Dissertation

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

PsychResearch

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
My goal is to propose my dissertation this semester. However, things are not going so well since I can't make up my mind what topic to choose. I initially was going to look at some longitudinal data we have at our lab. However, the stats professor already advised a student who already graduated not to use that data because in his opinion it did not make theoretical sense. My advisor, however, initially agreed to the idea. But then I went to her and said that since the stats professor advised against it for the other student, then why would I do it? So, I gave up on it.

Then I was asked if I had any other idea and I do. I described the idea and my adviser said it is good and publishable. However, now I have second thoughts as another student is doing something that is quite similar (just using different outcome variables). So, I again feel that this idea is no good.

There is a student who went to my advisor for months asking for a topic until she got it. I, sometimes, wish that my advisor would give me a topic, too. In all fairness, she suggested 2 topics but both require additional data collection which could take some time. I don't want to wait another year or two until this data is collected.

Even if I were to go with the idea I came up with, I still o stel I need guidance. At this point I have so many doubts. I don't even know where to start mainly because I'm undecided on the topic. I don't kmow if choosing one topic over the otrher would benefit me more in the future. Or perhaps I should just do something without thinking so much ahead. I really don't know, but if anyone has any thoughts about what I wrote, I would really appreciate it.

Also, what kind of guidance and support is reasonable to expect from my adviser in the process. For my thesis I pretty much did everything on my own. Many times I felt I was alone. I don't want this to happen again, but I also don't want to be a burden.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
Well, my first thought is welcome to the process of writing a dissertation ;). It is full of doubts and second-guessing. You will answer your own questions in time, but struggling is an unavoidable part of the process and will happen continually.

It seems like your working style may not match up very well with your current advisor, since you felt too independent when completing your thesis. Is this a conversation you would feel comfortable having with her? You could ask for more oversight and both agree on what that means. Your advisor may have strong ideas about what promotes the best learning experience for students. Maybe having this conversation would make it clear what her goals are as well.

Your school seems to handle the dissertation very differently from mine. For example, it has taken me about 8-9 months to write my formal proposal (and that is considered fast). We're also expected to collect new data unless there is a good reason not to do so that is inherent in the research question. From my point of view, your dissertation is your capstone project and should be something you actively want to do, not something your advisor hands to you. It should also be something that you are willing to spend quite some time on. Some of the things you wrote give the impression that you expect to finish the whole process in about a year. That seems very fast to me. My advice is to pick a topic that you would feel comfortable spending a couple years doing.
 
Last edited:
In general, I think my thoughts tend to mirror the above poster (KillerDiller).
I'll add though that you're right- you are alone. This is YOUR project, and the idea is that in many facets, it is supposed to test/stretch YOUR knowledge of the whole research project. Whenever you get your PhD, the goal is that you'll be an autonomous research machine, capable of designing and critiquing other research at a superior level. Thus, traditionally this means that you are alone (more so in your diss than in your thesis).

I can only speak for me (proposed dissertation last semester!). That said, my thought is that it has a LOT to do with personality. I did my own thing for my thesis, and I did the same thing for my dissertation: I was working in a clinic and had a brainstorm. I followed that brainstorm up in the literature, and read until I found an area that I wanted to study. From there, research questions, and from there, hypotheses. But the important thing is that's just how I work. I know that for me going the route of asking a professor to assign me a topic would drive me crazy and I'd probably end up regretting it and maybe even resenting them because of it.

So with that said, I'll throw these points out there:
-consider how your personality, work ethic, and motivation work for you.
-consider what you really want to do
-consider what is feasible to do



...and go from there. Vague advice, but vague on purpose
 
Members don't see this ad :)
My struggle is whether to do something that I can do in a relatively short period of time with existing data. Or if to do a project with ongoing data collection (a clinical trial). Perhaps that analyzing the data for the clinical trial (my advisor's grant) will give me great exposures in statistical methods and stats. I could then go to interviews for postdoc and present this data. However, since the project won't be over in another 2+ years, I feel I will not be around long enough to publish it.

The other project I could publish but is not as cutting edge as the clinical trial although it's based on an older trial we had going on at my lab.

I also don't know if choosing one project over the other will position me better for my career. I want to do research and work in academia.
 
My struggle is whether to do something that I can do in a relatively short period of time with existing data. Or if to do a project with ongoing data collection (a clinical trial). Perhaps that analyzing the data for the clinical trial (my advisor's grant) will give me great exposures in statistical methods and stats. I could then go to interviews for postdoc and present this data. However, since the project won't be over in another 2+ years, I feel I will not be around long enough to publish it.

The other project I could publish but is not as cutting edge as the clinical trial although it's based on an older trial we had going on at my lab.

I also don't know if choosing one project over the other will position me better for my career. I want to do research and work in academia.

If the clinical trial is your advisor's grant-funded research, are they going to let you publish the data on its primary aim as a first author and take it as your project? I've never heard of this being done.
 
I would just add that, unless you really want to be a hardcore researcher or academic (and thus, your dissertation is more than merely a means to an end:D), use existing (archival) data if you have access to it, This will save you months and alot of stress.
 
