Non-Science Research Thesis

[To be MD]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Alright, Student Doctor Network Forum. Here goes nothing (and yes, I have searched the topic on SDN, but I need more tangible answers).

As a third year undergraduate majoring in Italian Literature and Cultural Studies, almost half of my classes in college thus far have been dedicated to my pre-med requirements. I was sitting in one of the department heads' offices, and she asked me whether or not I would be interested in becoming a DMP (distinguished major program)--a program that embodies six extra credits and an undergraduate thesis of 40+ pages of writing that would be written over the course of my fourth year.

My question is this: since I have no research experience in the world of science, do you perhaps know if research in the world of academia can be seen as thorough substitute?

My feeling is that scientific research involves empiric thought processes based off the overwhelming amount of data already available. In a sense, I think that my thesis (and the subsequent research) would be pretty much the same thing: I have a topic, I have to research it exhaustively, and I have to defend it against others.

 

[aSagacious]

For the sake of admissions, I think a publication in the humanities would be analogous to a literature review in the natural / physical sciences (in that you're not physically conducting experiments and generating raw data). I'm sure it would help your cause, but it may not satisfy 'research experience' in the strictest sense.

 

[235788]

👍

 

[BiopsychStudent]

Alright, Student Doctor Network Forum. Here goes nothing (and yes, I have searched the topic on SDN, but I need more tangible answers).

As a third year undergraduate majoring in Italian Literature and Cultural Studies, almost half of my classes in college thus far have been dedicated to my pre-med requirements. I was sitting in one of the department heads' offices, and she asked me whether or not I would be interested in becoming a DMP (distinguished major program)--a program that embodies six extra credits and an undergraduate thesis of 40+ pages of writing that would be written over the course of my fourth year.

My question is this: since I have no research experience in the world of science, do you perhaps know if research in the world of academia can be seen as thorough substitute?

My feeling is that scientific research involves empiric thought processes based off the overwhelming amount of data already available. In a sense, I think that my thesis (and the subsequent research) would be pretty much the same thing: I have a topic, I have to research it exhaustively, and I have to defend it against others.

Not to undervalue humanities research, but what your describing is more the formation of a hypothesis. The next crucial step is generating new data based off your literature review, and analyzing and interpreting that data to determine whether or not it disproves your null hypothesis.

 

[StoicJosher]

Not to undervalue humanities research, but what your describing is more the formation of a hypothesis. The next crucial step is generating new data based off your literature review, and analyzing and interpreting that data to determine whether or not it disproves your null hypothesis.

This. 👍

Scientific method.

 

[To be MD]

Not to undervalue humanities research, but what your describing is more the formation of a hypothesis. The next crucial step is generating new data based off your literature review, and analyzing and interpreting that data to determine whether or not it disproves your null hypothesis.

Yes, that is a crucial portion of the process missing.

But, I'm kind of looking for some sort of assurance from someone who was a humanities major and thesis writer that applied to medical school and had an adcom/interviewer say to them "wow, this is a unique way to look at things... you'd be a great asset."

Possibly, those are words I'll never hear. All I can do is hope, right? (or, instead try to start scientific research as a 4th year... which just isn't going to happen for me)

 

[dougfunnie]

Yes, that is a crucial portion of the process missing.

But, I'm kind of looking for some sort of assurance from someone who was a humanities major and thesis writer that applied to medical school and had an adcom/interviewer say to them "wow, this is a unique way to look at things... you'd be a great asset."

Possibly, those are words I'll never hear. All I can do is hope, right? (or, instead try to start scientific research as a 4th year... which just isn't going to happen for me)

So my thoughts are a little less on the deep, theoretical side...

I am applying in the upcoming cycle, but I have bounced ideas off of several people who evaluate applications or have an otherwise strong understanding of the admissions process. Sorry I can't be your shimmering example. I do have a friend that got into two research-oriented top-fives without a shred of scientific research, if that is what you're looking for.

I guess my question for you is why are you interested in either type of research? Are you actually interested in spending your time doing either activity or are you purely trying to improve your app? If it's the latter, then I think it's pretty clear that scientific research is probably where you want to head.

