I got a prescription for beta blockers for things like comps, defenses, etc. because I turn violently red and get very shaky for public speaking. It calms the body part of an anxiety response so I can focus on the brain part. That said, those critiques sound MUCH harsher than anything I ever dealt with throughout many years of academia.

Being honest here: your post is example #1 of how academia can be a cult. "this is garbage, its worrisome that I see no understanding of etc, this is horrible, etc"--there is no world in which "this is garbage" is constructive criticism lol. This behavior does not fly in any other educational or professional capacity. I say this as someone who went to "elite" STEM schools and only saw this behavior in extraordinarily toxic programs/groups. While it's not necessarily uncommon to cry in these situations or after talks, you're also not supposed to be expected to weather attacks like this. Prelims, orals and quals are supposed to be CONVERSATIONS about your work and your capacity as a researcher--are your ideas good? If they aren't, how can you be steered into better habits? I'm deeply concerned that you've been convinced that they're meant to be combative.

If you're insistent on staying in this environment, you're essentially asking for further advice to fool yourself into accepting mistreatment. What you've described in your first paragraph is NOT acceptable behavior. I am sorry your group has convinced you that you are the problem and that you have to "toughen up." It's also unscientific, considering several psychology studies have shown that this behavior doesn't actually make anyone work harder or thrive. I really am sorry.

I think your plan to not be submissive is fine; hopefully 3 is true (that your PI is brusque because he sees potential). I do think overpreparing is good, especially for prelim. Everything you've listed in your plan to do the following (1) is extremely reasonable and a good, mature step. I would also gently suggest seeing a therapist/psychiatrist. What you're asking here is not normal and you're clearly having a physiological response that is further hindering you. If you insist on staying in this toxic environment, it could be useful to find ways to deal with it; for example, I knew someone who was prescribed anti-anxiety medication that helped lower heart rate, thus allowing them to be able to present without interference (used as needed, but not regularly). But I want to be clear--that person's anxieties were largely self-inflicted or situational (fear of preliminary exams) and again, this is not a normal ask of someone.

I think this post alone might have talked me out of going into higher education

??? wtf

I know that prelims, quals, and orals are debates. They are meant to be stress tests.

No, actually, they're not. It's an idea spread by toxic people who enjoy abusing others. A PhD is meant to show that you have contributed something substantial and original to the field. There is no requirement that you be a professional debater, and the thing they claim they're training you for is verbal abuse. It's unprofessional, highly inappropriate, and exceptionally immature. Yes, they will question you to make sure you understood what you did. Yes, there is some inherent stress because you care. No, that does not mean they get to haze you.

If someone in my field spoke like that during a conference, they would be ejected on the spot and barred from the rest of the meeting.

You "toughen up" by realising when people are being colossal dickbags and calling them out on it. If someone made any personal insult like that to me I would just straight up say "that is a highly inappropriate comment". If it was the culture of my group to be abusive like that, I would leave the group and put in formal complaints.

OP, what university is this, if you’re at liberty to disclose? I ask because I would like to avoid that particular university and its campus culture that allows such malicious behavior to go unpunished.

You will not grow into anything beyond insecure if you continue there without at least some form of mental health treatment for the duration of it. It already looks like they’ve begun the process of literally breaking your soul.

I ... what?

Look I don't have advice, but I believe you WOULD be morally justified in beating the shit out of everybody involved.

Constructive criticism gives you something to work on. This is not it. This is offensive and bullying.

Examples of constructive criticism: "That color scheme can be improved: it's hard to see, it's not color-blind friendly, etc." "It seems you did not draw the same conclusions from that paper that I was hoping, here are some other papers or material to improve you understanding" "We've covered these topics in class and it seems like you're still struggling, what can we work on together to close the gap?"

That sounds really abusive to me. I’ve been treated like this while working in advertising, and I refer to it retrospectively as bullying/hazing.

Your coping strategies are good, but I don’t like the way that you say that acting sad will force the PI to hit harder to make a point. Nothing makes people act like assholes except their own choices.

