Hey there! I think it is important to be thinking about conferences and journal papers if you want to work in academia, but at the same time I don't think you need to worry about not having got there just yet. I only had one paper published in my first year, and didn't present at any conferences until half way through my second year (I didn't have any results to present until then!). It's pretty normal to be in your second or your third year before you start writing up papers for publication and going to conferences to present- although a poster would be a good start and give you some experience of what happens at conferences and what to expect etc. If you don't want to stay in academia after your PhD then I don't think it matters so much about getting publications, but if you're after a post-doc then I think it's pretty much essential (or at least it is in my field!). Good luck! KB

Hey all! Just thought I'd share an experience of mine in case anyone is in the same boat. I recently heard back from a journal that a paper I'd written (with supervisor as second author) had been rejected straight out. I was pretty surprised as I was quite confident about the paper (especially in comparison to the last one, which I didn't have a lot of faith in but managed to get accepted after a lot of editing). One reviewer's comments were pretty good, but the other one went on a complete rant and to me it seemed a bit unfair and biased- but hey, I would have accepted the rejection and sent it somewhere else. Anyway, I emailed the reviewer's comments to my sup, and she was furious, especially as the straight rejection meant that we didn't get the chance to defend the paper. So she emailed the editor, quite a long email, refuting the claims made by the reviewer, and he has actually withdrawn the rejection! The paper will be re-reviewed by 2-3 new reviewers, so might still not get accepted, but I will at least feel happier that it has been reviewed fairly. I know that often papers are rejected for good reasons, but it just goes to show that if you feel that your paper has genuinely been reviewed unfairly, or by people who were unsuitable, then it might be worth pursuing! Of course, if it was just me the editor probably would have told me to get lost, but having my sup on my side seemed to pull some weight! Anyway, just thought I'd share in case anyone else is in the same position! Best, KB

======= Date Modified 19 Nov 2010 11:56:59 =======
Hi Rose! I'm in my third year in a PhD in Clinical Psychology in the UK. I went on to do the PhD straight after my MSc, and decided to stay on at the same university as it is one of the best unis in my subject and the people who I wanted to supervise me here are world-class researchers. My topic fitted reasonably well with my primary supervisor, and she has already had lots of successful doctoral students pass their degrees, which I figured was a good sign! There are different ways to obtain funding and it would probably be best to discuss this with a prospective supervisor. My PhD supervisor was also my MSc supervisor, and after I approached her saying I wanted to do a PhD and asking if she would supervise it, we started to think about where we would get funding from. I was quite lucky to win an academic scholarship that covered fees and stipend, but the department itself had offered to fund me if I wasn't able to get funding from elsewhere. Where I am, there are quite a lot of departmental studentships so it might be worth asking about that. If not then you would need to apply elsewhere, such as research councils, but your prospective supervisor would be able to adivse on that. I think the first thing for you to do would be to think about exactly what you want to do in your PhD, then have a look round and see who would be best to supervise it, and make contact to see if they would be willing to. Just for the record- I used to study at Edinburgh uni- it's a fantastic city to live and study in! Good luck with it, KB

Hey, that's a tough decision. First I think you need to establish whether you need the masters to apply for the PhD. I know one of the posts below says that you don't need an MSc to apply for a PhD, but actually in some subjects you do need a masters before they will consider you for a PhD- it is an official requirement in my subject at my university and every PhD student has done one. It also depends a bit on the reasons you failed your dissertation. Certainly it doesn't look good applying for a PhD when you failed your MSc dissertation- as others have said, the PhD is a lot tougher and standards are higher. But why did you fail your MSc dissertation? How much work would it take to re-do it? I agree with the others that a PGDip doesn't look too good on the CV (I have a diploma from another uni course I started at a different uni years ago, and dropped out of because I wanted to change subjects, and I don't even put it on my CV because I think it looks bad). I would persevere with getting the MSc, and try to get research experience as well to strengthen your PhD application. Good luck, KB

