Hey Neo, as the others have said, it really depends on your PhD. I couldn't complete mine within 4 years on 3 days per week and do everything I wanted to do within that time (publishing, conferences, supervising MSc students etc) but then I spend a lot of my time out testing patients which pretty much has to be done between 9-5 on weekdays, and everything else has to fit around it. I usually work 9.30am-6.30pm ish on weekdays and usually do extra at the weekends too, though not always. I anticipate that when I am writing up I will need more hours on top of this, so part time simply wouldn't be an option for me. However there are people in other departments who don't have the same sort of restrictions on when they have to do their work, so it is possible in some cases depending on your subject. Personally if you can, I would go full time, but I guess it works differently for different people! Best, KB

Hey! I'm doing PhD psychology (clinical psychology) and I don't feel as though I'm being treated as an RA, although sometimes it seems as though I spend my time in a similar way to the RAs on our team, i.e. visiting patients, collecting data, analysing it, writing, etc. But for my first year I was doing what you have suggested- lit review, conceptual review, proposal, ethics, theoretical framework and so on, and this is how all of the PhD students on the same team have worked, although I have friends with different sups who haven't even done a lit review. I don't see how you can possibly progress research in the right direction without understanding the current literature, but I think on some projects the sup has already done this before the PhD student starts the project- looked at the literature, picked the gap in the research and decided how to address it- so just wants the PhD-er to get on with it and worry about the lit review later. I think this happens where a PhD is advertised where funding has already been awarded to the project- the sup has had to do all of that just to get hold of the funding, so then the project is ready to get started on. When it's the other way round and you choose a project yourself and then develop the proposal then it hasn't already been done for you and you need to do the review yourself, if you see what I mean. There are important differences between PhD students and RAs though in my experience- I have a lot more input into the design and undertaking of my project than the RAs do on theirs and am able to make changes as I see fit, I get first author on my work where the RAs don't necessarily, and at the end of it all we get a doctorate after 3-4 years if we're lucky and they've basically done very similar sort of work for 3 years but have nothing to show for it at the end and so can't progress any further in the world of research until they've done the all important PhD (well, not in our field anyway- it might be different in others). So I think the PhD is def the way forward. I do get asked to do some things for my sup like helping out with her module and supervising MSc students, but it's all experience so I just get on with it really and quite enjoy some of it. But back to your situation- you really should get to grips with your literature as early as you can- I wrote a literature review in my first year and am now writing a conceptual paper which I am aiming to publish as well, and even though it's been a nightmare writing them (my subject is horribly complex!) it has helped me HUGELY to get to grips with the research and understand what I am doing and why! Best, KB

======= Date Modified 07 Feb 2010 14:12:33 =======
Hey Leaf! Really pleased you have got your offer, glad to know that your perseverence has paid off- in my experience it usually does and you just have to keep going until then! I don't really know about your chances of getting funding after the first year- I know some people on here have managed it but everyone that I know of in my department has been fully funded all the way through so I'm not sure about your situation. But my advice really would be to really push for funding from the start- your potential supervisors are clearly keen to have you on board so they should be happy to support applications for funding. I would try to get it sorted asap- if you agree to leave it and self-fund your first year people might put less effort into getting the funding for you if they think you are prepared to struggle on without. Ask your supervisor for ideas about where to apply, and put in as many applications as you can- lots of my mates got turned down from one source of funding and then succeeded with another. See if the university has any scholarships going too, and don't be afraid of applying to places/sources that seem a bit unliklely- my PhD funding came from an email about a random scholarship that was available to anyone in the country for any subject, based on academic achievement alone and nothing to do with the proposed project. I didn't think there was any way that I would get but I applied and I won it! So keep going, hopefully you will get there in the end. Good luck and keep us up to date! KB

Hey superman! It's great to hear you are enjoying your PhD so much! I am also having a very positive PhD experience and am absolutely loving it... I don't seem to have had the same sort of issues a lot of people have struggled with regarding supervisors, motivation etc...although I suppose I get little ups and downs now and again. Anyway, it sounds like you are making the most of your experiences, and it's always nice to have a positive post on here! Hope it keeps going well! KB

Hey Helen, its great to hear that things have been picking up for you. You've done so well to battle on through it and keep going, so big congrats on that. Hope things keep on getting better and better- glad to hear your supervisor is being supportive too! Good luck finishing it off, KB

