When you’re working on a paper of some sort (class paper, thesis, manuscript), how do you approach it? Do you agonize over every word and sentence and paragraph as you go? Or do you work to push through relatively quickly, leaving holes as you get stuck on things?
 
I used to do the former.  I would start a manuscript with paragraph one. I would take an inordinate amount of time agonizing over that paragraph in particular, to get the perfect first sentence, and perfect first paragraph. As I went through, if I wanted to cite something to make a particular point in a sentence, I would pause from writing and track down that reference immediately. If I struggled over an idea or thought, I would stay with that paragraph/idea until I could hash out at least some form of a draft of that paragraph.
 
I have modified this style slowly over time. Now, if you look at a draft of a paper I’m working on, it will have multiple comments and/or statements in bold. So, instead of getting stuck, I will skip over a sticking point and come back to it later. I often don’t even attempt to tackle the first paragraph until the rest of the introduction is done. And sometimes I outline the introduction, paragraph by paragraph, and write out the hypotheses, but don’t fill in the line by line details of the introduction until I’ve drafted the methods and results.
 
Now I allow holes in the draft (drafty drafts) in order to keep moving through it, rather than pausing to fix every detail. So, opening up some current in progress manuscripts, they include some of the following comments:

• Do we need more of a transition here? Probably…
• (CITE)
• (CITES OF LOW % AT YOUNG AGE)
• Religiosity:  FIND ANYTHING ON KISSING? AND THEN IF NOT, GO TO LIFETIME VAGINAL SEX
• MORE HERE ON WHY THIS MATTERS???
• Despite these limitations, this paper provides… WRITE A CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH!!!
• SAY MORE HERE ABOUT WHY THIS IS INTERESTING.
• (AH, FIX THIS SENTENCE!).
• ORAL SEX MATTER? THEY ARE REINFORCIING – SEE TALK FOR THIS, BUT BASICALLY, IF ORAL SEX IS LESS POSITIVELY PERCEIVED, MAY BE MORE LIKELY TO ENGAGE IN VAGINAL IN FUTURE, WHICH CARRIES EVEN MORE RISK

The point is, rather than getting stuck on trying to explain why oral sex matters, if I’m really stuck on that issue in the moment, I can move onto the next paragraph, and return to it later with fresh eyes.
 
I’ve been collaborating with someone new over the past couple of years, and his style is quite different. He will send a draft around with fairly significant gaps in it. Often he sends it before the discussion is touched, and often there are holes in the manuscript, either where he’s asking for help/advice, or where he wants to return to later, but he wants input from others on other sections first. Sometimes I’ve tried to follow his lead, in terms of allowing my draft to be draftier when I send it to co-authors. In the past, no matter what order I worked on things, I didn’t send the paper to co-authors until I had a full, relatively solid draft. Now, I should pause to note that if you’re a student working on a thesis or a manuscript with your adviser, it’s unlikely you will draft a full manuscript before sharing with your mentor. I usually have my students share their manuscripts (and theses and dissertations) in stages so I can have input before they have written too much (and potentially wasted a lot of time down the wrong path).
 
By emulating my collaborator and sending drafts around at earlier stages, I find that the back-and-forth pushes me to get moving more quickly, and the early input can help shape sections that I might have had to rewrite more drastically later. Also, some section I’m struggling with may come more easily for a co-author. So if you open up drafts I recently shared with co-authors, they contain some of the following comments:

• You’ll notice reading through that I haven’t really settled on a term to refer to this age period. Once we pick one I promise I’ll use it consistently.
• At this point reading through, ignore APA style for et al as I tried to mostly write things out in case order changes or earlier references get dropped. 
• WHAT ELSE CAN WE PUT HERE? DRINKING SODA (KIND OF KIDDING); RISKY DRIVING? TANNING?
• OTHER BETTER IDEAS HERE?

 
By allowing myself to have drafty drafts, rather than letting perfectionistic-Eva take over and agonize over the placement of every word, I increase my efficiency. And fresh-eyes-Eva often can tackle the problem that tripped up yesterday-Eva.
 
“The post Drafty drafts first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on January 24, 2016.

You can visit my posts on our puberty development classes from 2015 and 2014. I won’t repeat myself.

Some of the new papers we discussed this year, that either I found, or a student brought in:

Marvan et al. (2006): Interesting data in Mexico examining reactions to puberty, and how they differ both by current age group (teenager – seniors), and how prepared they had been for first menstruation.  
 
Mora (2012): An ethnographic study of middle school Latino boys, and there interactions around puberty, physical development, physical strength, and development.
 
Shaw et al. (2013): Demonstrated that girls with obstructive sleep apnea were behind other girls on breast development.

As always, our discussions about puberty were more lively than I could truly convey in a blog post, but overall an energetic discussion.

“The post Adolescent Development: Puberty 3 first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on January 20, 2015.

