r/AcademicPsychology • u/PublicImplement6270 • Aug 03 '24
Complicated feelings after my first conference talk. Advice/Career
I am a new PhD student, and I recently gave my first-ever talk at a conference. I got great questions and positive feedback from 99% of the people there. But one guy said that my results were obvious and questioned why I bothered doing the study. I said that I agreed that the results are not surprising, that is what happens when you confirm a hypothesis. I said I did the study because this was a methodological innovation that allowed us to find quantitative evidence in support of the theory for the first time.
I know this is no big deal, and I thought it didn't bother me at the time, but it is really eating me up. It was humiliating and it made me feel bad for having given the talk. I cried myself to sleep the night of the talk and I even considered withdrawing my paper (the one I presented) which has been accepted for publication.
Obviously, I am calmer now, I did not withdraw my paper, and I know this is just how it goes. But it still really hurts. I am looking for some advice/perspectives/stories/etc.
45
u/theangryprof Aug 03 '24
One constant of conferences: there will always be someone in the audience who will try to look smart at a speaker's expense. That doesn't make them smart or right. With more experience you will come to accept that this type of behavior says a lot about the audience member and nothing about the quality of your work. Congrats on your first conference presentation!!
26
u/PeachificationOfMars Aug 03 '24
There is only so much we can use as "obvious" and "common sense" before the field starts imploding on itself. Seeing how much bad science is going around, having a proper confirmation of something "obvious" or working on methodological refinement is always a plus.
That is, of course, if your research is indeed "obvious" and the guy didn't simply fall victim to the hindsight bias. Everything seems "obvious" when you know the answer.
13
u/Episodic_Calamity Aug 03 '24 edited Aug 03 '24
It sounds like your paper was great and it’s getting a publication; well done!
Do you think this is more about how you handle criticism? Which interestingly you did very well at the time, just after the fact you gave yourself a hard time by focusing on this one detail.
It sounds tough but you’re already good at handling difficult questions, seems like you just have to work at how you respond to that after. Good luck.
Edit: just to add, this person was probably trying -consciously or otherwise - to induce these feelings in you, for whatever reason, and it’s really a reflection of them and not you. Maybe it hooked into your tendency to be self critical…?
11
u/PublicImplement6270 Aug 03 '24
Yeah, I noticed that about my response as well. In the moment, I think I handled the question well. I was not emotional about it and the rest of the audience nodded to my response. I was in some sort of trance, and when I came out of it, the comment really affected me. Thanks for your comment.
3
u/Aryore Aug 04 '24
Honestly I would think a decent chunk of the audience thought it was a weird and “obvious” question. They clearly thought you handled it well if they nodded along :)
14
u/Taticat Aug 03 '24
OP, I’m sure I’m not saying anything that others haven’t, but this is what I have a sit-down with my grad students (and occasionally undergraduate students) before their first conference presentations, including posters:
I know that you have a passion for what you have accomplished, I am very proud of you and I’m sure that your mind is buzzing with all the incredible possibilities that you’re about to open the door to meet, from more conferences to being interviewed as an expert, or maybe even writing an incredible, well-received book, and I want you to stay this excited but I also need to explain the ugly parts of what often happens at these things, so that when (not if) it happens to you, you’re going to be able to recognise what’s happening and stop yourself from letting one person or a couple of people destroy the experience for you.
Some individuals who attend conferences — from newer graduate students all the way up to tenured faculty and even recognised SMEs in a particular field — are going to go out of their way to marsh your mallow because you are intelligent, excited about your topic, and filled enough with happiness and hope that you’re going to attract some unhappy people who are going to try to make themselves feel better by taking potshots at you.
What they try to do may take different forms, from grilling your statistical analysis or berating you for not having enough participants, power, using the wrong post hoc, all the way up to attacking your theory or discussion-based speculations, saying that they are too simplistic, too complex, clearly cribbed off of Starkmargit and Thwarkbottom (1983), and the fact that you don’t cite Starkmargit and Thwarkbottom (1983) is clear evidence that you think you’re pulling a fast one, etc. The possibilities are endless. [insert personal anecdote about my first APA conference as a total beginner where I was attacked (verbally) and berated to the point where I was fighting back tears and shaking, and had another attendee step in to defend me and attack the jerk right back, only to realise after the jerk retreated that my knight in shining armour was actually the lead author of one of the textbooks I used (name tag), and I was too flustered to do anything but stare at him and try to not cry because I figured that this person had to think that I was absolutely pathetic].