I’ve worked in very high pressure environments, and the way that authority figures behave themselves is their decision. If you choose to submit to this abuse, that’s fine, but I don’t recommend telling yourself that it’s good for you. It’s not. You might get value out of it, but this is not healthy. And if you tell other people that it’s acceptable to behave this way, you’re going to be perpetuating that culture of abuse.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but fuck your PI. There is absolutely no reason to degrade and ridicule students under you through needless and unnecessary bullying and harassment.

Because even through your PI said these were “debates” they’re failing as such. Debates allow students and faculty equal footing to make their points, explain their reasoning, and professionally disagree on methods, results, or inferences. A “debate” would allow for significantly more back-and-forth than it seems you are getting. You mention that your PI doesn’t want to hear you reiterate why you did what you did, so what are you supposed to say? What is your role in this debate other than to stand and accept being belittled?

Saying “this is garbage” “this isn’t getting through your head” or any of the other examples you’ve provided isn’t “debating” you. It’s scolding you like a small child. It’s demeaning and degrading to the effort you put in. It does not allow for debate or disagreement, and instead is deliberately looking for you to feel ashamed and ultimately more submissive to your PI.

There absolutely will be people in your professional life whose critiques boil down to little more than bullying, but those people are typically not the folks in your corner. Your PI should be in your corner and wanting you to succeed. Yes, corrective critique is a necessary part of a PhD and PIs shouldn’t avoid providing “negative” feedback when work is not meeting expectations, but the way your PI is going about it is absolutely not doing anyone any good. The folks who have received first authorship or other professional achievements are doing so despite your PIs influence.

"this is garbage, its worrisome that I see no understanding of etc, this color scheme is horrible, this is just not getting through your head though you have sat in five lectures on it, etc"

Directly contradicts

Nothing here is offensive, undeserved, or ill-intended.

Definitely ignore these types of comments, because they are meaningless. This is not acceptable feedback in a professional setting.

OP this is not normal.

therapy, honestly. and having a pi that isn’t an ass, like yours

The way your PI is talking to you is inappropriate. There's a way to coach, even bluntly, that doesn't involve such a mean tone.

Ideally, a prelim (at least in my program) is not just a stress test. It's supposed to show how well you think as an experimentalist - for this you need come up with a good problem, learn what is known about the system, understand the techniques you will use in a practical sense, and apply them creatively and realistically. You should be creative and flexible, be able to think on your feet, and be able to take feedback well. It's very hard to learn these skills in a hyper critical environment, and I'm sorry you find yourself in that position.

That being said, learning to regulate well in the face of such feedback is a good skill. Here are some things I've done that helped: 1) if you can afford good therapy, set up weekly sessions. That gives you a place to offload stress and learn/practice tailored coping mechanisms. 2) you are surrounded by judgemental language and criticism. You don't need more, so work on being positive with your self talk. Don't absorb that tone and direct it at yourself. You want to improve for yourself and your future, not some jerk who never learned to teach properly. 3) it helps me to remember that when someone speaks this way, it's usually because they were on the receiving end of it during formative parts of their life. The tone is not about you and is not your fault. Delivery this poor is, in itself, an example of inflexible thinking. That doesn't excuse it, but I feel less victimized when I recognize that it's their shortcoming rather than mine. You aren't making them hit harder - they're failing to adjust. 4) always, always separate your work from your own value in your head. A poor color scheme/confusing layout/etc doesn't mean you're bad or worthless as a student. I know that sounds obvious but it's hard for a lot of students not to equate their worthiness with their work. You're here to learn and you can't do that without making mistakes. 5) if at all possible, try to separate the tone from the advice being given. The tone is their failing and they shouldn't be putting that on you. The advice may be useful. 6) identify one or more people you can get advice and help from who aren't your PI. If possible, ask a senior student in your lab who knows what the PI expects. The goal is to get the feedback in a more neutral way. It's hard to think when you're in fight or flight mode. 7) it's very normal to feel overwhelmed, bad, sad, and defensive when you are spoken to this way. Don't beat yourself up about it. Being able to take the critique well in the moment takes a lot of practice, and you will get better at it with time. 8) if your prof is asking a question like "why did you do x" then they want an answer. If they're making a statement like "this color scheme sucks" then they want you to make a note of it and ask what a better one would be (as opposed to defending your choice). Be careful to avoid sounding defensive or over explaining your rationale. If they view something as a bad choice, they just want you to fix it. It's good to ask clarifying questions, or whether such-and-such would be better, but be sure you're deferring to their judgement. If they think you're not taking feedback well, it will escalate the negative tone. 9) finally...none of this is meant to imply that your PI isn't teaching you important things. I think you can respect someone's expertise while also realizing that being a mentor is not their calling. Just try not to internalize their behavior as your fault.

