Hi,

I am going through a phase of feeling like my research is too "simple" and examiners will look at it and think, is this really the content of a PhD.

My research methods are rigorous and well justified. I just feel the actual topic is very simple. I'm not sure what I should do. The area is very new, and the topic has not been explored before, so there will be a contribution to knowledge, but its just doesn't seem like a "difficult" topic.

The studies are 2 straight forward interview based studies and one questionnaire study, and sits between social science and psychology.

Did anyone else feel like this? What should I do?

I don't think there's anything simple about mixed methods research. I'm currently wading through all the philosophical and practical implications of mixed methods. It's hard theoretical work. Then once you've done that, you have to learn two sets of data analysis techniques. Nothing easy about that man!

I think you're focusing on the wrong word. It might be simple, but is it interesting? Is it important? That's the thing to focus on. That's the aspect that matters. If you're following rigorous methodology on an interesting or important problem then you should be fine.

I agree with the post above.

I'm using theoretical textual analysis which has been done 1000s of times before. However, nobody has used it on the case studies I'm looking at.

The methodology is incredibly simple, yet the research and outcomes of looking at a new case study are, in my opinion, interesting and - here is the killer word - ORIGINAL.

I second the above posts, I am also doing mixed methods research in Psychology and think that I have possibly made my project too big/difficult to get through in one PhD. I think no matter what any of us are doing we will always doubt ourselves at some point.

What is your research topic? Will it add a contribution to knowledge? Not all research is interesting and exciting but it can be very useful nonetheless.

I am also doing Psychology/mixed methods, and have had some of the same concerns. One thing I have noticed though, from presenting posters at postgrad conferences, is that people are actually very interested to hear about my research, because it is 'real world' and not too abstract and they can see what I am doing and why. I would agree with the advice given by others here - focus on the originality and possible impact of your work.

Simple is good! Some of the best papers / ideas are seemingly "simple". Sometimes things that sound terribly "complex" are just poorly explained. Maybe you are so good at conveying your idea that you've convinced yourself it is too simple. I don't know if there is anything that is too simple in research. As long as it makes an original contribution...

Agree with above comments. Simple is often good. The issue is whether your thesis adds something significant to the body of knowledge. If it does, then you're fine!

Thanks everyone for the vote of confidence! :)

I think the problem is that though my research does fill a gap in knowledge, its not really based in theory, as in I am not building on an existing theory, it is very practical. Could this be a problem?

Are there any existing theories or models you could compare your research to, eg to say whether it seems to support existing models or shed new light on them? My research is very much applied and practical too, but I have also been concerned about the theory side of things so I am going to incorporate some stuff about current theories and say how my research fits. I'm not really sure how much this matters so it might be worth talking to your supervisor about it?

I agree with the above post and am doing something similar.

Thanks Chickpea. I don't really know of any existing theories or models that could relate to my research. Its difficult because it is interdisciplinary.