Hi all,

In my thesis, I have three literature review chapters and the theory from each is combined to form my conceptual model (which then guides my data collection). I'm just having issues with where to introduce the model in my thesis. My supervisor has suggested maybe at the end of the third literature chapter (although he hasn't read all of my literature review) but to me, that sort of implies that it is more related to this third topic than the other two which isn't the case.

I'm more inclined to put in a chapter on its own, between the end of the literature review and the beginning of the methodology but its only a couple of thousand words so I'm not sure thats appropriate either (my lit review/methodology chapters are 10000-12000 each).

Is anyone else developing conceptual models based on their literature review? If so, where did you put yours? Even if you aren't, I'd be interested to hear any ones thoughts on it...

Thanks a lot!

I'm not sure it matters that a chapter is a couple of thousand words. I think it matters more that your thesis is 'nice' to read for your examiners, and having a clear structure will make it read more nicely. Seems like giving the conceptual model its own chapter makes sense, so I'd say go for it :)

======= Date Modified 13 Jun 2012 21:07:20 =======
Since the conceptual model is drawn from all three chapters could you build it as you go along, i.e. outline the first elements of the model at the end of the first literature chapter, another set at the end of the second, and then bring them all together in the third, perhaps with a diagram at each stage to show the development graphically? This would have the advantage of demonstrating the roots and growth of the model as it happens.

I've done an awful lot of work with conceptual models, particularly for chronic diseases, over the past year. Now, although I'd be tempted to put it at the end (I did build one from a literature review for my PhD), I would now actually put it at the start and then show how it was built up in the subsequent chapters. It addresses the 'so what?' factor.

So...

1) Here is my model and this is how it works/what it represents...
2) Here is the substantiating evidence and how I built it up.

Doing it this way, you immediately have the attention of the reader as she/he is firstly impressed by the initial presentation and then curious to know how you arrived at it. Like a piece of cake, you eat the topping first and then get down to business with the main architecture... Of course, this is just one of many different ways you can structure it.

Thanks for the replies - I'm not sure it would work introducing it bit by bit but introducing it at the beginning might be good - I don't know why I hadn't thought of that (although sometimes you can't see for the wood for the trees, can you?!).

I'll give it a go and see how it fits - thanks all! (up)