Responding to recent events
(This note is written in my voice, from my point of view. It was written with input from Richard Aslin and Frank Keil, both of whom endorse its contents.)
Recently, a story has come out about abuse that I experienced at the hands of a former adviser, Professor Brian Scholl — and about Yale’s mishandling of those events.
A Yale committee investigating this matter noted that this was the most “lengthy and acrimonious” conflict they had ever experienced or heard about in their collective “120 person-years of experience supervising and interacting with doctoral and professional school students.” They claimed that Professor Scholl “intentionally” caused “serious harm” by acting “in a manner that was threatening and coercive and displayed personal animus”. Yet, that same committee recommended unusually mild sanctions — an apology letter and some professional training.
As all stories are, the published account is incomplete. It would be impossible for any one article to cover a four-and-a-half-year saga in its entirety. Additional information may or may not come out in time. In the meantime, I hope that people can respect the privacy of the many people involved, especially those who were dragged into this conflict unfairly. Instead, I hope that all people can focus on the obvious institutional failure and how it can be remedied.
The way that Yale handles cases of abuse is not unique in academia. Many institutions — most — have complex, ineffective systems for resolving disputes. I hope that my story is a wake-up call for many about just how flawed these systems are.
I want to briefly respond to the accusations that were made against me. It is true that Professor Scholl spent years accusing me of ‘traumatizing’ my peers. He used vague accusations to justify demeaning, threatening, cruel behavior toward me. It is understandable that you would be concerned about these accusations.
You are not wrong to be concerned. These are serious allegations. Such claims should always be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly. That is why I spent years calling for investigations into my own behavior. That is why Professor Scholl was warned again and again that he should not speak so recklessly — told to “put up or shut up”, in the words of one Director of Graduate Studies — because there was no ‘ground truth’ upon which to base his accusations. Unfortunately, no official investigations into my conduct have been conducted. (One informal investigation was conducted by the aforementioned Director of Graduate Studies in the Psychology department, after which I was told that I had done nothing to warrant Professor Scholl’s extreme accusations, and that I should move on with my career without worry.)
I believe that Professor Scholl instigated and exacerbated petty, mundane disputes amongst students to my detriment. He made accusations about me without speaking with me, without collecting information. He did so whilst dismissing claims that I was being bullied by other students (ostensibly because this truth was not consistent with what he wanted to believe). He did so without ever providing any actual evidence to support his extreme claims. He did so suddenly and unexpectedly, shortly after I left his lab of my own volition (after he expressed hope that I would stay). This timing raises many questions: If a student behaved so reprehensibly to justify ostracization within the department, why were they not counseled about their behavior at any point? Why is there no record of anyone expressing concerns about this behavior? Why would any faculty member knowing of this behavior beg such a student to stay in their lab?
Two of my advisers — Professors Frank Keil and Richard Aslin, co-signers of this note — provided testimony to the ‘Faculty Standards Review Committee’ (FSRC), a committee investigating Professor Scholl’s behavior. An additional two Yale Psychology faculty members provided independent testimony to the FSRC. An additional three Yale Psychology faculty members have considerable knowledge of the situation, having occupied leadership roles in the department in the last four years. All seven of those individuals have expressed concern about Professor Scholl’s conduct in some form. None of them have expressed any concerns about my behavior (and some of them have defended me ardently). It is unusual, to say the least, that a faculty member would make such extreme accusations against a student, in spite of opposition from so many of their colleagues.
Whether one agrees with Professor Scholl’s views or not, there is little doubt that all of this could have been handled more delicately and respectfully. Believing that one student was hurt is not justification to harm another. This is especially true in the absence of any fact-finding process.
This situation reveals a critical flaw in the conflict resolution systems of most universities: What happens when someone makes a false (or misleading, or hyperbolic) accusation, but refuses to have that claim formally investigated? Perhaps that is what this story is about, more than anything else — the difficult position that one is put in if they are not given a fair opportunity to defend themselves against career-ending accusations (especially if those accusations are coming from a powerful individual).
This situation has forced me to make an impossible choice: Either (1) I choose not to pursue the accountability that I believe is justified and hope that Professor Scholl does not continue to use his power to unfairly harm my career and my life; or (2) I choose to pursue accountability and essentially guarantee that his irresponsible, defamatory claims are amplified. This is a harrowing decision to make. That a university would allow one of its students to be put in this position is deeply concerning.
I hope that all people can agree on one thing: If a professor is going to accuse a student of bullying or traumatizing others, then they should go through the proper channels to make those claims — as I did, dedicating four full years of my life to having Yale investigate Professor Scholl’s behavior privately. It was a painful experience, but it was the right thing to do. I was due the same process.
I have risked my career to speak out about the abuse that I experienced, knowing that I would be putting the allegations against me in the spotlight — that I would be powerless to protect myself from people’s judgment. I’m not sure it will, but I hope truth wins.
I want to thank Frank Keil and Dick Aslin for their support. What they have done for me cannot be measured or reciprocated, but it must be acknowledged. From the bottom of my heart, thank you.
And to the many, many others who have supported me privately over the years — thank you, as well, for believing in me.
Weeks after I wrote this note, on May 23rd, 2023, Dick Aslin wrote a blogpost addressing the situation in greater detail. Refer to it if you want additional information.