Is it normal to have a hard time comprehending academic papers?












3














I am starting my PhD in Statistics program next year, and I have some concerns.
In my institution, there is a mandatory course that every PhD students have to take in lieu of taking one qualifying examination.
The course requires students to read 5 academic papers and write a report, which will be graded by faculty members.



I was browsing through the reading list for this course, and I often find myself pondering over one 20-pages long paper for days and weeks because I want to make sure that I understand every math/concepts/other details of the paper.
I am supposed to make a report for 1 paper/month, and I am now quite worried about what I am expected to do as a PhD student because it feels like it takes me eternity to comprehend a single paper. I feel discouraged because I have done very well in my Bachelor's and Master's programs in Statistics, but I am having such a hard time comprehending these academic papers.



Is it normal for beginning PhD students to have a hard time comprehending academic papers?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    Nope, beginning students should instantly understand every paper perfectly, and there's no hope for improvement if not. /s
    – cag51
    1 hour ago










  • One thing that's important to learn on the meta level is how deep your understanding of a single unit of knowledge (e.g. a paper, a concept etc.) needs to be a at a given time for a given purpose. Many beginners get lost in various rabbit holes because they overestimate how deep they need to go.
    – henning
    3 mins ago


















3














I am starting my PhD in Statistics program next year, and I have some concerns.
In my institution, there is a mandatory course that every PhD students have to take in lieu of taking one qualifying examination.
The course requires students to read 5 academic papers and write a report, which will be graded by faculty members.



I was browsing through the reading list for this course, and I often find myself pondering over one 20-pages long paper for days and weeks because I want to make sure that I understand every math/concepts/other details of the paper.
I am supposed to make a report for 1 paper/month, and I am now quite worried about what I am expected to do as a PhD student because it feels like it takes me eternity to comprehend a single paper. I feel discouraged because I have done very well in my Bachelor's and Master's programs in Statistics, but I am having such a hard time comprehending these academic papers.



Is it normal for beginning PhD students to have a hard time comprehending academic papers?










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    Nope, beginning students should instantly understand every paper perfectly, and there's no hope for improvement if not. /s
    – cag51
    1 hour ago










  • One thing that's important to learn on the meta level is how deep your understanding of a single unit of knowledge (e.g. a paper, a concept etc.) needs to be a at a given time for a given purpose. Many beginners get lost in various rabbit holes because they overestimate how deep they need to go.
    – henning
    3 mins ago
















3












3








3


1





I am starting my PhD in Statistics program next year, and I have some concerns.
In my institution, there is a mandatory course that every PhD students have to take in lieu of taking one qualifying examination.
The course requires students to read 5 academic papers and write a report, which will be graded by faculty members.



I was browsing through the reading list for this course, and I often find myself pondering over one 20-pages long paper for days and weeks because I want to make sure that I understand every math/concepts/other details of the paper.
I am supposed to make a report for 1 paper/month, and I am now quite worried about what I am expected to do as a PhD student because it feels like it takes me eternity to comprehend a single paper. I feel discouraged because I have done very well in my Bachelor's and Master's programs in Statistics, but I am having such a hard time comprehending these academic papers.



Is it normal for beginning PhD students to have a hard time comprehending academic papers?










share|improve this question













I am starting my PhD in Statistics program next year, and I have some concerns.
In my institution, there is a mandatory course that every PhD students have to take in lieu of taking one qualifying examination.
The course requires students to read 5 academic papers and write a report, which will be graded by faculty members.



I was browsing through the reading list for this course, and I often find myself pondering over one 20-pages long paper for days and weeks because I want to make sure that I understand every math/concepts/other details of the paper.
I am supposed to make a report for 1 paper/month, and I am now quite worried about what I am expected to do as a PhD student because it feels like it takes me eternity to comprehend a single paper. I feel discouraged because I have done very well in my Bachelor's and Master's programs in Statistics, but I am having such a hard time comprehending these academic papers.



Is it normal for beginning PhD students to have a hard time comprehending academic papers?







publications phd qualifying-exam






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 2 hours ago









jcho

624




624








  • 1




    Nope, beginning students should instantly understand every paper perfectly, and there's no hope for improvement if not. /s
    – cag51
    1 hour ago










  • One thing that's important to learn on the meta level is how deep your understanding of a single unit of knowledge (e.g. a paper, a concept etc.) needs to be a at a given time for a given purpose. Many beginners get lost in various rabbit holes because they overestimate how deep they need to go.
    – henning
    3 mins ago
















  • 1




    Nope, beginning students should instantly understand every paper perfectly, and there's no hope for improvement if not. /s
    – cag51
    1 hour ago










  • One thing that's important to learn on the meta level is how deep your understanding of a single unit of knowledge (e.g. a paper, a concept etc.) needs to be a at a given time for a given purpose. Many beginners get lost in various rabbit holes because they overestimate how deep they need to go.
    – henning
    3 mins ago