Hey Jojo! I have also got significantly fatter during my PhD, and am just going into third year now (about 2 stone heavier!). One thing I would do if you're serious about losing weight is to get a health check done first- I have quite a serious ongoing thyroid problem that is no doubt accounting for a lot of my weight gain, and had no idea about it until I had routine blood checks for something else, although I had been feeling pretty bad (but just put it down to tiredness). It's good to know about your blood pressure and cholesterol levels too if you're going to be exercising. I would also recommend seeing a personal trainer or a dietician too- I started seeing a personal trainer about 6 weeks ago and have learnt so much from her, especially about my diet. I thought I had a pretty healthy diet (I get my 5-a-day etc) but my trainer said that it was really bad due to a lack of protein, too much sugar and not enough fat, and since I have changed my diet I have a lot more energy and feel much better, and have lost some weight too. Finally, do exercise you enjoy! I mix mine up quite a lot (kickaerobics, aerobics, gym, swimming, personal trainer, squash) and I really enjoy what I do. One other thing I did recently which has really worked well has been to join a different gym (a nicer one, although not that expensive!) where there is a pool and jacuzzis etc that I can relax in after a workout in the gym, and a cafe etc. It really turns a workout into something quite relaxing if you have a soak at the end! I have tummy issues too- my personal trainer says sit-ups are pretty rubbish and she has me doing a lot of plank work, including moving planks, long arm planks, plank press-ups etc, which are supposed to be the thing for tummies! It's hard work though! Good luck! KB

Hey Button! I'm in psychology, so not too different to you! I think it depends when you feel as though you have something worth presenting really. I didn't present at any conferences in first year as I was mainly focusing on the theoretical background and ethics etc for my project, and certainly didn't have any results to present (although some people do go to conferences and present what they are going to do next, or their theoretical framework or something!). In my second year I presented at 2 fairly large UK conferences in London and Cardiff (2 powerpoint presentations based on results to date). I have just started third year now and am off to the USA next week to a massive conference in my area, where I am doing 2 presentations based on my results. It helped me to start off with a couple of less scary conferences in the UK before heading off to America, and it also helped me to present results that I was confident about and interested in! I would try to build in a conference or two in second and third year, and maybe do a departmental one first if possible to give you a bit of practise. It is possible to present in first year if you want to though- a friend in the same team as me presented her lit review as a poster presentation at an international conference in her first year! Good luck! KB

Hi Mamara- I can imagine you must be stressed out after having this feedback. To start adding focus groups now seems to be quite a major thing to do. How long do you have left to submit? I would wait and see what your main supervisor suggests before getting too wound up. Bear in mind there is a difference between what would be nice to include in your PhD and what is absolutely necessary to pass. If I hadn't put my foot down several times with my supervisor I would testing participants well into my fourth year. Finally we have separated what I/she would like to do in the grand scheme of things, and what I actually need to do to pass my PhD. However if your other supervisor also recommends doing this then you might not have much choice- it's better to take time now and make changes then getting to the viva and having to resubmit (although this does seem like the kind of thing they should have mentioned ages ago, like about 2 years ago!). I can't really comment on your stats as I know nothing about your project. Certainly in my subject I have to use quite complex stats and would never be able to just present descriptives, but it could be different for different people/topics etc. Really I think you need to look at the aims of the study and see whether your analysis addresses them. It might be worth seeing a statistician to explore your options...I hope you get it sorted out. I think the main thing is find out what they think you need to do to pass, not what they would like you to do just for the hell of it! Best wishes, KB

Hey Jonny! I'm final year in a psychology PhD, and my stuff is pretty stats-heavy! It is hard to get to grips with it, but I think as long as you can demonstrate a reasonable understanding, you will be okay. It is okay to still be learning about stats during your PhD, it's part of the process. BSc and MSc degrees can only teach you so much, and if you haven't had chance to apply stats in a context then it can be hard to remember what you've learnt. The other thing I would say is that my supervisor is actually not from a psych background, and is pretty weak in statistics- all of her quantitative papers have the stats done by one of the departmental statisticians, yet despite this weakness she is world-reknowned for her work. You don't have to be an expert at every single little thing you do- just try to sort out the basics and I think you'll be fine! Best of luck with it, KB

Hey Maria! Sounds like maybe you need to take things a bit more slowly! I exercise quite hard every day (although not to iron-man levels!) and it takes a while to build up your strength and stamina, so you may be trying to exercise beyond what you are really physically capable of. It's important not to push yourself too hard- I have a personal trainer who works me hard but tells me off for doing too much training and at too high an intensity and makes me take a rest day now and again to recover. You can do your body a lot of damage if you overdo things. So maybe you could sit down with a trainer and draw yourself up a realistic, achievable fitness plan that you can follow. Perhaps you are also putting a lot of pressure on yourself because you want to succeed, so try not to be hard on yourself as well. I'm not sure I have ever been in tears purely as a result of physical exertion (except maybe the odd kickboxing fight!) but certainly a combination of physical and mental exhaustion could probably do that to you! Anyway, good on you for taking up the challenge and good luck with it! KB

