Well PhD-girl/posh-brunette,

I think you are perfectly entitled to your opinions about love and losing love and how to deal with it, of course you are. We all deal with things differently. But what I don't think is acceptable is to be so rude and unkind to another person who is clearly distressed and needs understanding, something which you clearly lack. Imagine how you would feel if you were severely depressed (yes, it's clear you have no idea what that's like, but just try) and you received a message similar to the one you posted before. That could be devastating to someone in that position. You are entitled to your opinion, but if it is based on ignorance and is clearly going to cause a huge amount of upset and distress to another person, then I would keep it to yourself. I only hope that the original poster realises that most of us, even those without experience of clinical depression, are here to offer support and understanding, not to judge with such a lack of respect for the person's feelings. Unless you have experienced severe clinical depression, you cannot understand what it is like- there are no words for it. All the best to Mlis, I only hope that you are beginning to feel better. All the best, KB.

I think you're fine- it takes a while to settle into the new routine of a PhD and finding what works for you. A lot of people spend their whole first year 'faffing around' and don't really have a clear idea of what they're doing until second year, although I wouldn't recommend faffing around for that long! I would start with a literature search so you can get to know the literature, because you will have to write a literature review at some point. Keep your supervisors up to date with what you're doing and where you're up to so they know what pace you are able to work at, you'll soon be at the stage where you have so many things to do that you could go for 6 months without needing a supervision session and another list of things to do! All the best! KB

Hi Cobweb! I'm in a different subject to you, but my primary PhD supervisor was on academic leave for the first semester of my PhD which I was quite stressed about. I think you should definitely make contact. My sup was very good and we set up a system whereby I (and her other 4 PhD students!) would email her every Monday with a bit about what I had been up to that week, what I had been reading about, any questions that I had, and any written work I had produced. This worked well and she was very good at putting time aside to reply properly to each of us. We also organised a couple of skype conversations to clear up issues that were too complex to sort out by email. It might be different for you- I was in the middle of preparing a detailed proposal and needed a bit of advice with practical issues etc, so if your work is all literature based then you might not need such frequent contact. But I think it is a good idea to have a piece of paper by your desk to scribble down questions/ideas that pop up throughout the week and then you can cover all of your queries in one email rather than sending 2 zillion emails one after the other which would probably get a bit tiresome for your sup! And of course, not all sups are quite as accommodating as mine, so might not want weekly updates- see what works best for you and your sup! All the best, KB.

Haha, this all sounds very familiar to me! I have just started my second year on a PhD in clinical psychology and spent a lot of the first year reading, writing my lit review, finalising the proposal and form-filling for ethical approval etc. I treated my PhD as a full-time job and I still do, so I always tried to put in at least 8 or 9 hours per day and often did more in the evenings and at weekends (whilst still retaining some sort of social life!). I think it's good to get into this sort of routine and it will set you up well for your next couple of years which will no doubt be rather hectic. I had an office mate who started at the same time as me in the same sort of subject area and same supervisors- she has probably averaged a couple of hours a day and apparently spends most of her time watching films at home and buying stuff off the internet (I am friends with her flatmate so get inside information!). But a year on, I'm glad I have been putting in the hours because she is a long way behind. At the end of the day you can do the minimum so that you pass your PhD with no frills, or you can work hard and get a PhD, publications, presentation/conference experience, teaching experience, and earn the respect of your colleagues. I suspect that this will eventually be the difference between people who casually put in a few hours a day and those who work hard and go on to lead successful academic careers...well I would like to think it works like that although I'm sure in practice it doesn't always! But I am working on this principal :) Stick with the routine, you'll be glad you did! KB

======= Date Modified 28 Oct 2009 16:28:03 =======
Hey Mlis. Please please please ignore the ignorant post a few below, whose author clearly has no clue what it is like to actually experience clinical depression. I don't think I have ever slated another person's post on this forum before because everyone has the right to their opinion but I feel very strongly about this one. I have bipolar disorder and have been admitted to hospital 9 times for this, for 2 or 3 months at a time. I have had medication, electric shock treatment (ECT) and years of psychotherapy- I know that depression isn't just about feeling a bit crappy and I know that you cannot just shake yourself out of it, so please don't feel like a failure because you aren't able to do this. At the worst of my illness I was so weak that I couldn't get out of bed (even to go to the loo) and my parents were trying to feed me off a teaspoon- this is the reality of severe depression. First thing's first- you need to look after yourself and get better, you cannot finish your PhD in the state you are in right now. What sort of help are you getting? You need to see your GP for an assesssment and also get access to some regular ongoing support that works for you, perhaps a different counsellor, mental health advisor or CPN. When you start to feel better you can start thinking about returning to your PhD work but for now you need to concentrate on looking after yourself. The professionals will be able to provide written reports supporting your need to take time out of your PhD. I dropped out of my year at uni 3 times when I was ill. The last time I was hospitalised was over 3 years ago and since then I obtained a first in my BSc, a distinction in my MSc, won a scholarship to fund my PhD, and have just had my first paper published. So things do get better with help and perseverence and you will finish your PhD and get your life back, but you need to get help. So just do your best, and ignore other people's ignorant views and thoughts about this. I hope that you are feeling better since your orignial post. My very best wishes and hugs, KB.

