of not contributing a lot.
This was someone with many great qualities, but also an internalized entitlement and talent for control.
I'd think that could be managed with the help of faculty peers and the levels of administration, but barriers:
* Students who are mistaken, entitled, and/or lying... is a thing. Which do you trust, and is there a crying-wolf effect applied to students as a whole.
* At the faculty level, they're colleagues, often friends (sometimes more), are more likely to being seeing a better side of people with problems, and will tend to identify with other faculty. (Though there's also internal dramas, but they might unite against the common enemy that is students.)
* The administration can be made up of people with similar problems (especially overconfidence, and aggressive self-interest).
* In some facets of university structure, it can be strictly a business, no vestigial ideals of academia, only branding. Which is a problem both for how they behave in those facets, and for students haplessly trusting the university when a sociopathic facet is involved.
A big one is students have far more to lose. “Solutions” are generally worse than the problems they address.
Grad-student / professor-advisor relationships are extremely personalized as well as career impacting. And not hot swappable.
Losing an advisor and getting any kind of rep can be disastrous. Degrees can flounder and die in an awkward aftermath.
I have no idea how faculty & peers should help, after the fact. In both examples above, people knew & didn’t approve. But stepping in would have been war - with the probability of everyone regretting everything.
A culture that emphasized ethical student treatment, with specific examples about research and going into business with students, might be preventative.
But on the going into business side, a lot of universities want to parasitically insert themselves into that too.
To me that is a conflict of interest with their educational mandate, but administrations think they must feed to grow & grow to feed.
This reminds me of someone who was athletic, played sports and had some strong opinions about them.
Basically, she liked sports where merit counted and disliked others.
For example, if you're playing a game with a score, or running against a clock, the sport tends to have a lot less BS compared to say gymnastic or diving competitions where you impress judges.
I think the trick in academia is optimizing for something similar.
I don't know whether the advisor was referring to collegial decorum in how good faith research is discussed, or more like whisper networks about bad faith that are impolitic or scared to speak aloud.
But I did actually once get a snap response like that. I was chatting with another grad student, who'd mentioned a student who'd just arrive, who'd be working for Prof. X. I hadn't worked with Prof. X, but I happened to see them treat multiple students poorly over time, belittling the student, disciplining them in front of groups of others, giving them non-research chores like a personal assistant rather than a research assistant, not letting them pursue their research, etc., so I blurted out, concerned, "Oh no!", and that X was a bad advisor.
This other grad student surprised me by snapping back at me, sternly, "You shouldn't say that!", and something about reputations. That other grad student's parent was a prominent academic, so I figured they were admonishing me in some decorum that they were brought up in, and which they knew better than me.
It might've been weeks later, that same grad student came back to me, apologetically, and spoke with surprise, of how miserable the new student was, once they realized the career disaster that they'd stumbled into.
Epilogue: A long time later, that grad student, who'd admonished me and then apologized, contacted me about a different professor, because they knew a prospective new student of that professor, they had some suspicions, and they thought that I might know something. The truth was much worse than they suspected, and the student fled after hearing only a little, in vague terms.
BTW, there's apparently a lot of all kinds of poor behavior, but the people doing it are almost never cliched evil, IME. For example, a couple times I saw Prof. X do something kind, and I think probably they had something like a very stern taskmaster upbringing that caused their other side. There was also another one, who was kind to me, but I later learned that they were decidedly unkind to some others, and were actually nudged out. And one of the most body-count professors I saw was actually genuinely warm and charismatic and humble in some ways, and I don't think they realized that they seemed to have emotional/cognitive problems that they let kill other people's careers in an awful way. Off-the-record gossip with grad students and (later) professors will tell you of all sorts of other misbehavior, especially by people who aren't all bad, but very driven and pressured. (Raging narcissist/psycho, however, seems relatively rare, or their trail of bodies doesn't survive long enough to complain about it. Maybe the worse people tend to go for careers with more money and power?) And, back to this article, I once met with Ariely, and he came across as empathetic, down-to-earth, and of goodwill, so -- iff it turns out that he's found to have done something academically dishonest -- again, that would seem like a bit of human frailty, in a more wholesome larger picture.
(Note: I've been a grad student a few places, and have talked with people at countless other places, so am not calling out a particular school or person. A lot of people have seemed paranoid about saying anything at all, myself included, so please don't speculate, or I think that would have even more of a chilling effect than already exists.)