How to Stay Motivated during PhD

“How to maintain PhD motivation?” This is a very common question asked by many PhD scholars. Below is an email from a PhD scholar that I am sharing with you.  Hi, I’m doing a PhD from Durham University. I was extremely excited until I went through intense pressure. Now I am losing interest. I find it back-breaking. Intensive research and writing a thesis is seriously a herculean task. I don’t get time, and perhaps I don’t know the ways to do it in a more efficient manner. My researchers have suggested several tips to finish my project calmly in time, but I don’t achieve the desired results. I am extremely depressed now. I feel like I can never have a PhD title.  Thanks and Regards, Jennifer Hey Jennifer, After I read your email what I have twigged is that you are demotivated now. It’s not happening with you only. There are many PhD scholars who face this tortuous phase. Being motivated is extremely crucial to complete any difficult task whether it is PhD or some other work. Here are some ways that can help you motivate yourself.  Be consistent Consistency is imperative to complete your PhD project. Ask advisors for tips about the effective ways to conduct research and writing a thesis. Don’t put off your work. Take your deadlines seriously and devote six to seven hours everyday in your research and writing work. Initially you’ll find it difficult to manage, but you can expand your scheduled hours by piecemeal.  For instance, write two paragraphs a day during the first week. Write three paragraphs a day during the second week, and then write four paragraphs a day during the third week, and so on. This will increase your writing capacity, and you will be able to complete it within time.  Track your progress You have 24 hours a day....

Some studies are painstakingly planned in advance; others are tailored as enquiry processes.

In presipified study questions of interest arguments supporting the inquiry,the specific procedures of the inquiry are worked out at the beginning of the investigation .Once the design is established ,the researcher implements the study,adhering to original plan as closely as possible. Much of the traditional empirical research in the social sciences is of this kind. Emergent studies have a long tradition in the humanities and in some branches of social sciences.In emergent studies ,the questions of interest ,supporting arguments ,and procedural details are worked out as the study proceeds .Such studies are most frequently employed to investigate natural variation ,to study phenomena afresh/or in all their normal complexity,or to explore the phenomena to see what can be learned.Emergent designs may also be used because researchers lack prior knowledge of phenomenon ,methodological tools are inappropriate or lacking,or situational control in inadequate to conduct a presipified study. Studies need not be one or the other but may blend the two strategies ,intentionally or inadvertently .A presified study may become more emergent as feels control breakdown ,new information suggests that initial assumptions were incorrect ,or unstable conditions demand greater researcher flexibility.When the pretest Measures show that the control group was already scoring higher than the treatment group instead of both the group starting out equally. The study intentionally starts as a divergent term which specifications are most meaningful for important and feasible. The nature of phenomenon being examined also influences whether a more presipified or a more this strategy is the best choice .Suppose you were interested knowing more about how different personalities type respond to chronic stress.You might chose as your dissertation to conduct a meta-analysis(combining results of comparable studies into a single index) of the considerable empirical literature that relates elevated blood pressure to prespecified design that summarized the extent of the available literature ,specified the criteria for selecting studies...

Summarizing and interpreting the information in case study research – PhD Help Series

In case study research,making sense of information collected from multiple sources is a recursive process in which the researcher interacts with the information throughout the investigative process.In other words, unlike some forms of research in which the data are examined only at the end of information collection period ,case study research involves ongoing examination and interpretation of the data in order to reach tentative conclusions and to refine the research questions .Case study researchers adhere to several guidelines as they simultaneously summarize and interpret information gathered when doing case study research. One guideline involves ongoing refinement of the study’s fundamental research questions in light of data obtained early in the investigation. For example, a teacher interested in factors that contribute to student attrition may discern from initial observations of her school’s classroom that rates.As a result,she may refine her initial questions from , What factors contribute to student attrition? to, Why are attention rates higher in classrooms in which teachers lecture exclusively?  Another guideline suggests constant focus on the research questions being investigated .A case study researcher can feel overwhelmed by the large amount of information normally obtained from interviews ,observations and documents. For example, a nurse exploring his hospital’s employment practices may generate 300 pages of transcribed interview data, several dozen pages of field notes describing observations of his hospital, and the number of pieces of potentially relevant physical evidence . A way to control the resulting sense of helplessness is to constantly remind oneself of the fundamental research questions being explored in the study.Each new piece of information should be examined in the light of these fundamental questions. A third guideline involves collection and interpretation of only those data that are potentially meaningful to the research effort .Although premature elimination of potential information is equally counterproductive .For example, a technology specialist seeking insights into her companies software...