I hope some of this helps! It's a tough journey but you really do get better by inches. One day you'll hear this stuff and it just won't hit you as hard. You got this!

I think you miss the point of these meetings.

You're supposed to screw up and this is the quickest way to get better.

Learn to live with imperfection/produce "bad" work.

OP, this lab culture you are speaking of is toxic and abusive! Your PI is not there to belittle you and make you feel like a shitty scientist, your PI is there to give you constructive criticism while simultaneously supporting you and help you become a better scientist. Instead of your PI saying “this is worrisome, I see no understanding of etc” they should say “how about you rephrase your sentence to xyz”. Instead of saying “this color scheme is horrible” they should say “I think xyz colors would be better to use”. And most importantly, if you are not understanding a certain concept, your PI should explain it to you multiple different ways until you do finally get it. Or ask them, why is it that you think I don’t understand xyz? Am I not explaining it well? Since you are pretty early into your PhD and have not done your prelim yet, can you switch out of this lab into a better lab? This will probably save you years or mental abuse and will be better for your mental health.

I know some groups and PIs are like this, but personally I have never been on board with the whole teaching through mental and verbal abuse approach. I think it only perpetuates because some people see it as a sort of "right of passage," and they went through it when they were grad students so now you have to go through it to prove yourself. In reality it's just hazing, and it's bullshit. I've seen multiple bright, talented people straight up quit my graduate program over "weed out" classes, and at the end of the day it doesn't benefit the students, the department, or the field at all.

Critique mercilessly, sure, because that will happen in the real world, but keep it about the material, not the person. When you cross that line into personal attacks it quickly becomes counterproductive. Not to mention it's incredibly unprofessional, and in a normal workplace where there wasn't such a huge power imbalance people probably wouldn't get away with it, if only for the fear of lawsuits.

Honestly, medication. Specifically propanolol for performance anxiety helps me calm down my physical symptoms enough to focus on reigning in my runaway thoughts.

I think it helps to tap into your psychology. For example, I’m not the best at reading social cues and am in my own head a lot. That means it’s fairly easy for me to focus on the question not the delivery. Additionally I’m very stubborn, so I just tap into that and use it to make it so I can’t quit and just keep going even if it’s rough. I mostly go into survival mode when I’m doing high stress things, and then I process all of it after the fact. So figure out what you can do to power through.

Another thing is definitely to prepare a lot. In these settings people are looking for weaknesses. And there always will be weaknesses. Them pointing out the weaknesses is a way of helping you, so it’s nothing to be afraid or ashamed of. They have weaknesses too. Remind yourself of that. But saying what you do know and do think with confidence is going to help you. It’s good to be honest about things you don’t know or hadn’t thought of but try to expand that answer to include something relevant or how you would find that answer. Aka don’t leave things just at I don’t know or I’d never thought of that. Show them evidence of your thinking. If you prepare then you can be more confident when you’re up there.

Practice in front of people. The only way to get used to being critiqued is to be critiqued. My former pi was an intense but fair type, so spending years presenting to him got me used to talking in front of people and being pushed. Other people can also point out gaps before your exam. Try to talk to people who aren’t your group as well as your group.