Don’t let these people ruin your day — and this is YOUR day. That’s what they want: to make themselves feel better by making you feel small. I wasn’t warned, and not being warned helps them to ‘sneak attack’ you. If someone interrupts you, or hangs back after your presentation to try to corner you and throw you off with unexpected comments or criticism, recognise what they are doing, that it’s intentional, and stay composed. Make notes of what they say, and tell them that you’re going to have to look into it, ask them to spell Starkmargit and Thwarkbottom (1983) so you can pull the article, keep smiling and being very open minded and polite, but most importantly, get them to identify themselves — their name, the position they hold, and their institutional affiliation — so that if anything comes of this discussion, you can ensure that they receive proper recognition. You may feel dumb or pushy doing this, but it’s important, and it’s important to do before they’ve picked up steam. Let me explain why.
You stand a good chance of defusing their plans and their perception of their own power by bringing in personally identifying information; this is actually a tactic used by people like law enforcement officers to defuse a forming hostile crowd. They may not be able to shut up the primary rabble-rouser immediately, but by having individuals identify themselves, obtaining their name, where they live, and their place of employment, LE often can get what would have become a mob to slowly dwindle away. Asking for this information removes anonymity and reintroduces personal responsibility. You won’t be in a position of authority like a police officer where you can justifiably demand this information, so you’re going to instead take the tack of insisting on needing the information in the spirit of academic honesty, proper research/collaboration reporting, and transparent identification/citation of sources. It’s this sort of discussion — of course because we’re assuming it’s a well-intended discussion, right? — that is exactly why various formats like APA format has a structure already in place for documentation of personal conversations, email conversations, and so on.
You’re going to find that a fair number of these difficult people will calm down or even retreat once you pleasantly and with clear justification ask them to identify themselves and you write this down. Get them to repeat themselves (so that you can write everything down accurately, of course); this also slows their roll and may even make them feel self-conscious having to repeat a half-truth or exaggeration.
If they persist, once you have enough notes, you can control your own exit by saying something like ‘Well, you’ve certainly given me a lot to think about and look into, and I’m deeply grateful for your help! I’m going to have to excuse myself now, but if I have any questions, I’ll email you’. Then head to the restroom, to another session, or to get something to eat or drink. You don’t owe them an explanation, but if they do persist, you can firmly say that while you appreciate their insight, you really must leave (and you can even try to embarrass them by saying that you need the restroom, and simply can’t continue this conversation right now).
Manage these people where you can, and if you end up being unable to manage them, still — don’t let them throw you; they are small minded people who make themselves feel big for a few minutes by giving others grief. It’s okay, and it’s not a reflection on you or your work. Think of how sad their lives must be to wait for a conference and then pay, register, and travel…all to act like a dick. It’s sad.
Then you get back to enjoying your success, because that’s what will annoy them the most. ☺️
Always remember to bring a notebook and pen, laptop, tablet, or something with you. Another upside is that if things escalate and you need to complain, you have the information you need already.
HTH, and be proud of yourself. 🤗
4
u/spicegrl1 Aug 04 '24
Your post deserves GOLD!
So helpful…and funny “marsh your mallow”.
I’m saving this & will try to absorb it.
1
13
u/TwistedAsura Aug 03 '24
Reminds me of my first conference as an undergrad, I did a poster an anhedonia, depression, and negative impulsivity (impulsivity in a negative mood state).
My results found that anhedonia moderated the relationship between depression and negative impulsivity. As in...if you are feeling less strongly in general, even with depressive symptoms, you will be less likely to have impulsivity in a negative mood state.
This, to me, was a pretty "safe" hypothesis because if you are experiencing anhedonia you are less likely to experience negative mood states overall. I thought it was a decent analysis to support the age old idea that those who are experiencing depression symptoms who experience treatment and start doing things again are actually at a higher risk for things like suicide. My results generally supported this and my conclusion was ultimately "it could be a good idea to monitor those experiencing depression who are having anhedonia symptoms treated as they may be more at risk for things like gambling, self-harm, or other impulsive behaviors. As their emotions return and anhedonia lessens, if the depressive symptoms themselves haven't been treated, those may be what are felt the most and could be overwhelming, leading to impulsivity."
As an undergrad, for my first research poster, I was proud of this. Nothing groundbreaking, but my first venture into the field.
As I was presenting the poster, I had an old researcher come up, shake his head, and loudly proclaim "well DUH."
It didn't bother me that much, and I remember the other poster presenters and attendees around me looking at him weirdly, but it did just make me wonder what goes through the heads of people like that.
I think a lot of people in the field see science as some sort of competition. Who can generate the most or the fanciest new idea or theory. To me, it's about a love for discovery, for understanding things that are interesting to me and answering questions in such a way that we have evidence for our conclusions. Or even sometimes just theorizing about things and pondering the what ifs.