1




1




Nope, beginning students should instantly understand every paper perfectly, and there's no hope for improvement if not. /s
– cag51
1 hour ago




Nope, beginning students should instantly understand every paper perfectly, and there's no hope for improvement if not. /s
– cag51
1 hour ago












One thing that's important to learn on the meta level is how deep your understanding of a single unit of knowledge (e.g. a paper, a concept etc.) needs to be a at a given time for a given purpose. Many beginners get lost in various rabbit holes because they overestimate how deep they need to go.
– henning
3 mins ago






One thing that's important to learn on the meta level is how deep your understanding of a single unit of knowledge (e.g. a paper, a concept etc.) needs to be a at a given time for a given purpose. Many beginners get lost in various rabbit holes because they overestimate how deep they need to go.
– henning
3 mins ago












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4














Yes, yes it is. But it gets easier. What most people don't realize when starting out reading academic papers, is that not every paper is an island (to paraphrase...). Terminology and 'lingo' is something you learn over time, and suddenly you realize that you no longer have to look up every second concept you stumble upon in a paper - it simply references stuff that you already know.



This is of course also the reason that forcing new students to read papers, and even write a report about them to make sure that the papers have been properly digested, is a very good idea. The fact that members of faculty even take time out to grade these reports, tells me that you are probably in capable hands.






share|improve this answer





























    2














    I am in my second year of a statistics PhD. I have by now examined many hundreds of papers. Some of them are, I now know, of only tangential relevance to my research. Others are relevant but when I first saw them I did not understand them enough to know even that. And some are so relevant that I have sought to reproduce their findings and in doing so I have re-read them many times, often finding something new in them that I had not previously noticed. In parallel with reading these papers I have been learning about branches of statistics that I knew nothing of before.



    The most important thing to realise, as I now have, is that academic papers are not generally written with the aim of explaining something to a novice, but rather are there to tell someone who is already expert how wonderful the author's research in that field of expertise should be seen to be.The day will come when you too can write papers that only a few people will understand, and to get there you will have struggled through countless really difficult papers.



    Now, given that academic papers in statistics are bound to be hard to understand and that you have been asked to summarise as many as five of them in a short time, you have to accept that your summary will not be based on a complete understanding of all the material in all the papers. Imagine that you are a journalist rather than a researcher. You need to be able to write down:




    1. what question does this paper seek to answer?

    2. what is the answer?

    3. what reasons does the author give for that answer?


    If you can do that you already have a good summary of the paper. To do it you do not need to understand all the author's reasons, still less agree with them all. Later in your research, maybe, you will recall one of these papers and realise that it is relevant to your own work: then you really do have to roll up your sleeves and understand in detail, but not now.






    share|improve this answer





















    • w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
      – davidbak
      3 mins ago



















    0














    Yes. But it's a question of practice. More reading= More understanding. More understanding easier to understand a new paper.



    But you do not need to understand every single phrase.
    For instance, if it is not exactly your field, I would jump over the methods section.



    I got a recommendation during my Ph.D. first read Abstract, second Intro, third Conclusion. Some cases 3rd Results, 4th Conclusion.
    The more you read the more you'll understand.



    Read, read, read. That's the key



    Reviews on the field of study are excellent starting points






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.


















    • Reviews are a very good starting point.
      – pink.slash
      19 mins ago











    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "415"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122188%2fis-it-normal-to-have-a-hard-time-comprehending-academic-papers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    4














    Yes, yes it is. But it gets easier. What most people don't realize when starting out reading academic papers, is that not every paper is an island (to paraphrase...). Terminology and 'lingo' is something you learn over time, and suddenly you realize that you no longer have to look up every second concept you stumble upon in a paper - it simply references stuff that you already know.



    This is of course also the reason that forcing new students to read papers, and even write a report about them to make sure that the papers have been properly digested, is a very good idea. The fact that members of faculty even take time out to grade these reports, tells me that you are probably in capable hands.






    share|improve this answer


























      4














      Yes, yes it is. But it gets easier. What most people don't realize when starting out reading academic papers, is that not every paper is an island (to paraphrase...). Terminology and 'lingo' is something you learn over time, and suddenly you realize that you no longer have to look up every second concept you stumble upon in a paper - it simply references stuff that you already know.



      This is of course also the reason that forcing new students to read papers, and even write a report about them to make sure that the papers have been properly digested, is a very good idea. The fact that members of faculty even take time out to grade these reports, tells me that you are probably in capable hands.






      share|improve this answer
























        4












        4








        4






        Yes, yes it is. But it gets easier. What most people don't realize when starting out reading academic papers, is that not every paper is an island (to paraphrase...). Terminology and 'lingo' is something you learn over time, and suddenly you realize that you no longer have to look up every second concept you stumble upon in a paper - it simply references stuff that you already know.



