cut a long story short, I explore three different cases during my PhD. In one of them, two different methods have been investigated and implemented (from the comparison of these two method, one is better). So in other two cases, only one method have been implemented. As a result, in my thesis, there is disproportionate larger part for one case and only a small part for two other cases.



Now, I received a negative comment on my thesis structure in the proof reading. I am trying to restructure it. But I found it difficult to go with traditional IMRAD ( Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion) structure, as my PhD research is case by case basis and there is quite more work for one of them.



So, here is question. How important to cope with IMRAD ( Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion) structure in a PhD thesis ? Any brighter ideas to organize a thesis structure with the contents like that.

I'm only a second year so feel free to dismiss this but I don't plan on following that exactly.

I will be doing lit review, method for phase I, results for phase I, method for phase 2, results for phase II, discussion (where phase II is informed by phase I).

Would this work for you?

A

Thank you for comments. But it would not work for me.

As I described , there are three cases. Two methods implemented for case I, as the result of comparison of these two methods in case I, only one method was chosen for case II and III.

So there have been  disproportionate large part for case I, since only one method have been implemented for case II and III, and this method have been described in the case I.

That causes problem for me.

I don't understand why it's a problem.describe the first case, explain why you adapted your methodology, describe the second case, describe the third case.

It's not a problem, but it isn't looking-nice.

Maybe u could try this Jiou,

1)Intro - what is the thesis about? current issues? scope, limitations, thesis report overview
2)Review of the problem - your thesis hypothesis, summary/preview to Literature Review Chapter
3)Literature Review Chapter
4) Proposed Methodology - how are you conducting your thesis? is there a particular methodology or is it experimental or investigative?
5) Data Collection/Analysis - is there any data? describe data sources, preparation of input data (analysis)
6) Calibration and Validation - calibration is where you tried your method 1 and compared with method 2- explain in detail why did you choose method 2 ( your calibration process); Validation - two case studies- you tried your proposed method on two cases - explain your validation process - the results need to match the observed data
7) Applications - any other case studies of your proposed method (method 2)
8) Conclusions and Recommendations
9)Appendices
10)References
Hope this helps, gl (up)

I use a whole range of methodologies to answer three seperate questions (which are forming one chapter each) - I was going to write each one as a seperate paper, with intro, methodology etc. But I was advised not to split up the methods, but to put them all in a chapter beforehand. Then the examiner has a clear idea of what is being done in a larger context, and where the thesis is heading. A thesis is all about signposting, and not introducing surprises and new material etc at different points.

Use a chapter for each case and within that have an intro, method, results, discussion section each and do a large discussion section in the end which could include critical analysis of the why you chose method 1 for case 1 etc. so you will have 'chapter-2: case 1'

I agree with Sheena. However as an alternative, do you need to add the two methods at the beginning in the first place? Normally a 'method development section' can be added if you are evaluating multiple methods - however if it doesn't add anything further to the overall structure of the thesis, it may be best to leave it in as supplement perhaps - to demonstrate that you have done this but it is not directly relevent to body of the work you have covered?