What would your answer be if the panel asked you,
"Is there a need to do this, since some other solutions are already available?"

"How do you know it's going to work?"

or the harder,

"I can't see what you're trying to do"

or

"I don't think it will work"

or

"Is this even your field?"

How do you handle such questions? : (

Hmm tough questions!
Obviously it would depend on the field and the specifics but I'd say something along the lines of...

"Is there a need to do this, since some other solutions are already available?"

Yes I believe so. The problem with other solutions are (costly/take a lot of time/inaccurate) whereas this particular solution is better in (x) ways especially when it comes to (y) and (z).

"How do you know it's going to work?"

I know it's going to work, because (I've used it many times before/Many other researchers have reported success with this method/I have the skills required)


"I can't see what you're trying to do"

I would probably ask if there's any area in particular they're struggling with and explain it further..

"I don't think it will work"

This proposed method has an excellent evidence base etc

"Is this even your field?"

Yes/no (go into background and tailor it for the particular theory/solution/whatever you are proposing)

Easier said than done...!!

They're all fair questions. What stage is that at?
I'd say be confident, although not by just bullshitting as they will be skilled BS detectors.

======= Date Modified 01 Nov 2012 00:07:48 =======

"Is there a need to do this, since some other solutions are already available?"
yes, because the rest of them do not provide [state the benefit / niche of your solution]
furthermore, they seem to lack [state the limitation of the other solutions, which is alleviated by your specific approach].

"How do you know it's going to work?"
i have developed a valid and sound model that takes into consideration the empirical aspect of it ..
i have done the proper experimentation to prove its applicability ..
i derived the solution from a series of approaches that have been proven to be highly successful.

"I can't see what you're trying to do"
allow me to restate the aim of this research as well as the process of achieving it.
aim = ...
process = 1.. 2.. 3.. [should be consistent with the aim]
[find papers that translate the aim into the process]
[find papers that justify each part of the process]


"I don't think it will work"
ur skepticism is quite understandable. Richard (2010) had expressed similar concerns regarding this type of solution. However, Linda (2011) has shown considerable evidence as to how it could work. [find a paper that attacks ur solution and another that defends it later on]

"Is this even your field?"
well, it is not confined to my field per se. i had to develop the solution based on the accumulation of interdisciplinary findings. the core principle was taken from field X. to bridge the possibility of implementing the principle successfully, i had to build upon the model employed in field Y. finally, the solution is combined with an improvisation from field Z to make it more practical for application. thus, this research is basically a combination of my field, field X, Y and Z.

@Pikirkool

Great answers!

Now, here's a rebuttal:
"So, it's a multidisciplinary field; I think this multidisciplinary fields you'll be covering are too big for your research"/
"It's too big for a PhD work"

others;

"Although you have explained the core areas you'll be covering, I still think you're more leaning on field X/Y/Z, and not your actual field R; your PhD is in R, so you should do something related to R."

A completely different and harder(est) question;

"It's not enough for a PhD work" / "this work is good for MSc level. not PhD."

@DocInsanity

All of the questions (even on this post) could be during a proposal presentation or even the viva (eek!)
lol. yeah. never BS them! (wait, is that a good advice even?)

@Noctu

Thanks for the answers!

I know right! When in front of these people, suddenly, everything changes. Sometimes even the simplest question couldn't be answered nicely : /

But I posted this post to calm my nerves down; I really want to see how other PhD students handle the questions.

Would love to hear you respond to the newer questions! : )

"So, it's a multidisciplinary field; I think this multidisciplinary fields you'll be covering are too big for your research"/
"It's too big for a PhD work"
definitely NOT. the scope of the thesis does not change. only the approach has been adapted successfully with the strength of the other fields in dealing with the obstacles along the way.


"Although you have explained the core areas you'll be covering, I still think you're more leaning on field X/Y/Z, and not your actual field R; your PhD is in R, so you should do something related to R."
that would not be true. the other fields are only working as *supporting* fields. the major problem to be solved still remains within this field, which is field R.


"It's not enough for a PhD work" / "this work is good for MSc level. not PhD."
i have achieved all the requirements set within the proposal stage. i have published two papers in cited journals prior to this viva. i have developed the solution successfully and proven its workability. if this work is not enough for a phd, shouldn't the objective and scope be addressed at the proposal stage, 3 years ago? [this a rhetorical question which implies the insanity of wanting to change the objective and the scope after everything is done]

[the use of a proposal is to set a series of objectives and scope that if satisfied, would substantiate a worthy doctoral research. if they are saying that the phd is NOT worthy, despite reaching all the objectives and adhering to the scope, then the proposal was not properly approved. if such is true, they are implying their own self contradicting dilemma. LOL but u shouldn't point this out in this manner. insinuating it would be enough i reckon]