Hi button! I am doing a PhD in clinical psychology which is mostly quantitative, but I am doing a small qualitative study as well, using semi-structured interviews which will be analysed using IPA (interpretative phenomenological analysis). I am aiming for up to 90 people in my quant study but just 8-10 people for the qual study, and this is perfectly acceptable in my field- most published studies of this kind using a clinical population have about 6-12 participants because the analysis is so rigorous and time-consuming, although of course there are some studies which are larger. I would think 10 should be fine although I would check with your supervisor what he/she thinks is a good number to aim for and of course it will depend on your population and how accessible they are as well. Best of luck, KB

No, you are not wrong in feeling this way. Are the results from your lab work going to be just your your own data or are you all sharing data from your repsective lab work? Either way, this isn't fair, but I guess the implications are a bit different. If it is all your own PhD work then it is your own responsibility to get it done however suits you best in whatever time scale is manageable for you, but it is not fair or realistic for your supervisor to expect you to spend this much time in the lab. If your data is going to be pooled and you're working more than twice the hours of your colleagues then this is even more frustrating if you are all going to end up sharing the results anyway. Everybody has other commitments and whilst these might be real hurdles for them, this shouldn't result in you having to work longer hours to make up for it. Nor should it be the attitude of your supervisor that you have nothing else to squeeze into your life just because you aren't married with kids. I am feeling very frustrated right now because at the same time I started my PhD another girl started with the same supervisor as me. She hardly puts in any work (2 hours a day would be a miracle for her) and is now behind schedule. As a result of this I am the only TA for my supervisor's module (80 students!) when every other year there have been two TAs, and I also have to help supervise 9 MSc students whilst she has been asked to do nothing (basically because it wouldn't get done). I have over 4 times as many participant visits to do as she does and can't help but feel a little pissed off, given that I am now losing about 2 days a week to my teaching commitments whereas she lounges around all day watching films and spending hours skyping her friends. Arrrrgh. I really hate people who don't pull their weight, so I have every sympathy with you. Are you able to approach your supervisor over this issue at all? KB

Couldn't agree more Jinkim65- well said! Whenever I get stressed or upset by things I always try to think realistically what the worst possible outcome could be, as I have a tendency to blow things out of all proportion. If the worst that can happen is really not that bad then I try to keep it in perspective....usually the worst possible outcome for something I am stressing about is completely laughable in the grand scheme of things (i.e. a piece of work won't quite be completed in time for supervision or I might be 30 seconds late for my teaching class because I've been stuck in a meeting, or if I don't get time to go to the shop I might run out of cookies today- heaven forbid-you get the picture!!). Thanks for that! KB

Depends on your subject. Where I am I know a number of people doing PhDs in biology who didn't need an MSc or any research experience to get in. At the same university in psychology there are over 70 PhD students and an MSc is a formal requirement regardless of mark at undergrad level. I achieved a first in my undergrad degree and then did an MSc, and I wouldn't have been able to achieve the same standard of work at PhD level without the MSc under my belt. There is only one person I know of in the whole department who didn't have an MSc, but she had over 15 years of experience, and even she had to take a number of MSc modules in her first year. So yes, in the some subjects it can be done. If you are in a more competitive area like Psychology (especially clinical) you probably won't stand much of a chance with no MSc. I would check with the admissions tutors at the uni(s) you are applying to first, that's the best way to be sure really. All the best, KB.