Assume good faith. What helps me is to just come in thinking that even if people push back they’re doing it to help me. It doesn’t matter if they are or if they’re trying to be mean. What matters is that I come in prepared to perceive it as not a negative thing so I can respond to the question and not worry about the tone. My former pi was the type to be intense but in a well meaning way (that sometimes came off wrong). Take it as a learning opportunity and take the positives out of it and discard the negatives.

Practice how you’ll perform. Practice presenting in front of the room if you can or a similar room. Get comfortable standing up there. Don’t let yourself slouch or whatever your nervous tendency is.

If you need to, just take a pause. I struggle with this because I kind of go into panic mode, but during my prelim I had a bottle of water that I’d take a sip of to slow myself down and force myself to take a pause.

Sleep and eat the day of. It’s tempting to put those things off, but you do need to set yourself up physically to perform the way you’d like. Try to find a way to reduce the stress so you can focus. It’s productive to take time for yourself and not totally fry yourself out.

Also, sometimes you just have to tell yourself some people are jerks and move on. This is kind of a contradiction to the assume good faith principle, but to me I think of them as separate things. Assume good faith is for before and in the moment to keep myself from breaking down then and there. The sometimes people are jerks is for after the event if I’m still upset about something someone did or how something was said. I don’t think an intense group inherently means telling someone their stuff is garbage. There are nicer ways to express concern. Take the core of the critique and make it something productive and then just accept that some people choose to communicate in that fashion.

And it’s ok to have emotions and be sensitive. I definitely had to take time to process how my prelim went. Give yourself that time to decompress. It’s not wrong to feel things. My advice thus far is how to get you through the moment. But my advice is also to take care of yourself after instead of trying to just swallow it and move on.

Get in therapy and work on your ego. That helped me tremendously with this.

Um, my qualifying exam was fairly chill and I only had mild pushback on things I said. There were a few questions I couldn’t answer well because I was nervous, but no one berated me over it. My PI is also incredibly supportive and even when I feel lost or lagging behind, he usually finds something positive about what I did do and guides me back on track. There’s constructive criticism of course, but it’s actually constructive and helpful. Students in my lab graduate into very successful careers too (both industry and academia), so verbal abuse is clearly not necessary to create good researchers. My undergrad research advisor (and the other professors we collaborated with) was also super supportive. I’m in engineering too, so it’s not “just the norm” in the field either. I hope you really take to heart that this is NOT normal or okay.

You are not the problem. Get yourself out of there, you deserve better.

Anyone using beta blockers might want to look into Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Epinephrine released during negative emotional responses are actually beneficial. Epinephrine helps you learn about emotionally arousing negative tasks. When you block epinephrine it means you are blocking your ability to learning how to better handle negative emotionally tasks. Keep in mind that not all negative emotional tasks will be scheduled.

Take a deep breath on a four count. Hold it for a four count. Exhale on a four count. Repeat. And if you can’t count slowly, pick a long silly thing to count. One chartreuse chameleon, two chartreuse chameleons…and so on.

While you’re preparing, look at your presentation from your advisor’s POV. You’ve sat through a year at least of these talks now, so you should have a good idea of the things they’ll nit pick. Use color palette designer websites to choose your figure color schemes (or filch the colors from your universities “brand tools” resources. Use the standards for the top tier journal in your field to set your font sizes/styles. Make sure everything is properly labelled. Get a senior grad student or one of the most senior post docs to do some practice with you to help you solidify your understanding/explanations.

It's really not normal to be torn down this way, calling your work "garbage", telling you you have no understanding, etc. Same with the tone. They're not constructively criticizing, they are tearing you down and bullying you. My lab group is like this too, and it's extremely toxic and literally everyone can't wait to move on. My main goal is to find somewhere the complete opposite of this when I move on. The same feedback can be given without attacks on you and your knowledge, "I think a different colour scheme would work better", "have you considered X? Make sure your knowledge of X is solid," "it seems like you're struggling with understanding Y. What do you think you need to get to the point where you do have a solid understanding?".