There are a number of posts out there about mental health during graduate school. Some good sources include The Professor Is In’s posts on mental illness and academia, Tenure She Wrote, and ProfHacker’s section on wellness.
As Graduate Professor-in-Charge, I meet with students frequently, and concerns around stress and mental health arise in a range of contexts. A while ago, a student expressed some concern about there being a stigma on mental health issues, and so I spent some time considering how I, as Grad Director (and as a non-clinician), could address these concerns without sounding preachy or condescending. After consulting with some of our clinically trained faculty, I sent the following email to our graduate students to provide students with thoughts and resources on the topic. I also forwarded it to faculty so that they could see the messages I was communicating to students. How does your department address student mental health and wellbeing?

Dear HDFS graduate students,
 
I hope that you had a wonderful break, and found time for sleep, relaxation, and engagement in whatever activities bring you joy.
 
I wanted to write to bring up the subject of mental health, and how important it is to be aware of your own mental health and wellbeing, now and throughout graduate school. The period of personal and professional development that you are currently in is one where rates of some mental health issues increase and/or peak. Sometimes, the stress of graduate school can intensify previous mental health issues, and sometimes new issues emerge. In addition, some of the topics covered in HDFS courses can at times trigger personal issues that could bring up mental health concerns. 
 
Your own personal wellbeing, whether physical, mental, or social, is always going to be more important than excelling in classes or getting another manuscript submitted. Do be aware of your own wellbeing, and take the time to nurture it.  Monitor your own stress levels, and make sure to engage in activities that will help you alleviate some stress, whatever those activities may be for you – yoga, meditation, or mindfulness practice; exercise, long walks, or time spent in nature; reading or listening to music; spending time with friends… There is free yoga available in State College, both on campus  and in town. And there are many opportunities for recreational activities on campus.
 
If you have concerns about your own stress levels or mental health, do seek out help. You can always talk to your adviser, to me, or to other faculty for advice, although they/I cannot serve as a professional counselor or therapist.
 
If you think that you would benefit from professional help, do not hesitate to take advantage of the services offered by the University’s Counseling and Psychological Services Center (CAPS).  CAPS provides up to 6 free sessions with professional therapists on their staff. CAPS staff includes psychologists as well as psychiatrists, for those for whom medication might be helpful. CAPS also offers a number of group sessions during the semester, some of which are specifically designed for graduate students. Other helpful resources on campus include the Center for Women Students and the LGBTQA Student Resource Center. Finally, there are useful self-help resources on the CAPS website, including videos.
 
There are also many highly skilled therapists in the community. CAPS has a list of community-based mental health providers with current openings. I’m happy to make suggestions if you ever need such advice.
 
There are many useful resources for crisis situations that you should know about. The CAPS website has a comprehensive list:
 
There are also some hotlines for urgent situations:
Centre County CAN HELP Line: (1-800-643-5432)
Sexual assault and relationship violence hotline: (1-800-560-1637)
Centre County Women’s Resource Center: (814-234-5050)
The Meadows Psychiatric Center: (1-800-641-7529)
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: (1-800-273-8255)
 
Here are some other suggested readings if you’d like to learn more on the topic:
 
APA
Gradhacker
 
As always, don’t hesitate to be in touch if you have any questions.
 
Eva

“The post Prioritizing wellbeing during graduate school first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on January 17, 2016.

I'm teaching my graduate seminar on adolescent development this semester. I teach it as a survey course, so lots of broad overview. I'm excited this semester because in addition to HDFS students, we have students from psychology, education, and nursing. Here's the syllabus:

I love hearing the students' contemporary issues presentations. It really provides students an opportunity to delve into a topic of interest to them, and exposes all of us to the most recent research in a more controversial topic. I look forward to this year's presentations because the students chose different topics than the usual suspects. Here's the full list of topics:

"The post Graduate seminar: Adolescent development" first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz's blog on January 14, 2016."

Really excited to be teaching my graduate seminar, Professional and ethical issues in Human Development and Family Studies, for the second time this semester. I've added a number of new readings since last year, and I've also assigned Karen Kelsky's book, The Professor Is In.  

My learning objectives:

1. Describe general ethical principles that guide the professional and scholarly behavior of developmental and social scientists
2. Negotiate ethical and fair research collaborations and collaborative writing projects, including those with mentors
3. Navigate responsible reporting of research and peer review
4. Identify career goals, and/or how to develop career goals, and the tools needed to obtain these goals
5. Write a clear CV, research statement, and professional website
6. Understand the requirements for a strong job talk, interview, and grant proposal (we will not be able to spend enough time on these topics that you will come out fully developed in these areas)
7. Recognize the boundaries, including fuzzy boundaries, of academic freedom

Topics include ethics of data management, reporting, publishing and peer review; mentoring and co-authorship; publishing and peer review; career planning, CVs, statements, job interviews and job talks; grant writing; academic freedom.

Here is the full syllabus.