If the clinical trial is your advisor's grant-funded research, are they going to let you publish the data on its primary aim as a first author and take it as your project? I've never heard of this being done.



No, they will be the first author. Which totally makes sense and being the first author will not be my goal. Being able to work on a federally funded study and analyze that data will be an honor in and of itself. However, I will graduate before the project is over. What I'll do will be preliminary analyses. Some other student may pick up the project after I'm graduating. I could still be on the paper..but if this student is taking over, they'll probably be caring the load so to speak. They will also be taking a more leader role on the final paper. Then again, perhaps I could still work on the paper until it becomes a final project. But I will have to do this during my postdoc, which i would like to do it at another university. So, I don't know if doing this as a postdoc is an option since i'll be away and close supervision is needed during the data analyses. Is this usually done?


The other project is more like a secondary analysis/smaller project type of thing, still involving treatment data, but less cutting edge. Yet, it could give me a paper after I graduate. Data is already collected. Topic is not as cutting edge as the first, which is why I have second thoughts.
 
FuturePhD - Some advisors are more generous with letting students take authorships than others. Certainly I would never expect to take first-author on something like that (and I suspect even if I did take first author, anyone interview me would "realize" that giant longitudinal study costing hundreds of thousands of dollars was not really my study anyways), but many faculty have reached a point where authorship is no longer a big deal to them. In medical settings, they may even "prefer" last author. We have one faculty member who takes lead authorship on review/theory papers, but actually prefers students take the lead on anything empirical. Some faculty it is project-dependent. Others seem happy with any situation that results in them not having to write it themselves;) That said...I don't know that something like that would ever "count" as a thesis or dissertation if that was what you meant. They are usually just additional papers the lab is working on that the faculty can't be bothered with (often because the results aren't quite what they hoped, but still worth publishing), so they let the students take the lead in addition to working on their own projects.

PsychResearch - I'm definitely a bit confused. Like erg, I am wondering what your goals are...I'm going to go out on a limb and guess this is just a means to an end for you because if you are interested in research you should definitely not need the level of guidance you seem to want from your advisor come dissertation time, nor should you be quite as lost as you seem about this whole endeavor (sorry, not meaning to sound harsh - the way you are coming across may not be reflective of reality). Ideally, your advisor should play a role in helping you shape your project but it shouldn't be his/her idea. The "idea" should come from you at the dissertation level (and I'd argue even at the master's level...and that I feel should be true regardless of whether a person is clinically-focused or research-focused). The main thing separating academic doctorates from professional degrees (e.g. MD, JD, etc.) is that the academic degrees require you demonstrate the ability to contribute something novel, and function as an "independent scientist" (or philosopher, or whatever else). Your advisor and your entire committee should be there to provide some guidance. Other variables you may want to consider. Alternative measures that may be more appropriate. Different ways of looking at it or interpreting it, different theories you may want to consider for guidance. However, they should not be "telling" you what to do (again...ideally....sometimes it happens and I think that is unfortunate).

Some more info on your career goals are important here, because I doubt a CMHC will care much about papers, whereas in an academic medicine/university setting, that will likely be the primary thing they look for.

Personally, I would never, ever, ever consider a dissertation topic I could not take first author on. That just seems insane to me, but then again I am research-focused. If you ARE research-focused, I'd definitely only do something you are first-author on. If you end up being 3rd author on your dissertation manuscript....again, not to sound blunt, but I think that would look awful. I think you are better off being first-author on something that gets published in a mid-tier journal than third-author on your own dissertation regardless of where it gets published.

As for the question regarding post-doc....again, this really depends on the situation. Many, many, many people are still writing up papers from grad school while on internship/post-doc in another location. For people planning an academic career, I suspect the majority actually will do so. Again, at the stage, analysis should not be requiring "close supervision", unless you are doing something incredibly complicated and your advisor has expertise in it. I don't know that my advisor has ever provided close guidance on an analysis, nor do I think any of our faculty really do that. I may run something by him to get his opinion, or discuss the options. Certainly when I send him drafts he may ask for additional analyses, or to consider re-running them a different way. Usually this is more like "Try including x in the design, and covary out z" or "run a random effects model instead"...I don't recall a time we've ever actually sat down and ran analyses together. So I guess the answer is yes, its possible, but you need to be comfortable working on your own for it to be realistic.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Ollie. What you wrote is helpful. I am interested in research and want to continue on this path. My struggle comes from not knowing what would get me there so to speak. I am quite independent when it comes to doing research and running the analyses. I did it of my thesis and I'm working on submitting an article soon on a different topic. I will then work to write up my thesis for publication.

I do have plenty of ideas (my difficulty is narrowing things down). My dilemma is whether to go with a secondary data analysis type of dissertation (for instance, in a depression treatment looking at whether anxiety and related symptoms improve) and create a model based on that. Or going to the advisor's topic (I feel she'll be more invested in helping me since she'll have an interest if the research turns out as expected, but maybe is just my perception).

I'll meet with her on Monday to discuss my options in more detail. I will write all my ideas down and take it from there. I want to eventually have a career in the academia, so I want to make sure I am on the right path by picking an interesting topic.
 
Top