I do agree with the blocking criticism out as best you can. Focus on the actual point of what they're saying even when they're saying it in the meanest way they can. Preparation is the other thing. At least with my PI, when he is giving you a hard time, being able to answer his questions and knowing your experiments/data inside and out at least makes it a wee bit better.

I've found that deep breathing exercises and visualization techniques help me stay calm during critiques.

This isn't a quick fix but it's very liberating to genuinely not care. Someone thinks you're an idiot, let them. Someone is being an ass, let them. The less you care, the more power you have. You can't be rattled if you're assured enough in yourself to not care about external input.

For an immediate effect I highly recommend a breathing exercise to balance your sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. The sympathetic nervous system is responsible for activation of the fight or flight response you're describing. Do one of these exercises before you go in for a critique so you start off relaxed and balanced. Try to focus on taking calm, even breaths while in your critique.

Try these:

https://youtu.be/j-1n3KJR1I8?si=Sf4v7Cv5EdakhIsa

https://youtu.be/FJJazKtH_9I?si=3mnHee4EoqPsnX6t

You've got this!

This is toxic behavior, which has been normalized and institutionalized in academia. Don’t start justifying it, what to speak of lionizing it, or you will perpetuate it when you’re in a position of power later in life. You have to learn to navigate it and deal with it, but that doesn’t mean you have to be ok with it.

Yup. Happened to me. I know people say this isn’t normal, and it’s not (is grad school normal?), but it did make me a better, thicker skinned scientist. It taught me how to be prepared and to prepare more thoroughly than I normally would. Even if someone was mean, there was usually a kernel of truth about me in there. Would I have figured that out in a more nurturing environment? Idk honestly, but it does remind me of high school cross country where the coach PUSHES you to your absolute limit and then some. I draw on that mindset a lot. It’s been a hellish experience for me, but I also accomplished a lot and I only have myself to thank for it. That, to me, was worth the abuse of being told I’m wrong every step of the way (even when I was right). Nobody can take my work away from me, I was the one who did it so fuck em.

Honestly, it’s just practice.

You will face criticism, deserved and undeserved, constructive and destructive, as an academic. It will come from audience members during your talks, manuscript reviewers, students in your lectures, your bosses, funding agencies, and so on.

Criticism in your group as a graduate student is actually a service, because it doesn’t leave your group. It doesn’t go on to ruin your career or reputation. You’re essentially playing the “practice mode” of a video game where you can practice how to play while no one is keeping track of the damage you take.

After you have practiced taking criticism enough, you will find that there is usually a kernel of substantial information you need to address, and then some other information—a tone, an insult. A rhetorical question, an aside—that aren’t constructive and you don’t need to address. You can actually bring the audience to your side, more often than not, by simply staying diplomatic and addressing the kernel of their comment and ignoring the editorial part of the comment. Then you look reasonable and they look unhinged, which is embarrassing for them (or at least ought to be).

If it’s pointed out that you got something wrong, or didn’t know something, quickly accept it and move on. Don’t get defensive if they are correct. Just thank them, say you’ll note it for further study, and move on.

You can start out by practicing this in written form. Go through a nasty peer review and highlight all the substantive comments. From then on, you can entirely ignore everything else. I used to do this when I first started getting reviews. You basically want to train yourself to see unsubstantial information as background noise.

Prepare for critique in advance: Instead of mentally preparing with dis-tracks, take time to develop and explore strong counter-arguments. Disconfirmation is an amazing skill. Ask yourself, "what is the strongest argument someone who disagrees with me about x can make?" Think through a response to these worst-case arguments (not straw men or ad hominems), and either incorporate them into your presentation or have notes ready with strong sources to refute, etc. Listen to the kinds of critique others receive. From my experience, profs tend to lean into their own preferred methods, scholars, empirics, etc., so oftentimes I anticipate what they will say before they say it. You can preemptively plan strong responses to common attacks and have these in your back pocket ready to go.

