It's a humanities based PhD... the survey was open for 3 months, I collected the data, analysed it, used that data to inform interviews with participants involved in the intervention; analysed my interview data, used results for an interim report to the services involved. Also wrote a paper about another part of my PhD research (it's a mixed methods PhD involving 3 stages which each have at least 2 distinct studies) which involved case file analysis of 500 serious case reviews... published that. I had a bereavement and took a month off to grieve and attend to family issues... one year... wanted to actually focus on writing up my thesis and then focus on papers...

My question was more about the implications that having a paper published as a second author would have on using the data within my thesis, and dealing with the potential crossover/defending my work as 'my own', but thanks for your comments.

Yeah you missed the bit where I said I was planning on publishing... my supervisor wants to use it as his personal policy direction has come under scrutiny and wants to defend it using some of my work; when in actuality my position is probably more nuanced than his...

I got a career development loan to fund part of my Masters fees, but for my PhD I applied for a programme with a stipend attached. Personally, I would not pay for a PhD using a loan/my own money.

Thanks for your thoughts! I've emailed my supervisors to clarify exactly what they are planning the focus of the paper to be (in case I can do another first author paper from a different angle using the data), and to ask them what happens if there is a crossover of information between the paper/my thesis. I think I've got to remember that this information is for my PhD, and not for them to justify a policy position with. If they want to use it in a way that won't compromise my PhD then that's fine for the points you raised, but otherwise they will have a different source to defend their policies :)

Hi gang,

A year ago I conducted a survey on a domestic violence intervention. I've done my analysis of it and am writing up results as part of my thesis. I had also stated to my supervisor that I'd like to get a paper out of it at some point but that getting my thesis done was my priority so it would have to wait a little bit.

My supervisor has just come to me and said that they would like access to the data I collected in order for them to lead on a publication to get it out quickly, but I'm not sure how this would fit in with my own work?! They want to re-analyse the dataset themselves as some of the issues raised in the survey have come under scrutiny (I'm funded by a government organisation). They basically want a paper out quickly to say that the controversy surrounding the intervention is unfounded and no issues were raised when the survey was done with people who were involved in the intervention - which I understand. However, from my own thesis and own publishing point of view, it feels a bit like they're pulling the rug from under my feet a bit and I'm not sure how to respond...

Thanks!

Hi,

My PhD involved conducting a piece of research that was part funded by a local council; as part of that I've published my first 'first author' paper in an international peer reviewed journal, presented the work internationally, nationally and locally and done a load of poster presentations and written up a report for local organisations to share.

One of my supervisors who is based at the council organisation sort of signed me up to speak at a conference without asking me about it first/letting me know any details. She's not been very 'present' within the PhD (I basically get the idea that she's there to have her name on something - she doesn't come to any meetings and didn't even proof read my final manuscript). I've been struggling with my mental health recently, having a recent bereavement and coming towards the end of my PhD funding and the stresses that involves. I think it will take a lot of time to prepare for the presentation and most of the audience will be aware of the work already, it's getting published and I just don't feel like I could cope with the anxiety of presenting at the moment so it's not something I want to do right now. I emailed my supervisor to say I wouldn't be able to attend but I'm more than happy if she (who is also presenting) wanted some of my slides and she can include it in her talk. She sent me a pretty arsey email after that and copied in my other two supervisors (one of them agreed I shouldn't present; the other more senior supervisor wasn't aware of it)...

Was I out of line in cancelling? I know they part funded the work but I feel I've done quite a lot of research dissemination already to make it worthwhile!

Hi All,

I'm in my third year of a PhD, which has involved making 6 ethics application. Each one has taken a long, long time to get returned to me for approval/changes. The university have differing guidance depending on where you look (a sign of how inconsistent/disorganised they are...) but guarantee a four week turnaround for PhD projects. I have a current application which has been awaiting review since June, and every time I chase it up they just extend the due date. I have had other applications which have taken months, and then if they've needed amending, another few months to have those approved.

So - I wanted to hear about whether anyone has made any official complaints or raised issues with their ethics boards? I've raised it with supervisors but there isn't much else they can do for me except add a bit more weight behind my concerns. There doesn't seem to be any official avenues at my University in which to go down to get it sorted.

Thank you!