In the UK it can happen that the RA role actually has scope for you to be more independent and be supervised to attain a PhD. Likely in your case the project didn't have scope for that. And they wanted to make you aware of that in case you were expecting that it might (given that you said you want to do a PhD on your statement).

If you are looking to do a PhD, certainly an RA position can be one way into doing one. It would not be one where you got to carry out your idea though, as the project would already have been proposed etc by the stage you came on board. If you are more interested in a PhD where you have the freedom to carry out your own idea then I wouldn't suggest this route.

Hope this helps.

Try to do something on the side. Be open about it. You should be allowed to develop your own small idea during your PhD!

Awesome - thanks everyone. I will probably go for it anyway - not that much too lose. Basically, your odds of getting help with funding to attend the conf are increased if you are presenting two things. So I am trying to come up with a second thing to present. Will see what happens.

Somehow I didn't see this sooner. I do agree that the solution often lies in being proactive, yes!

Wow - time flies! That's interesting. In the social sciences (or at least in my part of it) it seems that lecturers are in demand and experience isn't really needed. Several people I know have walked into teaching jobs. Their problem is that they aren't getting to focus on their research, as the teaching is so all consuming. Glad you have a fantastic boss. Maybe if you get a spare moment you could share more about the postdoc (how you got it in the end) on your blog! I'm in that position now and wondering how to get one without having the great publication record that some of my peers seem to have (I have one mediocre publication and hopefully another one to come from the PhD - again not high impact or anything). Any advice would be appreciated!

Hi Eng, thanks. I understand the pushing to publish /present what you've got so far - but in my case at the time of writing the abstract I have nothing. You still advise that? Worst case scenario I find nothing of interest and end up presenting an incredibly boring poster! Mind you, given the nature of the study, whatever the outcome should be interesting... (ie. observational looking at the nature of interaction between participants).

Hello! There is a conference in March that I'd like to present some work at. I have the data and the idea for the analysis but haven't yet conducted the analysis. Do you think that the abstract is likely to get anywhere (be accepted) without having the results yet announced on it? Also it is an investigation with no specific hypotheses so I can't say what it would be expecting to find either. The deadline is next week so I'm just trying to decide what to do.

Nice idea. I'll have a think about that.

Hi Tru, Thanks! I've had a quick look but will look better later. Is it for general tips on writing up?
Hope all's going well.

Typo corrections:
*trying to "fix myself" in order to make it work
*it was interesting to hear...

pm133 - I can appreciate your approach. I use it too - more so with myself than with others. But I also see value in having the default position of giving the benefit of the doubt. I think people (especially PhD students) can be highly self critical, and, in the context of the great unknown of academia, undermine themselves and be drawn into constantly thinking that the problem is with them.

All I'm saying here is maybe the problem doesn't lie with this person. Maybe it IS the context. Or a mismatch between personility and context. Maybe check out other labs and talk to other people and see if what is being experienced here is really OK. If it is, and nothing is seriously amiss, then change your attitude and move forward. But if it isn't... move on! You'll thank yourself later! (Or deeply perhaps regret it if you don't).

I admit that my attitude is very much shaped by my own PhD experience. I wish I'd had that kind of advice a few years ago - but to be honest I'm not sure I'd have even taken it. I was too undermined in the context and too busy trying to "fix myself" to make it work.

I was interesting to hear about your approach - no mansplaining as far as I could tell. It's interesting to hear where people are coming from - especially as our opinions/advice often seem so diametrically opposed!

Tudor

I was so enlightened by mattfabb's reply (I'm in the writing up stages) that I wasn't very helpful in my own one!

I think I can understand your feelings of apprehension as you start a new PhD having quit the last one. I can see how that previous experience could easily feed into how you are feeling now. I guess it's a bit like anything - if something went wrong - a relationship - even a swimming lesson - it kind of can make you feel a bit apprehensive next time you are faced with doing it.

"I'm therefore really thankful that I've been offered this second opportunity and determined that this time it will work out - it's doing the subject I really want to be doing this time, so it should all be fine."

That is the truth of the matter here. The negative feelings / stage fright are just that - feelings. One thing you could do is challenge your own thoughts and fears when they come (maybe this is something in your mindfulness routine - but it's also useful to just get into the habit of challenging such thoughts until they eventually just stop coming). Also, you could start to get into the work so that they can't distract you. Re moving away from friends and family - could you plan so that you will visit once a month or whatever seems reasonable - just to put that nagging doubt to rest? Having a support plan like that in place is definitely a good idea if you already know you are someone who can get stressed or lonely when feeling isolated.

Just to say, well done - it takes amazing courage to quit a PhD when you realise it isn't for you. As a word of encouragement, a friend of mine quit hers one year in and then started another. It was a similar scenario to yours - it just wasn't in what she wanted to do. She is much happier now and nearing the end of her first year on the new PhD.

All the best!

Absolutely agree. I don't want to infer that this is where the OP is coming from though, as it may not be the case. That's why I'm trying to get at whether it is a problem with lab or a problem with self. We are probably on the same page here but just coming from opposite angles. The fact that she/he says that the uni standards are not high and he/she will probably pass anyway kind of raises the possibility that maybe it is just a crap context to be in.

Thanks eng. Ah I now understand the format you are suggesting. Still, perhaps inserting the reviewers comments after Study 1 (original) would help explain the origins of the reanalysis later on. Will ask sup.

Thankfully, I've no issues with receiving criticism about my work, especially when I already recognize some of them and agree with them. I imagine that the viva will be an interesting discussion about the weaknesses of my work and how to do it better next time. I don't think they will ask me to redo any experiments as the experiment was an intervention in schools - it would take an awful long time to re do it... and it wasn't flawed as such - it still tells us something about the effect of x on y skills (i.e., that there doesn't seem to BE an effect when measured on these outcomes). It is only that in hindsight I would have designed it differently - mostly with the benefit of having seen that it didn't work (as well as having learnt more from the reanalysis of Study 1).

I wish I knew some examples of people who had a crap thesis (as indexed by the publish-ability of the research) and yet went on to be successful researchers. That's what's bothering me here. But that's for another thread I suppose!