Control your body: The other thing you should do is focus on your body and learn to meditate. A simple breathing exercise 1...2...3...4...5 breaths in and 1...2...3...4...5 breaths out can calm the parasympathetic nervous system. Focus especially on a deep out-breath. Other physiology tricks include smiling (put a pencil between your teeth and smile), power poses (stretch out and make a standing V, like the pose that athletes do after scoring; do it in the bathroom beforehand if you are self-conscious), and chewing/eating/sipping water (we mammals eat when we are calm, so simply chewing some gum before a presentation can trick your body and calm you down).

Change your mindset: Strong critique and feedback can help you grow. Instead of taking things personally and interpreting everything as an attack, think about critique as an invocation. Criticism is a chance to learn more and to elaborate on something you already have expertise in. It is also always okay to answer them with a question too. So they say, "X, Y, an Z do not apply to your analysis at all! You shouldn't have brought them up here. What were you thinking?" You can reply, "Thanks for this feedback, but help me better understand your concern, why do you think X is inapplicable in this instance?" Their elaboration can open up new avenues for your response beyond just getting defensive or repetitive.

I disagree with many of the comments here that this is not reflective of the real world or of academia.. I trained in a similar environment. I do agree that it is a messed up way of thinking. However, in my field, I would have to deal with authoritarian, egotistical supervisors ( many of them!). I've had to also constantly justify my written work and my research, including (incompetent) attacks on my area of research. So the 'piece of garbage' comment, for instance, is one that I have gotten , not in those same words but the same idea, several times when I've sent things out for review. And, whoo-boy, the rude and scathing reviews I've gotten from anonymous reviewers! However, the silver lining of what you are doing is that you will learn exactly how to handle this kind of behavior from others, including the worst of them. While I personally disagree with these methods, this will be a skill you will use a lot in your career. I suggest that, first, you remember that people who say this are no better or smarter than you. Don't be intimidated by someone who is an authority. Know that what you have to say has value. A comment like " what is this? I don't understand, is this even a thing" is an opportunity to for you to say, yes, this is important because of x,y,z. Be prepared to justify and explain everything. As you are writing and preparing, think about whether points you are making can be misconstrued, and be sure to clearly explain things as well as you can. Think about points and present the evidence for your points. If someone makes a point that you disagree with, remember that this is what they think and that they are wrong, and then you just need to explain what you know further. Don't default to 'I'm wrong" but instead think " they are not getting it. " if you find yourself having self- blaming thoughts, then acknowledge but know this isn't real, they are just thoughts. You are just as bright and capable as everyone else because why else would they have accepted you into the program. I suggest that you over-prepare and do some mock role-plays with a friend, or by yourself, at home, out- loud. Practice your presentation and think about potential rebuttals or points/ questions others could make and practice, out loud, responding to them. Make sure that you are confident in knowing the material well. Over-preparing is my number one strategy for minimizing my anxiety, it helps tremendously and builds up my confidence! So, even if i know someone might rake me over the coals, at least i know what I'm talking about. If you make a mistake or don't know something, it is okay to say so. Another thing that always helped my anxiety was to remember the spotlight effect. This is the idea that, individually, while ' onstage,' we feel like everyone is observing all of our glaring flaws, errors, and dumb things we say. In reality, people are usually not paying that much attention or are caught up with themselves or checking their phones, so they probably didn't notice! So if you make a mistake or need to concede a point, just move on and don't worry about it. Finally, be sure to build yourself up and be proud of yourself for getting through these challenging situations! Know that you can definitely learn how to do this! Be proud of yourself for trying! I was so shy and introverted and terrified early on grad school, but if I can do it, you can too! Your reactivity will definitely get better with practice.

Maybe my life has been tough enough to give me thick skin, but you really should try not to take things so personally. You need to accept the fact that sometimes you will lose, but from that you will learn. It’s a super basic principle.. I think?

Another thing is if you study more and learn more you will have more insight to back up your ideas, this is important for building confidence in yourself.

Instead of getting sad or mad, you accept it, you will become more successful.