I feel even more emphatic about it now that I know you're using bootstrap :p(up)

No! Stick to your guns! So many people don't care about statistics and that really sucks. Just make sure you can explain what you did and why you did it - often I frame it in terms of why I wouldn't just use a t-test etc. I think as long as you can get across the advantages of your approach, your examiners will accept when they're out of their depth regarding the exact procedure and won't be unfair about it. Personally I think the key is to have a strong message in your discussion of results - ok, sometimes you have to explain an effect in terms of the nuances of the way you analysed the data, but other that that don't make understanding the discussion dependent on understanding the details of the analysis if that makes sense.

I think it just depends. I only made one application - to stick with my MSc supervisor - and luckily we got the scholarship. I think if you've got a specific idea of what you want to do and write the proposal yourself, then you're more likely to apply to a smaller number of places, and if you don't get it just apply the next year. If you're applying for projects which have already been set out but have funding attached, then you might make a lot of applications. There's no standard response so don't stress over it. :)

Maybe you could phrase it as you think it would be given as a revision when the article is reviewed before publication?

If it was my supervisor, I'd put it like that, and if they weren't going for it, I'd just ask what we would reply if the comment was made by a reviewer. If the theory fits and she doesn't want to include it, I'd say the onus is on her to come up with a reason why she disagrees.

Try using paste special in word to try out different types of images - some look better than others.

It sounds like what you're saying is you want to do a separate ANOVA for each time-point - the reason you won't be able to find an answer to the question is because you should be including 'time' as a variable in the analysis. Otherwise, you don't truly control for multiple comparisons. So if you're doing a single 5x25 ANOVA with the factors TIME and DRUG and one of your conditions doesn't have a normal distribution, then the whole thing should be a single ranks ANOVA.

FYI time-series data is not suited to a standard ANOVA at all because you make so many comparisons - if you correct e.g. Bonferroni then it becomes near impossible for an effect to reach significance; if you don't then with that many comparisons the odds are you'll get a few false positives. If it were me, I'd bootstrap the data and construct my own ANOVA tables - that option might not be available to you though if you can't easily get training in robust statistics.

======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2011 20:54:57 =======
Hey Keenbean, I really think you need to get out of there! You don't need the extra stress and you've done amazingly well so far, so start lining up jobs now. I think you need to tell her about the applications - you've got a lot of research and teaching experience which makes me think that you're likely to get interviews so you'll have to tell her at some point anyway. She's gonna pitch a fit regardless IMO, but based on past form it'll be a bigger fit if she thinks you went behind her back. It sounds like she doesn't understand your need for a life outside of the PhD, and people like that will suck the life out of you. Good luck with the applications! (up)

ETA: And you know, most people move on to a new place post-PhD. It's very much the done thing, so don't feel bad about it. It would be really and truly unreasonable of her to attempt to hold you back in your career just because you didn't want to work with her until the end of time.

Always 'these data were collected', never 'this data was collected'.

Fantastic advice everyone, I can't thank you enough - and keep it coming if there's any more! (up)

No, you're not over-reacting - I would be so pissed off. Usually if my flatmate has someone staying while I'm away then she sleeps in my bed, and the person staying over sleeps in my flatmate's bed, always with the condition that I agreed to it in advance and that the bed linen is changed the next morning.

I started my PhD a few months ago and before then I was quite into the idea of pursuing a career in research. Now I've reached a stage where I think it's not really what I'd want to do for the rest of my life. However, I want to just get on with it and see it through to completion - apart from anything else, no-one in my institution ever drops out (1 person in the last 5 years), and if I drop out the conditions of my studentship mean that I have to pay back the money I've received so far.
Has anyone else been in this situation? If so, what did you do to keep going and not become too unmotivated by it all?

Right now I'm about 6 months into my PhD (psychology/cognitive neuroscience) and I noticed that the other PhD students in my institution seem to fall into two groups: those who power through the last year and submit just after the three year mark, and those who struggle to submit by the end of fourth year (the deadline where I am).

Anyway does anyone have any tips on how to submit closer to three years than four? I'm looking for both people who completed in three years to discuss why they think they acheived that, and people who ran over a little bit to discuss if there's anything they would have done differently? Cheers!

You might wanna get the old spell-checker out, it doesn't look very professional...

If you look at which specific forum the thread's in, then click on home and select that forum, then open the thread you want, it usually works.

======= Date Modified 11 Mar 2011 11:50:17 =======
I use the first person when I feel that the flow of the writing is better served by it. For instance, it doesn't make sense to talk about our previous work in the third person/passive voice, so I would say "We recently demonstrated that...". I think when you describe what you're going to tell the reader, the first person's good for that. "In the first chapter, I will review recent evidence for..." sounds better than "Recent evidence for ... will be reviewed in the first chapter".
My personal opinion is that it gives you a better connection with the reader - after all, if you were giving a talk, it wouldn't even be up for debate whether or not to use the first person.


ETA: Just wanted to add, as an undergrad I never used the first person, but I switched during my final exams. It's so much easier to get in to the main part of an essay if you don't have to worry about always using the passive voice in the intro - you just tell the reader what you know. Dunno if it's relevant, but I'm in Psychology/Cognitive Neuroscience.