        This is of course also the reason that forcing new students to read papers, and even write a report about them to make sure that the papers have been properly digested, is a very good idea. The fact that members of faculty even take time out to grade these reports, tells me that you are probably in capable hands.






        share|improve this answer












        Yes, yes it is. But it gets easier. What most people don't realize when starting out reading academic papers, is that not every paper is an island (to paraphrase...). Terminology and 'lingo' is something you learn over time, and suddenly you realize that you no longer have to look up every second concept you stumble upon in a paper - it simply references stuff that you already know.



        This is of course also the reason that forcing new students to read papers, and even write a report about them to make sure that the papers have been properly digested, is a very good idea. The fact that members of faculty even take time out to grade these reports, tells me that you are probably in capable hands.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 hours ago









        nabla

        4,31711029




        4,31711029























            2














            I am in my second year of a statistics PhD. I have by now examined many hundreds of papers. Some of them are, I now know, of only tangential relevance to my research. Others are relevant but when I first saw them I did not understand them enough to know even that. And some are so relevant that I have sought to reproduce their findings and in doing so I have re-read them many times, often finding something new in them that I had not previously noticed. In parallel with reading these papers I have been learning about branches of statistics that I knew nothing of before.



            The most important thing to realise, as I now have, is that academic papers are not generally written with the aim of explaining something to a novice, but rather are there to tell someone who is already expert how wonderful the author's research in that field of expertise should be seen to be.The day will come when you too can write papers that only a few people will understand, and to get there you will have struggled through countless really difficult papers.



            Now, given that academic papers in statistics are bound to be hard to understand and that you have been asked to summarise as many as five of them in a short time, you have to accept that your summary will not be based on a complete understanding of all the material in all the papers. Imagine that you are a journalist rather than a researcher. You need to be able to write down:




            1. what question does this paper seek to answer?

            2. what is the answer?

            3. what reasons does the author give for that answer?


            If you can do that you already have a good summary of the paper. To do it you do not need to understand all the author's reasons, still less agree with them all. Later in your research, maybe, you will recall one of these papers and realise that it is relevant to your own work: then you really do have to roll up your sleeves and understand in detail, but not now.






            share|improve this answer





















            • w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
              – davidbak
              3 mins ago
















            2














            I am in my second year of a statistics PhD. I have by now examined many hundreds of papers. Some of them are, I now know, of only tangential relevance to my research. Others are relevant but when I first saw them I did not understand them enough to know even that. And some are so relevant that I have sought to reproduce their findings and in doing so I have re-read them many times, often finding something new in them that I had not previously noticed. In parallel with reading these papers I have been learning about branches of statistics that I knew nothing of before.



            The most important thing to realise, as I now have, is that academic papers are not generally written with the aim of explaining something to a novice, but rather are there to tell someone who is already expert how wonderful the author's research in that field of expertise should be seen to be.The day will come when you too can write papers that only a few people will understand, and to get there you will have struggled through countless really difficult papers.



            Now, given that academic papers in statistics are bound to be hard to understand and that you have been asked to summarise as many as five of them in a short time, you have to accept that your summary will not be based on a complete understanding of all the material in all the papers. Imagine that you are a journalist rather than a researcher. You need to be able to write down:




            1. what question does this paper seek to answer?

            2. what is the answer?

            3. what reasons does the author give for that answer?


            If you can do that you already have a good summary of the paper. To do it you do not need to understand all the author's reasons, still less agree with them all. Later in your research, maybe, you will recall one of these papers and realise that it is relevant to your own work: then you really do have to roll up your sleeves and understand in detail, but not now.






            share|improve this answer





















            • w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
              – davidbak
              3 mins ago














            2












            2








            2






            I am in my second year of a statistics PhD. I have by now examined many hundreds of papers. Some of them are, I now know, of only tangential relevance to my research. Others are relevant but when I first saw them I did not understand them enough to know even that. And some are so relevant that I have sought to reproduce their findings and in doing so I have re-read them many times, often finding something new in them that I had not previously noticed. In parallel with reading these papers I have been learning about branches of statistics that I knew nothing of before.



            The most important thing to realise, as I now have, is that academic papers are not generally written with the aim of explaining something to a novice, but rather are there to tell someone who is already expert how wonderful the author's research in that field of expertise should be seen to be.The day will come when you too can write papers that only a few people will understand, and to get there you will have struggled through countless really difficult papers.



            Now, given that academic papers in statistics are bound to be hard to understand and that you have been asked to summarise as many as five of them in a short time, you have to accept that your summary will not be based on a complete understanding of all the material in all the papers. Imagine that you are a journalist rather than a researcher. You need to be able to write down:




            1. what question does this paper seek to answer?

            2. what is the answer?

            3. what reasons does the author give for that answer?


