{"id":312,"date":"2016-12-12T12:30:33","date_gmt":"2016-12-12T12:30:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/deberker.com\/archy\/?p=312"},"modified":"2021-11-06T15:57:08","modified_gmt":"2021-11-06T15:57:08","slug":"tips-from-the-other-side-writing-a-thesis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/deberker.com\/archy\/tips-from-the-other-side-writing-a-thesis\/","title":{"rendered":"Tips from the other side: writing a thesis"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

After a relatively painless month or so of writing, I\u2019ve finished my thesis. I\u2019m yet to be examined, so whilst I can\u2019t comment on how to write a good<\/i> thesis, I\u2019ve had a few thoughts on the process of getting from start to finish. Given the surprising lack of information on writing PhD\u2019s (which is baffling since everybody in science either has one or has to write one), I thought I\u2019d collect together a few things I wish I\u2019d known earlier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before you start<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Take notes throughout<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Your thesis discussion provides you with a tabula rasa<\/em> on which to scrawl your thoughts about your field. Time and time again, I\u2019ve found that the most valuable insights into the frailties of a particular approach come when you first learn about it. These little voices are sometimes subdued once you\u2019ve worked in the field for some time. Operating within a certain framework for too long, you come to accept its assumptions more easily (perhaps because desires and beliefs are entangled<\/a>?).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I wish I\u2019d kept a single word document (or Evernote<\/a> note) with my initial reactions to all of the ideas that would go on to form integral parts of my thesis. Once you\u2019ve become expert, you could then sift through these naive impressions to separate out the ignorant from the insightful. These might then form the useful material for your discussion<\/b>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Similarly, in your introduction<\/b> you will need to provide a reasonably approachable explanation of the key concepts in your thesis. Capturing the aspects that helped you<\/i> understand the idea is one of the easiest ways to do this. Once more, capturing these key points as you go along would make your life much easier! Similarly, if you\u2019ve spent some time teaching during your PhD, try to keep track of what works and what doesn\u2019t – this might help separate the explanatory wheat from the chaff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read some theses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"\/
Disclaimer: plagiarism in science is less acceptable than in art<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Most institutions have an online archive of theses; many authors also provide them on their personal websites. Reading the theses of people you admire and respect is a good idea, and even a pleasure (there\u2019s a certain pseudo-intimacy which comes with reading the product of 3-6 years of somebody\u2019s life). Reading around gives you an impression as to the diversity of lengths and structures that are acceptable, which is surprisingly large. You can even read quite far away from your own field: if the author has done a really good job, the introduction ought to be intelligible even if the material is unfamiliar (see e.g. David Mackay\u2019s 89 pager<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you\u2019re in cognitive neuroscience and fancy reading a few, I\u2019d recommend taking a look at Laurence Hunt\u2019s <\/a>(beautifully written, very deep introduction, largely focused on two experiments) and Demis Hassabis\u2019s<\/a> (written with an impressively confident and visionary tone [foreshadowing his future ambitions], focused on putting forwards a particular idea with numerous experiments in support of it). I also dipped into Peter Smittenaar\u2019s<\/a> and Helen Barron\u2019s<\/a>, both of which are excellent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sharpen your tools<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/i><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Broadly speaking, there are three tools you\u2019re going to need to use to write your thesis (assuming you\u2019ve finished analysing your data): a word processor, a reference manager, and some sort of graphics program for your figures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Word processing<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In some fields LaTeX is the norm. In ours, we use Word, so that\u2019s what I can offer advice about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thing is, you think you know how to use Word, right? I too considered myself pretty competent, and then proceeded to learn a new thing about Word every 3 days whilst writing my thesis. Here are the things you should master, before you really get cracking:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Styles<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

I always thought these were an irritation. They are actually super useful. You probably know the concept – tagging different pieces of text with a style that you can then alter in order to instantly change the formatting of all of the text associated with that style – but their function extends beyond that. In particular, they\u2019ve very useful for grouping together similar elements (e.g. all of your chapter titles), which makes numbering + table of contents generation a dream. At the very least, you should set up:<\/p>\n\n\n\n