How to Formulate a Research Problem in your PhD Research Proposal

There are two types of research problems, viz., those which relate  to states of nature and those which relate to relationships between variables. At the very outset, the researcher must single out the problem he wants to study, i.e, he must decide the general area of interest or aspect of a subject matter that he would like to inquire into. Initially, the problem may be stated in a broad general way and then the ambiguities, if any related to the problem, are resolved. Then the feasibility of a particular solution has to be considered before a working formulation of the problem can be set up. The formulation of a general topic into a specific research problem, thus constitutes the first step in a scientific inquiry. Essentially two steps are involved in formulating the research problem, viz., understanding the problem thoroughly, and rephrasing the same into meaningful terms from an analytical point of view.    The best way of understanding the problem is to discuss it with one’s own colleagues or with those having expertise in the matter.  Often, a problem is put in general terms and is up to the researcher to narrow it down and phrase the problem in the operational terms. In private business units or governmental organisations, the problem is usually earmarked by administrative agencies with whom the researcher can discuss as to how the problem originally came out and what possible considerations are involved in its possible solutions. The researcher must at the same time examine all available literature to get himself acquainted with the selected problem. He may review two types of literature- the conceptual literature concerning the concepts and theories, and empirical literature consisting of studies made earlier which are one similar to the one proposed. The basic outcome of the review will be the knowledge as to what data and other materials are...

Pitfalls to Beware of While Doing Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is majorly used in social sciences research where the analysis of interactions and texts is required. This analytical method is used to describe and interpret the statements of subjects on a specific social issue or to analyse and critique the text. However, discourse analysis brings about some pitfalls with it, which researchers and scholars should beware of. Following are a few cautions to be taken while doing discourse analysis: Methodological issues: Discourse analysis suffers from a few methodological issues. For example, different traditions may have their own concepts and epistemological positions, as well as their own understanding of discourse. Therefore, the meaning of discourse may vary. It is critical for a researcher to take care, as the discourse is open to one’s own interpretation. Explanatory differences: The concepts may have multiple differences, as well as similarities. In such a case, there may be confusions for the researcher with regard to the explanation of these concepts. While doing discourse analysis, it can be problematic to justify the use of a concept in every analysis. Narrow technique: Discourse analysis has been critiqued for its lack of explicit techniques available for researchers. Thus, it is considered to be a narrow technique. It is important for scholars to see that it does not become a hindrance during their qualitative research analysis. Non-concrete: Discourse analysis is not a technique that provides definite answers. Thus, the knowledge or insight gained through this method is a topic of debate. Under-analysis: The technique has also been critiqued for some analytical shortcomings. For instance, when the analyst simply summarises the statements of subjects, collates the quotations or takes his/her own position on statements, then it cannot be said that the discourse is actually analysed. While there may be under-analysis in some cases, the analysis may not have been done at all in others. It is critical...

PhD Thesis Format – Frequently Asked Questions

The writing stage for any doctoral candidate is dreaded when he is not good with the academic writing style and format. While you reach the writing stage for your PhD thesis, you might have a few questions in your mind about the style, structure, and format of your thesis. Here are a few FAQs that would make all the PhD thesis requirements quite clear: Does my PhD thesis length matter if the content is accurate? No. The length of the thesis is not really a matter of concern when the content in your thesis is precise and accurate. Your research topic is undoubtedly a vast topic to cover but your thesis doesn’t need to include every bit of your research. Your PhD thesis should be precise providing the required information to a reader for a comprehensive understanding of your research. Is a PhD thesis structure universal or confined to your University? Well, a PhD thesis structure is universal in accordance of the introduction, literature review, methodology, data analysis, result & conclusion, and bibliography. However, if your University asks you to write it in a different order you must abide by it. The organization of the chapters is as follows : The introduction provides a glimpse and the objective of your thesis. The literature review is a chronological and relatable background of the study on your topic. The methodology defines your approach towards the research and the method (qualitative or quantitative) you chose for your research process. The data analysis chapter includes the analysis of the collected data either in a pictorial or tabular form. Result & conclusion is the findings you have attained from the research with the limitations of the method. Bibliography of your PhD thesis is the reference section where you mention every used source which helped you with the research. What should a PhD thesis cover...