If you really are interested in working on a humanities project, however, I urge you to think beyond questioning whether it's a substitute for basic science research, because it definitely isn't. However, this may not be a bad thing. If you are interested in attending a state institution, ending up in primary care, or otherwise becoming purely a clinician, then having no science research may not hurt you as much as you think, especially if you've had other significant demands to deal with as an undergrad. Furthermore, it seems like there is a trend in valuing the humanities, from taking an interest in undergrad humanities major applicants to all of these medical humanities and social medicine programs popping up. Are you interested in this side of medicine? Do you want to stand out as an applicant even though you won't have something that the majority of applicants have?

There really isn't a perfect answer here. As with many things, some evaluators will look positively on a humanities experience and find you memorable because of it, others may ask you why you didn't take an interest in scientific inquiry.

 

[sector9]

I assume that you're planning to apply after your senior year? If you're applying this summer, then all of this is a moot discussion since you wouldn't be able to list it anyway

 

[TXKnight]

Alright, Student Doctor Network Forum. Here goes nothing (and yes, I have searched the topic on SDN, but I need more tangible answers).

As a third year undergraduate majoring in Italian Literature and Cultural Studies, almost half of my classes in college thus far have been dedicated to my pre-med requirements. I was sitting in one of the department heads' offices, and she asked me whether or not I would be interested in becoming a DMP (distinguished major program)--a program that embodies six extra credits and an undergraduate thesis of 40+ pages of writing that would be written over the course of my fourth year.

My question is this: since I have no research experience in the world of science, do you perhaps know if research in the world of academia can be seen as thorough substitute?

My feeling is that scientific research involves empiric thought processes based off the overwhelming amount of data already available. In a sense, I think that my thesis (and the subsequent research) would be pretty much the same thing: I have a topic, I have to research it exhaustively, and I have to defend it against others.

Go for it. No doubt about it. Social Science research will definitely set you apart from the traditional applicant.

You should research extensively your topic, identify a problem/issue you are interested in and formulate your question/curiosity (hypothesis). Plan your approach and how you are going to answer your question by using the several methods available for social research (participant observation,qualitative/quantitative methods,surveys, etc). If surveys or interviewing are necessary (they most likely they will) get your permissions and paperwork approved for Human Research Subject studies (IRB at your school maybe?) and stuff.
Ideally a review of the main theoretical frameworks that exist (fucntionalism.structuralism,etc) should be done in my opinion...and.... crank data, tables,etc. How does your data and your hypothesis fit together? does in support it or not?. what other questions/issues did you identify for future observations?...write thesis.

Elaborate a simple question you want to answer, keep it solid but simple. Many people go overboard and then produce a ****ty thesis when they realize they were shooting for something they can't finish. I am not sure what kind of field you are into but some -or all- of the stuff I mentioned might ring a bell, so, although it's going to take a big time commitment, much of the theory stuff should be a review of sorts. Rely on your thesis advisor for the methodology if needed.

It's a lot of work, but it should be rewarding and original. If not for the interview/med school application do it for yourself. I believe doing stuff like this widens your worldview and understanding.
I am not an expert of course (lowly non-trad premed) but I have research under my belt for both natural and social sciences.

For those that tell you this is not the same as spending one summer washing flasks, making coffee, running PCR machines, running gels and sitting down with the PI and doctoral students trying to convince them to put your name in the upcoming paper just tell them whatever. This research is much more meaningful than a cool but otherwise shallow 4 month experience in basic science research. My guess is that not many applicants devote more than 4-6 months to natural science research. If they do more (1. to 1.5+ years), then, that is great..

In short, if you have the will and stamina go for it without a doubt -at the least it will make a great interview topic and maybe something you can use in your PS.
Good luck.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

Yes, that is a crucial portion of the process missing.

But, I'm kind of looking for some sort of assurance from someone who was a humanities major and thesis writer that applied to medical school and had an adcom/interviewer say to them "wow, this is a unique way to look at things... you'd be a great asset."

