Here's an interesting article about how journalists refer to people with Ph.D.'s: http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment012502.shtml
Interesting article; the author's own anecdotal experience is quite different from mine. He states: "There is very much a North/South split in this country about “Dr.,” as about so many other things. It is common practice for professors in the South to be called “Dr.” At the universities I attended — northern — you would sooner have struck a professor than called him “Dr.” In fact, it was something if the sullen and self-absorbed students grunted their acknowledgement of the prof at all." I received my Ph.D. from Purdue University. We addressed all faculty as "Dr." or quite occasionally, "Professor". For the last ten years at Ohio State, I've always been addressed as "Dr.", and never as "Mr.", and very rarely as "Professor". The only person I can recall that routinely refers to me as "Professor" is a colleague from Johns Hopkins who refers to all fellow faculty members as "Professor". (Must be how the top tier folks do it... ) Mark
Fascinating article - and kind of fun. A publication that was not mentioned in the article is one that should certainly know the proper method for journalistic references to persons with a Ph.D. - The Chronicle of Higher Education. Surely The Chron should follow proper protocol, and their procedure is to refere to persons with a Ph.D. as (drum roll) . . . Mister. Two articles that still hold a prominent place in the piles of paper on my desk are the ones that recently dealt with the Texas fine levied against MIGS (which referred to me as "Mr. Levicoff") and the follow-up piece about California's investigation of MIGS' president (which referred to Armando, who also holds an RA Ph.D., as "Mr. Arias"). Nonetheless, as far as I'm concerned, it's talked about as "Mr." when it comes to The Chron than not talked about at all. Although "Mr. Arias" may disagree . . .
Out here in California, the tradition seems to be for students to address university teachers as "Doctor so-and-so". I have rarely if ever heard "Professor...". Never "Mr....", which seems like something that a superior would call a subordinate. Or at least it is the custom for students to *initially* address their instructors as "Doctor" as a sign of respect. Classes often move on from there to a first name basis, as a sign of friendship and comraderie. It's important to follow that move, since continuing to call the instructor "doctor" after the shift has occurred suggests coldness and even hostility. Some embarassing moments can arise, such as when the instructor doesn't have a doctorate, and has to request that the class not call him "Doctor". I have been told that in the South the custom is to address instructors as "Professor so and so". The story that I was told (probably false) is that historically fewer instructors in the South had doctorates, hence the use of a title that didn't presuppose it.
The data are all anecodotal, and fascinating. There's a Master's thesis project in here somewhere. When my wife got her Ph.D., I was looking forward to the first time someone called and asked for "Dr. Bear," and I could say, "Which Doctor Bear?" (That was until she pointed out that the logical response might be, "I didn't know one of you was a witch doctor.") She has noted that, despite her request to be called "Marina," in general her black students call her "Professor Bear," her Oriental students call her "Doctor Bear" and her caucasian students call her "Marina." More fodder for that Master's thesis.
That's why I have not mustered the courage to address you as John. First, you are older than me. Second, you have achieved more than me in life. I think it is a cultural thing. Blacks and Asians use "Mr.", "Dr.", etc, to address people as sign of respect for age or achievement.
As a military officer, I worked around African-Americans all of my career. But one thing threw me when I worked in a predominantly-Black Southeast Washington DC. Many Black co-workers would refer to me as "Mister Rich." At first I was taken aback by this; it sounded so "Roots." As a liberal, I've always actively avoided even the appearance of sounding superior to other people. (Of course, sometimes trying too hard!) But then it was pointed out to me that this was a sign not of subservience, but of pleasant, mutual respect. When a couple of my peers starting doing it, I came to understand. Rich Douglas, who promises not to upgrade to "Dr. Rich."
Well, I have always referred to my professors as Dr. Occasionally, I may say professor. Yet I've noticed, especially Cal State Hayward professors, don't seem to mind being called by their first names. Maybe it's a cultural thing.
I have always refered to professors as "Dr." unless they happened to be profs with a Masters and then we called him "Professor". Locally we have an Ed.D prof who appears to insist on the use of "Dr." no matter what function he attends. He is listed as Dr. even if others are listed by their first & last name. That is where I take issue. I think that people with doctorates are entitled to the respect that having earned an accredited doctorate deserves (whether Ph.D, D.Min. DBA, Ed.D). I find that people who refuse to accord respect for the achievement are usually suffering inferiority complexes. However, if others are simply refered to by first & last name then so should the Ph.D. Or if introduced to "Mark" should not expect to address Mark by his first name but expect to be addressed themselves by "Dr." In other words respect should be a two way street. North
