I think this varies for different people. I definitely have things I have to do before I can start any work. For example, today is a day when I have decided to work, but it's also a Saturday, so I've got a bunch of weekend chores to do first. So, after 4 loads of washing, cleaning the kitchen, general tidying and lunch, I'm only just opening my lap top now. But, I always check this forum before I start work, so that will kill some more time...

Yes, I guess it's avoidance tactics, but there's an end to it so at some point I have to start work.

It works out ok in the end, because if tomorrow was another work day, I would have fewer distractions so I would start work much earlier, probably around 11am.

Find what works for you and stick with it.

Yes, in Biology you would write it as a normal reference e.g. "Trees are nice (Joe Bloggs, XYZ company, pers. comm.)" for personal communication

It's very rare to be asked to do additional experiments, job or no job. There may no funding left for example, or supervisors just want you to finish so they can concentrate on the next student.

Sounds like it will be best for you to start work sooner rather than later then.

I did this; actually I started my post doc before I had even submitted my thesis.

Corrections and papers were mostly completed in evenings and weekends for me. Most academic employers should be fine to let people do these things in quiet moments, but mine wasn't, which was annoying. I was living far from home so it wasn't as if I had much else to do anyway.

So, I wouldn't say it was risky, but I would say I would have much rather had not had to start a job that soon. It depends where your head is at I guess. If it weren't for financial reasons, I would have wanted to take a good few months off after submission, write my papers and prep for the viva.

I don't think it will affect what corrections you get either way.

Congrats, on the job mkb91! This will all be fine, and will seem like a storm in a teacup in a few weeks I'm sure!

Yeah it all seems a bit odd to me too. If you've got a good reason for not doing something, then surely you should be given a chance to explain and not just failed for it? I've never heard of that happening before.

Like pm133 said, a mistake like you are describing is not what I have seen people fail for.

p.s. What are you saying about supervisors not wanting to be direct because you should be thinking for yourself, is less likely to be intentional and more likely to be due to their inability to give proper direction or advice. You need to ask them to be more specific, challenge what they say, ask more open questions, ask direct questions and keep pushing til you get an acceptable response.

I interpret this to mean a FUTURE research plan, not a plan of past achievements ie papers you can publish from previous research. I would include things like what I was going to research, techniques to use, potential collaborators, grants to apply for and then possible papers that may come out of it.

Hi mkb91,

Yes, this is a pretty unusual situation. I guess it does happen a lot, but usually on a much smaller scale e.g. I had a few results in my thesis that I realized were wrong as I was finishing up the thesis, but it would have been quite a lot of work to change them and didn't affect the overall outcome of the results. I just omitted these from the paper that came later. I discussed this with my supervisor and he said this was the easiest thing to do.

In your case, the paper came first. What does your supervisor think?

I think leave the thesis as it is and explain what has happened in the viva, then add a paragraph addendum of explanation and the paper at the end of the thesis with the actual result. You've already submitted the thesis in good faith, so I don't see how you can change it now. I don't think the examiners will ask you to either - it was correct to the best of your knowledge at the time of submission.

I would make something up. There's no kind of work relationship that requires this much honesty.

Can anyone on here offer any insight if they've been there before?

You can apply for a funded PhD with a 2.1. Apply for directly funded ones rather than DTPs to increase your chances as DTPs are more competitive I believe.

That will be fine, people will understand given the situation

There are some posts on here about this, but you will have to search for them I'm afraid. I doubt the people are still around to be reading this board now.

This is rare but does happen ie if the first student gets a PhD elsewhere and declines the offer.