🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan09.195642.19414@eng.umd.edu> clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles Lin) writes:

>In article <1993Jan9.113916.27542@fuug.fi>, an3329@anon.penet.fi writes:
>>I'm a graduate student and I have a bit of a problem
>>with my advisor.  He gave me some papers to referee,
>>and these papers were submitted to a conference to
>>which I have also submitted a paper. The problem is
>>that these papers are very similar to the paper which
>>I submitted, and so they will be competing directly 
>>against my paper. I told him that I could not act as 
>>an impartial reviewer, and I asked to have someone else
>>review the papers, but he refused.  (He is also the
>>conference co-chairman).  He said that it was perfectly
>>acceptable for me to review the papers, but I don't believe 
>>him.  What do I do?  I was thinking of refusing to review
>>the papers by not submitting a report, and just let the
>>deadline slip.  Please respond by posting because this 
>>site does not have secure e-mail. 


>    Though I am not really familiar with the reviewing process, it seems
>as if there is something of an ethical dilemma.   On the one hand, since
>the work is similar to yours, you would seem qualified to make some judgments
>on the work.   On the other, you may have some quota of papers that should
>be accepted, and you may feel that there is a perception that you rejected a paper
>to make yours look good.

>    Given that your advisor is your advisor, and that you may not have
>anyone to back you up on this, I would probably suggest that you go
>ahead and review it.   Also, given that you feel that there may be
>ethical problems, one would assume that you would be able review the
>papers without ulterior motives because you are already worried about
>improprieties.

>    You could also consider trying to talk to other professors to see whether
>this is really a problem, though professors can be friends with one another, 
>and you may feel the need for confidentiality.

Except in very unusual circumstances, one should be extremely cautious in
refereeing papers which may compete with ongoing research.  Also, it is not
uncommon for faculty to ask their students to make a preliminary review of
a paper, with the faculty member being the final judge, but I would never
do this if the student's current research may be affected in any way by
knowing the contents of the paper.  Even here, it seems to me that the
advisor is bound to respect the wishes of the student not to referee.

As a faculty member of long standing, I believe that the advisor's rights
should be strictly limited to advising.  I personally consider that your
advisor should remove himself from the position, and do this in such a
way that your degree prospects are not affected.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)