"The post: Course: Professional development and ethics first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz's blog on January 12, 2016"

Adolescents and young adults who engage in more frequent alcohol use also tend to engage in more frequent sexual behavior. However, most findings in this area are based on cross-sectional data, and thus indicate whether individuals who tend to drink more engage in more sexual behavior, but not necessarily that alcohol use and sexual behavior are temporally linked within individuals. In a recent paper in Journal of Research on Adolescence, Megan Patrick, Jennifer Maggs, and I used data from the University Life Study to examine daily associations between alcohol use and sexual behaviors across seven semesters of college. We found that consuming more drinks and engaging in binge drinking on a given day were associated with an increased likelihood of kissing, touching, oral sex, and penetrative sex on the same day. Findings were stronger at the semester and daily level than at the person level, suggesting that the associations may actually have more to do with situational factors than with stable personal traits.

The association between alcohol use and sexual behavior was higher for students who were not in romantic relationships, and for students with stronger expectations that alcohol was linked to sex.  These findings provide some support for alcohol myopia theory. That is, students who are not in relationships may be relying on the most salient cues in the moment, such as whether a partner is available, when they are drinking. In contrast, the sexual behavior of students who are in romantic relationships and therefore have frequent access to sexual partners are likely less context and state dependent. Findings also support alcohol expectancy theory, given that students who expected alcohol use to be associated with sexual behavior demonstrated stronger associations between their own alcohol use and their sexual behavior. 

“The post Alcohol use linked to a range of sexual behaviors, especially for single students first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on January 7, 2016.”

Here is the process I go through when I get an R&R (revise & resubmit) on a journal article:
1. Hurray!
2. This is all totally doable. And reasonable.
3. Hmmm… some of this may not be all that reasonable.
4. Hmmm… some of this may not be all that doable.
5. [insert inappropriate language here]
6. We did it. Hurray!

I’ve been trying to publish journal articles for more than 20 years, so I’ve received my share of R&R letters (when I’m lucky). I’ve received supportive ones, I’ve received neutral ones, and I’ve received ones that felt unnecessarily harsh. Here is one that felt really harsh at the time – it was in a letter about the first manuscript I wrote from my dissertation, which, in retrospective, was way too long – but also was eventually published in the first journal I sent it to, Child Development.

Ouch. But as my adviser told me at the time, in the end it doesn’t matter how nice the letter is, as long as you can respond to it. So, here is my advice on what to do/write, no matter how supportive or harsh the feedback is.

• Include the original critiques. One of the biggest challenges of an R&R is not only revising the manuscript in response to the feedback, but also explaining every change you did (or did not) make. When your adviser or colleague gives you feedback on a thesis or paper, you don’t necessarily have to respond – certainly not in writing – to each point. But with an editor (and the reviewers who may read your letter and reread your manuscript), you have to respond to everything.
• I was originally taught that in writing a letter to the editor, I should not cut and paste from the actual letters, but instead should paraphrase the points. My mentor told me that by doing so, I didn’t have to quote feedback that was very negative, but could paraphrase and therefore soften some of it. After serving as an associate editor for Developmental Psychology, I changed my philosophy on this point, and I now do cut and paste the original language from the letter, and respond to each point. Then, the editor and reviewers do not have to go back and forth between 3 documents – their reviews, your letter, and your revised manuscript – they only have to look at the letter and the manuscript. Saving others’ time is always appreciated.
• Don’t skip any points. It seems obvious, but I’ve seen authors fail to respond point-by-point far too often. If an editor or reviewer raises a point, you have to address it one way or another. To ignore it is to really annoy him/her, and that’s not in your best interest.
• Be polite. Sometimes you will be really frustrated with editors or reviewers. Sometimes you will really disagree with them. It absolutely does not benefit you to express any of that frustration. Whatever you say, say it in a polite way. I know that there’s variability in the extent to which authors state things such as “this point was a really valuable one.” Some authors use these types of phrases frequently, others cut right to the chase (“we have addressed this issue on p. XX by adding…”). Whichever style you choose, be polite. And, if you do think the reviewer made a good point, be sure to say so.
• Save your “get out of jail free” card. Another term I borrowed from Steve Zarit. There are usually going to be a couple of points that a reviewer made that you strongly disagree with, and thus plan to argue against in your letter. Try to minimize the number of such points, and maximize points in which you do take the editor’s/reviewers’ advice. I have at times changed something that I preferred the way I originally had it, so that I could hold firm on another point. As they say in parenting, choose your battles. I have rerun all of my analyses and rewritten all of my tables, dropping 2 (out of 700) participants because of a characteristic that a reviewer thought could bias my results.

-----
Although I often groan during the revision process, I usually genuinely believe that the final product after responding to reviews is better than what I initially submitted. That is, I generally have faith in the process.

What if your paper was rejected? The bad news is, your paper was rejected, and you have to start over with a new journal. The good news is, you have a “free” set of reviews, can address concerns you agree with, and can totally ignore what you don’t agree with, before sending it to a new journal.

Just don’t ignore every point, or obvious ones. I once reviewed a paper and provided relatively extensive feedback. Three months later, I received the identical paper to review from a different journal – and the only change was one misspelled word. So I sent the exact same review to the editor. 
 
“The post Writing the letter to editor for your revised manuscript first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on January 4, 2016.”