Hey Stephanie! I am doing a PhD in psychology as well (clinical) and I'm just doing one huge study then breaking the results down into about 5 chapters. I've never heard of anyone doing so many separate experiments before in psych, I'm guessing you must be in cognitive psychology or something? Do you need NHS approval or just departmental approval? Either way, for me it was really important to have a thorough understanding of the literature before designing my study and applying for ethical approval. I know some people who write their lit review right at the end of their PhD but I think it's really important to have a good insight before you get to that stage, so I would advise against rushing too much and making sure you are being careful and thorough. The last thing you want is to get loads of ethics applications in and then realise you've made a mistake and need to make an ethics amendment or something. Maybe have a chat with your supervisor about how you would rather set things up (i.e. maybe just do one or two studies at a time so you can concentrate on what you're doing). Lit reviews themselves are very time-consuming, I don't envy you having to write that many! Good luck with it, KB

Hi Sneaks- I have done a theoretical review (basically a review of the concepts/models/theories underlying work in my subject area and outlining the theoretical framework I have chosen to base my research on and the reasons why) and am planning to include it as a separate chapter in my thesis. I wrote it as a paper which has just been accepted for publication (I pity anyone who ever has to read it- it's hideously dull)and it's about 8000 words excluding references, so basically it justifies having a chapter to itself really. I suppose theory has a huge part to play in my subject area, as it has led to many disagreements amongst researchers and has imposed limits on existing empirical work, so it was always going to be a big part of my project. If it's really important and there's enough content, I'd give it a chapter of it's own...but if it's little more than a short justification for the theory underlying your own work then maybe stick it in the method section, although to be honest I'm not sure how well something like that would fit into a method section, I've never really thought about doing it like that! Best, KB

Hey Cornflower! I think you need to bear in mind that whatever it is you produce for your review will not have to be a final, word-perfect version of what your lit review will look like at the end. The main thing is to show that you have identified the relevant literature and are starting to integrate it and piece it together. It can take a lot longer than 3 months to produce a high quality review of your subject area, depending on how much there is to review, so don't cut yourself up if at this stage you haven't quite managed to grasp everything- for many it takes a good year to get to know the literature and to have completed the lit review. When I write a lit review I tend to find the easiest thing is to write a detailed plan first, which is what you're doing by the sounds of it- and then I go on to elaborate on all of the points in detail before writing it as a full article. 11 days to write 10,000 words is tough but doable- but I don't think you're gonna get into any serious trouble if you admit that you are still getting to grips with some of it and it's a work in progress. I would just concentrate on writing what you can in the time you've got and perhaps just prepare comprehensive notes on the rest of it. Good luck! Best, KB

Hey Satchi! It depends whose criteria you use- there are different values in different stats books etc, so it depends! I think there is a general agreement that >.7 is thought to be 'highly' or 'strongly' correlated, but you should check to see what value other people in your subject area use and what it says in your best stats book! Sorry I can't be more helpful- I am at home at the moment and all my stats books are in the office! Best, KB

Hey Fm, I'm just in the process of reviewing my first paper, although I have had a practice with a few that my supervisor has been doing, so I've got an idea about how to do it. Really unfortunately the one I've been sent is really poor and it's hard to find the positives except that the topic is interesting. But there are major methodological flaws which means that the only option is to reject it. It's hard rejecting a paper as I don't really feel qualified to make the decision- I am hardly an expert! But I have asked my sup to read over it and give me her opinion to make sure I'm not being too harsh (apparently I'm not- the paper is indeed appalling!!), though I will still do my best to find some positives. I think reviewing is just part of the learning process- could you ask your sup to have a quick look at it just to make sure you're not too far off the mark? Best, KB

Hey! I agree with Bilbo- as long as the skills are there then you can learn to apply them to something quite different. I'm in psychology and although I'm working with the same clinical population as I was in my MSc (i.e. people with Alzheimer's), the topic area is completely different and this hasn't caused any problems at all. Other people might disagree, but I don't think it's a problem unless you are planning to do something really radically different! Best, KB