            If you can do that you already have a good summary of the paper. To do it you do not need to understand all the author's reasons, still less agree with them all. Later in your research, maybe, you will recall one of these papers and realise that it is relevant to your own work: then you really do have to roll up your sleeves and understand in detail, but not now.






            share|improve this answer












            I am in my second year of a statistics PhD. I have by now examined many hundreds of papers. Some of them are, I now know, of only tangential relevance to my research. Others are relevant but when I first saw them I did not understand them enough to know even that. And some are so relevant that I have sought to reproduce their findings and in doing so I have re-read them many times, often finding something new in them that I had not previously noticed. In parallel with reading these papers I have been learning about branches of statistics that I knew nothing of before.



            The most important thing to realise, as I now have, is that academic papers are not generally written with the aim of explaining something to a novice, but rather are there to tell someone who is already expert how wonderful the author's research in that field of expertise should be seen to be.The day will come when you too can write papers that only a few people will understand, and to get there you will have struggled through countless really difficult papers.



            Now, given that academic papers in statistics are bound to be hard to understand and that you have been asked to summarise as many as five of them in a short time, you have to accept that your summary will not be based on a complete understanding of all the material in all the papers. Imagine that you are a journalist rather than a researcher. You need to be able to write down:




            1. what question does this paper seek to answer?

            2. what is the answer?

            3. what reasons does the author give for that answer?


            If you can do that you already have a good summary of the paper. To do it you do not need to understand all the author's reasons, still less agree with them all. Later in your research, maybe, you will recall one of these papers and realise that it is relevant to your own work: then you really do have to roll up your sleeves and understand in detail, but not now.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            JeremyC

            39416




            39416












            • w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
              – davidbak
              3 mins ago


















            • w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
              – davidbak
              3 mins ago
















            w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
            – davidbak
            3 mins ago




            w.r.t. paragraph two I am reminded of the following: "Oppenheimer once said that most people gave talks to show others how to do the calculation, while Schwinger gave talks to show that only he could do it." (The paper I found this in, however, continues: "Although a commonly shared view, this witticism is unkind and untrue.")
            – davidbak
            3 mins ago











            0














            Yes. But it's a question of practice. More reading= More understanding. More understanding easier to understand a new paper.



            But you do not need to understand every single phrase.
            For instance, if it is not exactly your field, I would jump over the methods section.



            I got a recommendation during my Ph.D. first read Abstract, second Intro, third Conclusion. Some cases 3rd Results, 4th Conclusion.
            The more you read the more you'll understand.



            Read, read, read. That's the key



            Reviews on the field of study are excellent starting points






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.


















            • Reviews are a very good starting point.
              – pink.slash
              19 mins ago
















            0














            Yes. But it's a question of practice. More reading= More understanding. More understanding easier to understand a new paper.



            But you do not need to understand every single phrase.
            For instance, if it is not exactly your field, I would jump over the methods section.



            I got a recommendation during my Ph.D. first read Abstract, second Intro, third Conclusion. Some cases 3rd Results, 4th Conclusion.
            The more you read the more you'll understand.



            Read, read, read. That's the key



            Reviews on the field of study are excellent starting points






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.


















            • Reviews are a very good starting point.
              – pink.slash
              19 mins ago














            0












            0








            0






            Yes. But it's a question of practice. More reading= More understanding. More understanding easier to understand a new paper.



            But you do not need to understand every single phrase.
            For instance, if it is not exactly your field, I would jump over the methods section.



            I got a recommendation during my Ph.D. first read Abstract, second Intro, third Conclusion. Some cases 3rd Results, 4th Conclusion.
            The more you read the more you'll understand.



            Read, read, read. That's the key



            Reviews on the field of study are excellent starting points






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            Yes. But it's a question of practice. More reading= More understanding. More understanding easier to understand a new paper.



            But you do not need to understand every single phrase.
            For instance, if it is not exactly your field, I would jump over the methods section.



            I got a recommendation during my Ph.D. first read Abstract, second Intro, third Conclusion. Some cases 3rd Results, 4th Conclusion.
            The more you read the more you'll understand.



            Read, read, read. That's the key



            Reviews on the field of study are excellent starting points







            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 15 mins ago





















            New contributor




            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            answered 21 mins ago









            pink.slash

            11




            11




            New contributor




            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.





            New contributor





            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            pink.slash is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.












            • Reviews are a very good starting point.
              – pink.slash
              19 mins ago


















            • Reviews are a very good starting point.
              – pink.slash
              19 mins ago
















            Reviews are a very good starting point.
            – pink.slash
            19 mins ago




            Reviews are a very good starting point.
            – pink.slash
            19 mins ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122188%2fis-it-normal-to-have-a-hard-time-comprehending-academic-papers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            サソリ

            広島県道265号伴広島線

            Setup Asymptote in Texstudio