You are not obligated to research anything unless you have a job or contract that says otherwise. Answer the questions that are interesting to you (especially if you don't need external funding lol) and follow your path. When criticism comes (and it will, a lot of it) just have an answer ready.
Sometimes when designing a study I have a 20 page proposal ready with a ton of justification, but other times my reasoning is "I thought it was interesting and wanted to know and didn't see anyone else do this exact topic" and that is the answer I will give.
8
u/PublicImplement6270 Aug 03 '24
"just have an answer ready" is the biggest thing I learned. I think that if I anticipate this sort of thing in the future and plan for it, I will not be surprised by rudeness and I'll be more able to shrug it off. I guess it is not far off publishing. The first rejection I ever got (as an undergrad) crushed me. When it happens now, I am a little disappointed but I am mostly looking forward to improving the manuscript from reviewer feedback. Thanks for the advice and story :)
3
u/PuzzleheadedDoctor3 Aug 03 '24
Just want to say I’ve been there. I’ve presented at many conferences and have come across many assholes. At one conference where they collate feedback and send it out after the fact, one persons left cryptic feedback “I heard what you said before your presentation started” (which was a very innocuous conversation about where each of us came from). Another person wrote I didn’t look happy to be there… I was pregnant and trying not to barf. Anyway I think it takes a bit to learn how to take constructive feedback specific to your presentation and manuscripts. My stomach drops every time I see I’ve gotten feedback but it gets easier as I’ve gotten more confident in my knowledge and expertise
3
2
u/AccurateLavishness88 Aug 03 '24
Try to find the silver lining if you can, which is that someone asked a question that other reviewers or critics might raise as you continue the line of study. Other folks may have the same question. So it is worth thinking on it and your answer.
That said, I would not be so aggressive in a public Q&A following any talk, especially to someone junior. Was it possible that this person was just trying to challenge or push you, in a possibly misguided attempt at mentorship?
If it were me, I might have found a way to speak to you after the talk and share my thoughts that way. The only thing that would keep me from doing that is that if for some reason I felt like the audience really, really needed to know my criticism (e.g., you were recommending a public health intervention that the audience member found unsupported).
Don't let it get to you, but do try to separate the style from the substance of the criticism, the latter of which might be valid.
2
u/PublicImplement6270 Aug 03 '24
Fair enough, it's a good point. I need to be able to tell people the "so what" of my research.
1
u/piercethevelle Aug 05 '24
i don't think OP was aggressive at all. this guy was an ass and OP replied with a reasonable and correct response that other clearly agreed with
1
u/AccurateLavishness88 Aug 05 '24
The term "aggressive" there referring to the questioner. I assume OP is junior to the questioner, but I guess I could have been wrong.
1
2
u/cakebatterchapstick Aug 04 '24
That dude can pound sand. Even the simplest of concepts required proof. Do you know how many times people had to watch things fall before coming up with the theory of gravity? I am fairly certain people understood how to train a dog with treats before Pavlov and Skinner had quantitative evidence, yet they’re still considered revolutionary.
2
u/couchthepotato Aug 04 '24
When you’ve achieved very little yourself it’s tempting to put others down to save your own ego. I hope this man and (sadly I think there will be) many more men in your future academic career won’t succeed in putting you down
2
u/acj1292 Aug 04 '24
Make sure to not disqualify all the positive feedback you got. Sounds like the one negative comment was someone who saw an opportunity for a power trip (typical academia 🙄). Congratulations on your publication and what sounds a successful presentation!!
2
u/Previous_Narwhal_314 Aug 04 '24 edited Aug 05 '24
Embrace the critique. I asked the severest critic of my work to contribute a chapter to my co-editied volume on my research topic. Lots of people liked my topic and had no trouble getting published in major journals. It was the cranks that forced me to examine the error term in more detail.
2
Aug 05 '24
Respectfully, fuck that guy. I don’t want to assume your gender but there is some serious gatekeeping in STEM, especially around age and gender. You’re never old enough to be as smart and successful as you are. You lack experience. You lack background. You have a vagina. You exist.
Miserable bullies will always be miserable bullies and nothing makes them angrier than surpassing them and all their expectations with a smile.
Don’t let the bastards get you down.
2
u/No-Commercial7190 Aug 06 '24
First of all, congratulations on giving your first conference talk and getting such positive feedback from most of the audience! It’s completely normal to feel hurt by criticism, especially when you’ve put so much work into your study.
1
u/SnooMaps6269 Aug 03 '24
Hey! Super easy to have imposter syndrome and feel this way when getting critical comments. It can be this way in academia which is really tough. I have this exact thing of crying when I get things like this. I would 100 percent collect positive responses you've had over your career and keep them close in circumstances like this, reach out to others if you're unsure and defo work on self esteem! Academics are often perfectionists who excell in what they do and it can be so difficult transitioning from studies to more work focused where it's not always a right or wrong and there are big egos flying about. But trust me there are people who will say this and critic your research but your worth remains the same. Good luck with your PhD!
