"trial and error" bad way to describe research?

[Nookular]

---

Members do not see this ad.

When describing my research, I am trying to concisely talk about how it is very likely that your first approach and plan wont work perfectly, so you must figure out what the issue is, change your procedure and try again. What do you think about describing this as a 'trial and error' process? Does this make it seem like I'm just blindly trying things? I need to cut letters.

Thanks.

 

[Inuranic]

I think trying something one way (i.e., trial) and finding that doesn't work (i.e., error), then trying again, can be described as "trial and error".

I would probably try to find a more eloquent way to put it though.

 

[Concordia]

When talking about failures during my project to my interviewer, I described as an invaluable experience in troubleshooting. Not as random as "trial and error," that was a good description for what I have learned as an undergrad in a research lab. It worked well for my means.

 

[Omyss]

i hate research

 

[Nookular]

thanks guys! 😀

 

[nonesuchgirl]

the scientific method?

 

[Maxprime]

I think the important thing is to convey your excitement about what you're working on. If you can talk about your current work without cracking a smile, I would question how serious you are about it . . . or I would assume you aren't doing research in Neuroscience. 😀 (I couldn't resist)

I think you have to be honest about how probable the success of your work will be, but I definitely wouldn't dwell on it. 'Trial and Error' makes me think that you have a vat of bacteria and you're pouring in random chemicals until they all die.

 

[kami333]

I like the word "refine" or "optimize" when it comes to experiments.

 

[Dendrite]

I like the word "refine" or "optimize" when it comes to experiments.

👍