Hey guys. I have only ever had Acer laptops so can't compare brands but I thoroughly recommend them and Acer have now apparently beaten Sony to the number 1 spot for reliability (according to the guy in PC World!). I replaced my laptop last year as my old one was getting on a bit and was really slow...it sounds a bit mad but it's worth looking at the laptops in Tesco! I went to Currys, PC World, loads of places online etc, and had a look at the spec I could get for my budget, then went to Tesco and found a much better spec for the same price. I then went back to PC World and asked them if they could offer anything competitive and the guy looked at my printout of the spec for the laptop in Tesco and said 'go back to Tesco- we honestly can't offer you that spec for anywhere near that price'. So I did and my new laptop has been fab! You obviously won't get the same sort of choice from a supermarket but if you just want a fairly standard laptop with a decent spec then it's worth a look! KB

Hey Mlis, you should def go see someone else about the depression. You could ask your surgery if there are any GPs there who have a special interest or experience in mental health- a pal of mine did that and ended up with someone much more suitable than her normal GP. Unfortunately most GPs have little training in mental health, and like the rest of the population, they can be incredibly ignorant about its causes and effects etc. I too have experienced this first hand, and even had to argue the toss with a GP for my prescriptions very recently- in the end I had to ask my consultant to write to him and put him in his place as he was refusing to prescribe me my medication! I think there are two kinds of depression, and this causes problems in the medical profession. Lots of people experience a reactive depression after a negative event, which can be quite a normal (although unpleasant) reaction in the circumstances, whereas other people have a more endogenous depression that is purely biological and not necessarily triggered by anything. The main problem a few years ago was that people whose depression was thought to be 'normal' in the circumstances (e.g. bereavement, job loss etc) were given pills when the depression wasn't necessarily arising from a purely biological cause, and some other sort of therapy would have been more appropriate, such as counselling/psychotherapy etc. And now they've gone the other way and are reluctant to prescribe medication even when it's clear that a person's depression is beyond a 'normal' reaction to circumstances, or isn't triggered by a negative event at all. I would definitely go see another doctor and explain how bad things are and that you don't feel that you are being taken seriously...it's impossible to keep going like this and you need some help! Find a doctor who listens to you and stick with them, there are some good ones out there! Good luck with it, KB

I would be a little bit cautious about settling for him as your 2nd supervisor- if he doesn't have the time to be your first supervisor then I'm guessing if he's your second supervisor then he's going to have even less time for you. In my experience it is the primary supervisor who does the most for you, sees you for supervision, checks your work, keeps track of where you're at and advises on your research. Often the second supervisor is only really there for back up if the other leaves or goes on study leave etc. I don't often see my second supervisor, but then I don't need to as my primary supervisor is great and gives me all the support I need. So in your position if he can't be your primary supervisor then I would ask him to jointly supervise you with someone else and check that he is still willing to be involved in your project and not just taking a very back seat. It's really important to have a supervisor who is there for you and has enough time to support you properly, as well as being in the right field etc. Good luck with it, KB

Hey Maria. Well firstly, congrats on having got your presentation done, and by the sounds of it you would have been quite happy with it had this guy not pounced on you and torn it to pieces, so try to hang on to that. I agree, it would have been far more appropriate for him to have spoken to you about it at the end rather than be so nasty and so public about it. Who knows what was going on his head- maybe he thinks it is okay to be so aggressive, maybe he enjoys 'challenging' people and asserting his authority, or maybe he's just an a**hole and is having a bad day. Either way, his behaviour was inappropriate and unfair given the circumstances. Unfortunately, some people seem to enjoy this sort of thing- I have seen it happen (in my own department and at conferences) where the presenter is practically bullied into silence at the end by a high-up prof with no social awareness at all. Of course it is important to be able to defend your work but there is way to ask questions that is not so intimidating and unpleasant. I think the important thing to remember is that it went WELL- it was only this idiot that has pissed you off, and everybody else would have seen him for the nasty piece of work that he clearly is too. He'll have done himself no favours. I suggest you go enjoy your glass (or bottle!) of wine and try to focus on the positives! Best, KB

Well, it depends what you want to do with it. Certainly that would be a lot of work if you just want to do one 'for fun' or as a personal achievement that you are not actually planning to pursue after you've finished. But if you have your heart set on a particular career (e.g. in research) where a PhD is absolutely essential, then perhaps it is worth it. You can obviously work in research without a PhD, but realistically there are limits as to how far you can go without a doctorate, however good you are. But if you're thinking about investing all of that time and money then best make sure it's what you really want to do. A lot of people on the forum have very negative PhD experiences, but there are many people who have extremely positive ones as well, so don't be too put off by this! KB

