Hi,

I have three studies, each of which have their own methods section, detailing everything that would go in a methods section of a journal paper for example, but in more detail.

In this case, what would go in the methodology section?

Thanks!

I'm not sure what your discipline is Hugh, but I'm using my methodology chapter as more of a discussion of the issues, e.g. the types of knowledge and implications of using quantitative/qualitative approaches. I'm seeing that chapter as being more about the over-arching concepts and arguments, rather than a description of methods.

Hugh, this is a great question-it is so hard to work this one out at times isn't it? I can give you an example from what I have done for my mixed methods study-it may help but it is only one perspective or example.

I have three studies and I have placed an abbreviated summary of the methods in each results chapter-one result chapter for each set of data.

In my methods goes a full account of the three different methods for each set of data, plus my over arching epistemology-eg: using interpretive/constructivist methodologies and whole study underpinned by social constructionist epistemology and how the study a mixed methods study could fit within this particular theoretical paradigm. All of this needed explaining and elaborating on before I even got to my individual data set methods. It is basically a justification of my overall approach.

Also included in methodology chapter were descriptions of the site, any variation of methods occurring while I used the constructivist approach and participants (sample sizes) . Methodology chapter had lots of sections including a section on each different method for each data set which went through the methods I used to process the different data. All the way through I have tried to make sure everything lines up theoretically and makes sense. Thus, the methods section in each results chapter for the data set just has a short summary and focuses mainly on the actual results and discussion summaries with interpretations and with a reminder that a full account can be read in Chap 3. Chapter 7 (after data sets Ch 4.5 & 6) has a much more analytical discussion that links all results interpretations together, evaluates them through answering the study's research questions.

I am hoping that this approach is okay, but supervisors don't seem to have made comments to the contrary ('yet' I say advisedly).

Another thing I am toying with is moving the methodology chapter towards the end of the thesis, to give it a much more 'reflective' role. Similarly to Pjlu, I have mentioned this to my supervisors and have received non-committal nodding, so we'll see!

It might not really be necessary to have a separate Methodology chapter if you're including detailed method sections elsewhere. If you're struggling to find things to write, then don't force it.

Thank you very much! Some very useful suggestions here!

I think I might leave the methodology chapter to write in that case until my three studies are written up.