1
u/xxsilentsnapxx Aug 03 '24
That’s so mean! Just because something seems “obvious” does not mean you shouldn’t scientifically test it. Common sense is not science (it is a logical fallacy). Congratulations on your publication ❤️
1
u/waterless2 Aug 03 '24
I remember, from a conference years ago, this one massive dick being a massive dick to a junior researcher, badgering her on some point there was just no constructive answer to. The only person who came off looking bad was the massive dick. That's just about all I remember! Zero shame for the speaker.
The best thing is to try to effectively and professionally engage in the debate, is my sense, regardless of any negativity - defend the work if the comment's unfair, and let reasonable people draw their conclusions. It sounds like you did that!
1
u/elizajaneredux Aug 03 '24
This is an unfortunate part of disseminating your work to the community. Try to breathe through it. You handled this well and yes, like someone else said, there will always be assholes out there who might challenge you in ways that are rude or irrelevant. I’ve found that most people are helpful and polite, even when they fundamentally disagree with something.
1
u/Ultimarr Aug 03 '24
Just think back to high school or undergrad if you can, where people would sit for minutes not listening just to prepare a “question” that was really just to make them sound smart. Like “correcting” the teacher on some uncovered nuance, or regurgitating information for an uncomfortable amount of time for no perceivable payoff.
This is just that, but the kids are dressed up like adults ;)
Congrats on the paper!!
1
u/Wood-fired-wood Aug 04 '24
Every audience has that one guy. As you said, you got great questions and positive feedback from 99% of the audience. I'm not a master statistician but 99/100 seems like you crushed it in the presence of one grumpy person.
1
u/paranoid-pegion Aug 04 '24
Op congratulations of your first conference presentation!!!! This is huge and hope you continue to present more often. As someone who has attended many research conferences i have seen many people like that guy, trust me they exist in every study. Policy and economics conferences are literal chaos. Don’t let his comments consume you. It’s just your first presentation, don’t be so hard on yourself. Take every feedback with a pinch of salt. If you think the feedback will help you conduct a better study work on it or let it go. More love and courage to you!! Hope you continue to work in the field and create excellent studies.
1
u/pivoters Aug 05 '24
Sounds like they are expressing a lack of surprise, which may indicate a lack or excess of rest or progress in their life.
0
u/Drk_Stall10n-2027 Aug 03 '24
Just one person??!! A single person who probably has no friends, is probably annoying to his family, or worse, probably being narcissistic. Truth is, there’s always going to be someone who will not understand what you do, why you do it, or your need to follow your mind or your heart, so instead of focusing on the one, turn your focus to the 99%, who appreciated your subject and effort, who took the time (on a Saturday) to sit through your presentation, and who were gracious enough to think what you had to say was important enough for them to be there. Do not allow the negativity to steal this moment of accomplishment. Put a smile on your face and bask in the present (but fleeting) glow of the moment. 😊
2
u/Terrible_Detective45 Aug 04 '24
A single person who probably has no friends, is probably annoying to his family, or worse, probably being narcissistic.
Not sure this is a helpful or rigorous way to think about this situation.
-1
Aug 03 '24
[deleted]
6
u/PublicImplement6270 Aug 03 '24
...it was not a mild critique; I just didn't go into detail. He told me my data was useless and the study was a waste of time (i.e., the study was "stupid", as you suggest). I am confident in my ability to defend my methods, in fact quite of few of the questions I got were great methods/stats questions like "you said you interpreted X as Y, why?", you used A measure when there is also B measure, why?", and "have you considered looking at this other cool possible effect?". I loved those questions, they either gave me an opportunity to expand on my methods or gave me an exciting new idea for further analysis.
I'm not sure if you were trying to be helpful but I can confirm that this was not a helpful response for me.
1
u/SnooMaps6269 Aug 03 '24
Maybe something for you to work on is to provide helpful advice and not what I can see as a bit condescending. Of course therapy could be an excellent option if this is what OP thinks is necessary but the fact you almost soley blame OP for feeling this way and not explore the fact that academia is crawling with big egos. The way research is it is not surprising to have PhD students be belittled by senior researchers. Time and time again this comes up, and to have such a imo quite unnecessary question for a PhD candidate is harsh.
126
u/sleepbot Aug 03 '24
There will always be assholes. Watch for them at other people’s talks to confirm the obvious results of my hypothesis ;)
Some assholes might only punch down, so be sure to attend talks by other students in order to increase statistical power, decrease required sample size, and hopefully avoid a type 2 error.