Hi Chaotic

Thanks for your response. I've just been having a google and come across some really interesting (recent) papers on this kind of thing. There are lots of variations of it... and at worse it is fishing/data dredging/p-hacking (i.e., basically hunting through your data to see how you can get significant results), and is completely wrong yet widely done. On the other hand, if the author is transparent about what they are doing and why (i.e., states that it is a posthoc hypothesis for x reason, as opposed to presenting it as a a priori hypothesis) it seems it is acceptable (I found a few examples of this kind of transparent reporting in my search).

For anyone interested:
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10869-016-9456-7.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testing_hypotheses_suggested_by_the_data

Tudor

Ps. I like to get opinions, chat to people, and come to my own conclusions before approaching my supervisors :)

Hello and happy new year,

I was wondering.... is it possible to add a hypothesis that you hadn't previously planned for a study?

The long and short of it is... I'm analysing the results of an experiment (developmental psychology), and although the predictions have not been met, I have a hunch that I might see some interesting effects if I analyze a different aspect of the data. Is it above board to state this as an exploratory hypothesis and do the relevant analyses, or should everything be pre-planned?

Anyone come across this kind of thing before?

Tudor

I am unclear on what you are seeking advice on. In your title you say "Should I seek the publication of a controversial paper?" but then you go on to explain (what sounds like) that you are going ahead with it and simply asking what impact it could have. If you are already at that point then I don't really have advice, but if you are still considering whether to go through with this, then don't! I mean, you are basically saying it has important errors that you are aware of. People RETRACT papers because such things are later discovered. Why publish it when you already are aware of them? Just put it behind you and go on to do better research based on what you've learnt from it. Also you talk about coercion. At the end of the day, you are responsible for what gets published with your name on it - especially as first author. If I was convinced that the paper really was crap/potentially misleading (because of the things you've described), I would state my case again to my supervisor and refuse to back down. Stick to the facts of the matter and avoid any emotional arguments. Good luck whatever you decide to do!

Happy new year Iwan! Either that (as tru suggests) or change advisor! One or the other. Otherwise you are just wasting time and energy thinking about the wrong things (I did this for a long time so am speaking from experience unfortunately!)
All the best, Tudor

Also - if you are doing something like a zero hours contract/agency work it will easy to drop it when something else comes along - something's bound to pop up in your department in the new year. And yes - defo agree - JSA will help ends meet in the meantime (and I think you can have it backdated it too, marvellously).

Best of luck
Tudor

Hi Jamie_Wizard, happy new year and sorry to hear of your woes but chin up - you'll get through it! Best advice I can think of is get a job that isn't at all mentally taxing - even if its minimum wage - data entry, shop work, call centre, production line, cleaning... work enough hours to cover your expenses and spend the rest of the time (evenings, weekends - more if you can afford it/live on less money) working on your corrections.

Personally I find that when engaging in work that isn't mentally demanding my mind can work on other things - and when I return to my work I have actually made progress somehow even without directly working on it. You may even find that you are actually MORE productive this way than if you had funding to support you in these months and were focused entirely on the corrections.

If your optimal working hours are in the morning, then you may be able to find something on a zero hours contract that allows you do later shifts. I used to do 2pm till 10pm and spend mornings studying. I was highly productive back then!

Keep us posted on how it all goes,

Best
Tudor

Hey Nova, the need to vent is very understandable!

Hard as it is, as kenzibob says, the constructive criticism will help and is good. Just see it like a nasty tasting medicine... it's for a good purpose in the end, and despite the negative feelings at the time, it will get you better (hope that doesn't sound patronising - metaphors can be helpful).

PhDs have those really low moments for sure. You're so not alone. Regarding the situation itself and whether it is normal... defo not normal to have an ex supervisor with dementia calling you up all the time (sounds harsh but could you just change your number?). Changes to supervision etc... I think it is quite normal - not common but happens a fair bit.

Since you don't have an advisor could you ask for one? Or even just approach someone in the department who you feel you can share stuff with - like an unofficial mentor or advisor? Maybe ask someone if they'd mind having a chat (but just be sure not to say anything that you wouldn't want to be repeated).

Hope you're managing to take some time off for Christmas/New Year.

Ditto - we call it an advisor at our place. It sounds like you could really do with talking to yours if you have one.

Absolutely - you know what's best for you in this situation. It sounds as though you know what you need / want in this situation, and it is just a matter of fingers crossed and waiting for it. I don't know anyone who has actually regretted changing supervisors. The only regret I've heard of (and I have myself) is waiting too long before doing it. It's great that you've identified that it isn't working fairly early on and are taking steps to solve it. It takes courage (it did for me anyway).

I think that it may cause a bit of hassle that you've made a formal complaint... I know someone who made a complaint and it didn't go down well - but she got through it in the end and things are now looking up for her (she actually ended up transferring to another Russell Group uni - taking her research council funding and project with her).

Hope this helps.

Wow! Really interesting. Thanks for sharing laurelin88 and Pjlu. It crosses my mind sometimes... but then I think I must be crazy. I like the idea of retiring and doing one in a completely different area! But two at the same time - no way!

Know anyone who has two PhDs? And if so, why,and if they draw on both in their current position? I was just wondering about how this sometimes occurs.

These spammers are going crazy in time for Christmas it seems!

Hi Mazking_96 - your query is quite specific so unless someone one here happens to be a specialist in your area they probably won't be able to offer the advice you're after. Do you have a dissertation supervisor? Don't be afraid to approach them and ask them for feedback on your ideas. The main thing is that you go to them showing that you have spent time thinking about it and have come up with some possible options. What are the pros and cons of each approach you suggest? Think practicality, time, skills required, and importantly, ethical issues... It's important to choose to do something that you can definitely achieve within the time frame.

Hope this helps.

Tudor

Ha! Family eh?

I came across this online the other day:

Might be hard work but might be worth it!

Sounds a great idea to upgrade by the way - I hadn't heard of it before. Is the MA by Research similar to an MPhil?

Give me strength!