Thank you both. I will do it and sell it on those terms. : ) Now let's hope there's someone available to talk to me! One worry at a time lol! Have a great weekend!

Thanks Hazy Jane! I've just found out that we can get statistical advice from the biostats dept! I have to send an email detailing my scenario and what I need the support with and they should hook me up for a session with someone.

Now I have another question... I guess the best way to be with my supervisor is transparent about what I want to do... (go talk to someone else). I am now worried that he will not take it well that I want to chat to someone else. Any advice on that front?

Thanks Chickpea. It does sound similar. I'm happy and keen to learn the approach - I've really enjoyed understanding why it is suitable for my data etc - it was me who realised I needed to use it and sort of had to persuade one of my sups about why it was necessary. So I have no qualms about defending the approach and writing a strong justification for it vs alternatives. I just feel a bit worried I suppose, having met with the new sup who was specifically asked to join for support with this, and then he says in the meeting that he actually isn't 100% sure of whether we've done it right (not whether it is the appropriate method but whether we're actually doing it right in the software), and why don't I just do a simpler approach (even though the simpler approach doesn't reflect the data structure and would violate a major assumption!). I was a bit shocked I guess. And I'm wondering who I could talk to. I guess it is just luck if I get to talk to someone in my department who knows someone else who is more skilled in using the approach...

Hi all

I just wondered if anyone has experience of something like this... the stats method I want to use (should use given my data structure) is quite complex. Because of this my main sups tried to get another sup on board to supervise the stats part. Anyway, turns out the new sup isn't an expert in the method either, and we're going to sort of be "working it out together". Basically, I am quite concerned as I want to feel certain that the models I come up with are good. The literature is helpful in understanding the method and when it can be applied, but the practical issues of building the model aren't greatly covered (for what I specifically want to do). Is it just luck if you happen to know someone in the field of statistics (or who has expertise in a particular statistical method) who might be willing to take a look at what you've come up with?!

Tudor

Thanks allyballybee. I am thinking I'd better stick to R, as that is what my supervisor is comfortable with (and he may way to look through my outputs/be able to offer support).

Yeh I get it a bit... sometimes there is an incredulous silence if I say "sorry I missed your call, I was working", or "don't forget I work on weekdays...". It is a bit annoying that some people don't think the PhD is work when you can be working your butt off for like 60 hours a week.

Thanks pd1598! I have Field's book from the library, but strangely I am not finding it very helpful. It is strange, because I found his SPSS book on statistics SUPER helpful - I don't know how I would have got through my masters without it! But with the R one I'm struggling. For example, in the part where it explains how you import you data by reading an Excel (or csv) file into R, it then doesn't go on to tell you anywhere how to work with the variables that were on that sheet (as far as I could see). It took me HOURS (literally!) to figure it out and seemed odd that such an important thing wasn't in the book (or maybe it was but I just couldn't find it).

Awesome thanks!!!

I've come across "The R book" by Crawley, which seems an excellent guide (for those of us who tire of screen reading!)

Thanks Dr Jekyll. I agree. I think! I'm just getting familiar with reading csv. files and doing some basic stats on my existing datasets. It sure does feel like a steep learning curve. How did you learn it? Could you recommend any good books?
Thanks
Tudor

Thanks kikodog. I'm learning it because I'm doing some multilevel modeling, which apparently R is better for... (I don't know why it is better, but apparently it is)...

I know SPSS, so I am wondering whether to screen my data etc as I normally would in SPSS before conducting the main analyses in R, or whether to just learn how to and do the whole shabang in R.

I have a question about whether it is really worth using R to do your basic descriptive stats and tests, when at a glance it actually seems much easier/less timely to do it in SPSS... If you are an R user - do you use R for everything in your analysis?

atchooo!

I know what you mean! My non-PhD friends have even stopped asking me about what I'm doing - we stick to non-academic topics generally! I am just this perpetual student to them, who also acts like a lecturer at times (teaching) but isn't really one. It is generally OK, but can feel a bit isolating at times...

I hope the one person coffee/last minute invite ideas work, as it's good to have a PhD social network (in addition to this great forum).

Hey Yirara, Would love to hear the outcome, as I haven't heard of it being done before either.

Hi Kazwales

Lots of people feel shocked by their first bit of feedback from the supervisor. When you say negative and blunt, do you mean as in "no, change this to x", "that is wrong, it should be x", etc? If so, this is more a case of critical feedback than negative feedback, and it is what you would expect on a draft - that is why you send it to them. At PhD level often the only feedback you receive is where to correct or improve things. So don't worry - it isn't about your ability to complete a PhD.

Tudor