Hey there. Well if you have found what the next directions in research might be then in one sense you have found the 'gap' in the literature. With a lit review normally one writes about the existing literature in an effort to synthesize it and make some sense out of it, and then use this to look for directions for future research. This kind of sounds like what you have done, so you are probably along the right lines. I guess the main thing is to try to be critical about existing research and see the holes in it/limitations- the authors may even have highlighted these themselves. It is often these 'holes' that need filling and which provide scope for further work. Best, KB

Hey Mlis, sorry to hear that things are still so tough for you. I agree with the others- you really need to go above your supervisor's head now. You have given her every chance to respond and to be helpful, and are not getting anywhere, so I think it's time to ask someone higher up for support. Is there no other 'pastoral support' PhD person who can help you too? We have a member of our staff that is there to deal with issues like this and it provides you with someone to speak to you about your studies and also how things are affecting you at the moment. In addition, what about your chairperson? We are always told that they are the person to see if there are issues with the supervisor. I wouldn't give up on the counselling thing either- sounds like you had a really awful time with the first one and I don't blame you for not wanting to go back! But the university service might be more used to dealing with issues like this and might therefore be more understanding- I have been going to my uni counsellor for 6 years now and she has been fantastic. Good luck with it all, KB

Hey Natassia! First off, well done- it sounds like you have done a good job of a difficult task! I think it's scary to be different sometimes. The way I am approaching my PhD topic is very different to how it has been tackled before, and whilst it seems like an arguably logical step to me I do worry that it's too different and novel! In terms of the theory stuff, I think you have to understand a theory well before you can apply it properly. One of the hardest things to do is to synthesize different theories and find a way forwards with the research, but I think this is the first step to being able to apply it. I find the theory side of my project horribly complex, but the thing that has really helped is the written work I have done. I did a systematic lit review that has been published and that gave me a really good grounding, and I am just completing a paper on the theoretical concepts behind my topic which will be submitted for publication too. It's a bitch of a paper to write but slowly I am beginning to get to grips with it all and feel more confident that I know what I'm doing (well, on a good day!). Some people jump into their PhDs without doing a lit review, and I don't get how they can really understand what they are doing when they haven't looked at the background to it properly, but I guess everyone has different ways of working. I think the application side of the theory stuff will come in time, it just takes a lot of perseverence and patience, so take it easy on yourself! Talking of presentations, I remember in my MSc final presentation the marker asked a question but his Welsh accent was so strong I couldn't understand a word of what he was saying. I asked him to repeat it twice and still couldn't make head or tail of it so had to say that I couldn't think of an answer as I was too embarrassed to ask him to say it again! Not good! Best, KB

Hi Julie. This is a really unfortunate situation. There seems to be a lot of tension surrounding first authorship on papers- understandably, given the benefits of having first-author papers. Unfortunately, data collection alone does not necessarily entitle one to being first author- in fact it is quite possible to have collected all of the data and not being an author at all if that is the only input one has had. I have known people who have collected the entire set of data (but not been involved in the write-up or analysis) to just be mentioned in passing in the acknowledgement section of the paper. So I suppose the question for you is how much you contributed to the paper aside from the data. Was the idea for the research yours? Did you get involved in the analysis of results and the conclusions drawn from them? When you say the post-doc has taken your work 'to the next stage', how do you mean? It is crappy that you weren't given the chance to write this paper yourself- especially given that they knew you wanted to write it and then wrote it behind your back. Unfortunately I have seen this done before once in my own department- sounds like a very similar situation to yours. I think this time you are going to struggle to convince the post-doc to put you as first author given that he/she has already written the paper, unless you can prove that a significant amount of the academic content was your own (the thinking behind the research, analysis, main conclusions drawn, new theory derived from results etc). If you still feel that you have been hard done by then it might be worth asking your supervisor very tactfully about what would normally constitute enough of a contribution for first authorship, but I think you would have to be pretty non-confrontational about it at this stage. I suppose the next best thing to do would be to speak to your supervisor about any other papers that you might be able to write up for publication, and explain that you are really keen to do this. It is not a nice situation and I really feel for you- however these things can be a bit sensitive so I would tread carefully. Best wishes, KB