Possibly, those are words I'll never hear. All I can do is hope, right? (or, instead try to start scientific research as a 4th year... which just isn't going to happen for me)

I did a thesis for my English lit major on entropy and literature (130 pages). It came up in my interview, but my interviewers didn't appear very interested in it. I had a great time researching for it and writing it though. It also got me an excellent letter of rec from my thesis adviser.

My advice is to do it if you're really interested in it.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

For those that tell you this is not the same as spending one summer washing flasks, making coffee, running PCR machines, running gels and sitting down with the PI and doctoral students trying to convince them to put your name in the upcoming paper just tell them whatever. This research is much more meaningful than a cool but otherwise shallow 4 month experience in basic science research. My guess is that not many applicants devote more than 4-6 months to natural science research. If they do more (1. to 1.5+ years), then, that is great..

Well put, sir. 👍

 

[TXKnight]

Well put, sir. 👍

Thanks.

 

[235788]

of course the humanity "researchers" come to defend humanity research.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

of course the humanity "researchers" come to defend humanity research.

Compared to bench research, where you are but an individual on an assembly line, humanities research is very rich and creative. It's offers the opportunity to develop your own thesis and defend it, instead of something a PI has that is kind of interesting, but is really just a side project for most undergrads.

It all depends on your perspective, and what you work on. I for one, have done projects designing a targeted chemotherapeutic drug, and developed models to understand mechanisms of tumor metastasis, it sounds great, but on a day to day basis is pretty boring. However, in my English thesis, I brought together seemingly unrelated ideas (entropy and lit) to develop a paradigm to understand the development of language.

Neither will be important, and they are very different, but I don't think it's fair make the humanities the lesser of the two.

 

[235788]

Compared to bench research, where you are but an individual on an assembly line, humanities research is very rich and creative. It's offers the opportunity to develop your own thesis and defend it, instead of something a PI has that is kind of interesting, but is really just a side project for most undergrads.

It all depends on your perspective, and what you work on. I for one, have done projects designing a targeted chemotherapeutic drug, and developed models to understand mechanisms of tumor metastasis, it sounds great, but on a day to day basis is pretty boring. However, in my English thesis, I brought together seemingly unrelated ideas (entropy and lit) to develop a paradigm to understand the development of language.

Neither will be important, and they are very different, but I don't think it's fair make the humanities the lesser of the two.

I feel that a publication in the hard sciences is much greater than the humanities and is looked up with higher regard. Thus the reward is much greater. Anyone can do a literary review on steinbeck or whatever else.

 

[elblackwell]

I did something similar since I wasn't a science major and I didn't want to work in a lab. My research involved human subjects but it was qualitative, so I don't think it fit the scientific research requirement some schools value. With that said, I was asked about it in all of my interviews, and a few interviewers showed a lot of interest in it. I would guess that it helped me get interviews because it allowed me to stand out BUT I do think some schools care a lot about research in the sciences ( lab or clinical) and not having it is a disadvantage. If you could do both, that would be ideal. Another thing that I did when I chose my topic was to connect my non-science major to my interest in medicine through my choice of topic. For example, if you are interested in doing something in cultural studies, you could connect it to the cultural aspect of medicine or cultural competency. I think this allows the people who are reading your application or interviewing you to relate to your topic and your interests.

 

[StoicJosher]

I feel that a publication in the hard sciences is much greater than the humanities and is looked up with higher regard. Thus the reward is much greater. Anyone can do a literary review on steinbeck or whatever else.

You let the cat out of the bag!! Now all SDN-going pre-meds are going to apply with four or five publications!

 

[TXKnight]

I feel that a publication in the hard sciences is much greater than the humanities and is looked up with higher regard. Thus the reward is much greater. Anyone can do a literary review on steinbeck or whatever else.

Anyone can do a literary review. Not anyone can do a literary review that can get published.

 

[TXKnight]

of course the humanity "researchers" come to defend humanity research.

Well if you had done any you would know what I'm talking about.

 

[To be MD]

Go for it. No doubt about it. Social Science research will definitely set you apart from the traditional applicant. ..............................
In short, if you have the will and stamina go for it without a doubt -at the least it will make a great interview topic and maybe something you can use in your PS.
Good luck.

Thank you TXKnight. That was both incredibly insightful and encouraging. I appreciate it! 👍