Pjlu - you've hit the nail on the head. I was listening to some talks at the SLSA conference at the SLSA and, sorry to say, but some of the talks I was left with exactly that feeling - so what?

======= Date Modified 02 Oct 2012 15:08:43 =======
I guess it probably depends on the field - I certainly find listening to legal academics/postgrads with no results talk about their design and methodology incredibly boring, I have no idea why they have law conferences on that sort of thing.

My pet hate is when people focus too much on their methodology, because generally that's not the interesting bit of the research.

======= Date Modified 02 Oct 2012 13:15:18 =======
That's a brilliant idea - cheers!
Have you numbered your paragraphs?

For those people that really do find themselves overwhelmed with panic in vivas, consider taking beta-blockers (you have to get them from your GP). I did that for a set of postgraduate medical exams where each time I could feel the adrenaline surge turn my brain to mush - I knew my stuff but the panic would stop me coming out with it on the day. The first time I took them I passed - possibly coincidence of course, but if I was in the same situation again I would consider taking them.

Does anyone else have/had this problem writing this thesis? I have difficulty remembering if I've written about something already in my thesis somewhere now it's getting bigger - it's driving me nuts! It's probably my random approach that doesn't help :-(

Carold, I have a friend who's having a hard time because the thrust of her research doesn't fit with the agenda of many working in the field. I think academic freedom is largely a myth.

Yes, I think a certain amount of fear is better than complacency.

I think a lot must depend on your supervisor. I too am enjoying my PhD.

Always encouraging to hear from someone further down the road. Well done for persevering!

I second that - research questions get changed as the project progresses

Do you want something to do the PhD for you LOL?

I think there's a lot of factors involved other than simply the quality of your abstract. I had an abstract rejected for a postgraduate conference, but then accepted for a much more prestigious event (and this was a presentation based on an article which had already been published).
So I believe that it also depends on how well your abstract fits with the other topics and how well the reviewer understands your field.

What method are you using to analyse the interviews? have you piloted it?

There's a school of thought, which I have a lot of time for, which says that intensive/extensive is a better dichotomy than qualitative/quantitative. This sounds like a qualitative methodology would be more appropriate. If they're Likert-type scales then that's qualitative.
Lormak, what field is your supervisor from? I know from experience with one of my supervisors that medics don't really 'get' qualitative methodology.