I don't really know but I guess as many as possible. I have just started my 2nd year in a PhD in clinical psychology and had my first paper published at the end of 1st year, but not many people who started at the same time as me have had anything published yet, and I know of 3rd years who don't have any publications. I spoke to my supervisor a few weeks ago about this and she is wanting me to have about 5 or 6 from my PhD work and although I can see where they could potentially come from (e.g. two review papers, about 3 from the results- 1 cross-sectional, 1 longitudanal, 1 qualitative- and a paper based on the discussion and implications for clinical practice) I am less than convinced about having the time to actually write all of these and submit them! There is research that suggests that people who do their PhD by publication take on average an extra four months to complete (can't remember the reference!), but then if you don't publish as you go along and you want to carry on in academia you would have to spend time on publishing after you finished your PhD anyway. I guess it matters less if you don't want a future in academia. Personally, in a competitive subject and in a competitive world, I wouldn't want to complete my PhD with no publications and if it takes me an extra few months then so be it! Though I think I would be happy with 3-4, I'm not optimistic about 5 or 6 at the moment! KB

Hmmm...interesting. Most of the time I think mine is going quite well, although it is easy to compare oneself to others and think they're so much further on or have more participants than me etc! But often I'm not comparing like with like- my project is using a clinical population (NHS patients) as participants, so it is always going to be running behind those that are using students as participants which don't have to go through NHS ethics. The paperwork just for working with a clinical population has taken me over 6 months to prepare and have approved by the NHS so sometimes it feels slow-going. I'm very happy with things overall though and tend to rely on feedback from my supervisor to reassure me that things are going well. I'm especially happy now I'm out and about testing people and not chained to the desk like I have been for the last year! I am finding it hard to balance everything this year though...I seem to have little time for writing and it really feels as though my teaching commitments are negatively impacting upon my PhD work at the moment which is frustrating. But the essentials are in place, I still love my topic and what I do which I think counts for a lot. So the little frustrations will be overcome and somehow I'll muddle my way through just like you guys will too!! Best wishes all, KB.

Hi! It depends on your subject I would think. A distinction is definitely an advantage if you are applying for funding for your own project in a competitive field, but if you are applying for a project that already has funding or something in a less competitive field then it's probably less important. I know people who have got on an advertised funded PhD with just a pass at MSc level so I think you should be in with a chance with a merit and some relevant experience. Good luck, KB.

Hi guys! I think most people experience these sorts of issues to start with. Like emcollins I did Psychology BSc, MSc and now PhD and was used to fairly short-term deadlines. When I started my PhD I found it quite helpful to fill in a form with my supervisor at the end of each supervision session, which included progress from last meeting, things discussed in the present meeting, and targets for the next meeting. This way you can get a sense of direction and tick things off as you go. Sometimes I had specific practical things to do but other times I was just aiming to read around a particular area of literature and understand it by the next session and we would discuss what I had read etc. And then of course your supervisor knows where you are up to and can give you a shove in the right direction if you get off course, which would inevitably happen with me every few weeks! Good luck, it'll all become clearer as you carry on! KB

Hey! Pretty much full time work hours I guess plus whatever else is required! So at least 8 hours per day in the office or testing, sometimes a bit more in the evening, sometimes weekends and sometimes not. I go through hectic patches and slightly less hectic patches and like to take some time to chill at the weekend if I can so I don't burn out, but sometimes PhD stuff doesn't fit from 9-5 Mon-Fri as most of us will know! KB

Hi guys!

There are quite a few posts at the moment about reviewers and how to deal with their comments, and I was just wondering if anyone had had a similar experience to my own?

I submitted my first paper and got a revise and resubmit decision (I was actually quite pleased- I was dreading a straight rejection!). I was able to respond to the first reviewer's comments and found them helpful and made a few changes. Yet the second reviewer's suggestions were difficult to address. I had assumed that the reviewers would be 'experts' in the field (as stated in the editor's email!), or at least to have done research that was clearly related to the papers they are asked to review....but this reviewer obviously had very little knowledge of the field or existing research and his/her comments were therefore inappropriate and impossible to respond to (my supervisor agreed with me on this- I wasn't just being awkward!). For example, they suggested that I widen my inclusion criteria to include research that hasn't actually been done (it was a review paper) and to add in further details of other non-existent research etc...

In the end it wasn't a problem, I responded to the comments and explained why I couldn't make the suggested changes and my paper was accepted without further changes or another round of reviews. As it was my first paper I have little experience of the review process, but how much knowledge do reviewers generally have of the topics they are being asked to review papers on? I know there might not be experts on the exact same things that we are currently studying but I thought they would have more background knowledge than that! What has anyone else found?!

Cheers guys, best wishes to all, it seems to be a stressful time for a lot of people right now, myself included!

KB