Research Methods:

From the Perspectives of

Supervisors and
Research Students
Min Chen
Professor of Scientific Visualization
Oxford e-Research Centre
University of Oxford
min.chen@oerc.ox.ac.uk
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia
19 September 2013
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
1. Research Methods?
2. Research Quality
3. Research Activities
4. PhD Projects
5. PhD Examinations
6. Research Publications
7. Research Collaboration
8. International Visibility
9. Summary
Outline
Research Methods
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
Research Methods in Psychology?
http://www.thepsychfiles.com/2007/10/psych-majors-check-out-the-mappr/
So basically there is not a best research method for
psychology but there can be a best method for a particular
area.
For example below is a simplified diagram of how a
researcher in psychology would go about choosing which
research method is pick.
The most important
factors are will the
method chosen be
valid and reliable?
Research Methods in Psychology?
http://sk914.wordpress.com/
Searching for Research Method?
http://www.sharpy.dircon.co.uk/index_files/
KevJ udgesDissertationTheResearchMethodslMindMap.htm
My Approach (perhaps it is a common approach)
startanewtopic
readliteratureonthetopic
findoutthestateoftheart,gaps,
commonresearchmethods
designandplanprojects
developmental observational mathematical conceptual
theoretical experimental hybrid
quantitative qualitative
new
discovery
new
theory
applied generic
new
technique
new
system
readaboutresearchmethods
findoutprocesses,merits,demerits
technicalrequirements
new
researchmethod
formulateimprovement
Research Quality
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
Four star
Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour
Three star
Quality that is internationally excellent in terms of originality, significance and
rigour but which falls short of the highest standards of excellence.
Two star
Quality that is recognised internationally in terms of originality, significance
and rigour.
One star
Quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality, significance and
rigour.
Unclassified
Quality that falls below the standard of nationally recognised work. Or work
which does not meet the published definition of research for the purposes of
this assessment.
UK Research Assessment Exercise (or Excellence Framework)
Originality
will be understood as the extent to which the output introduces a new
way of thinking about a subject, or is distinctive or transformative
compared with previous work in an academic field.
Significance
will be understood as the extent to which the work has exerted, or is
likely to exert, an influence on an academic field or practical
applications.
Rigour
will be understood as the extent to which the purpose of the work is
clearly articulated, an appropriate methodology for the research area
has been adopted, and compelling evidence presented to show that
the purpose has been achieved.
UK Research Assessment Exercise (or Excellence Framework)
Relying on peer judgement through
review, publication, conference presentation, and citation;
Establishing dependence on and divergence from creditable
prior work,
e.g., fundamental theories, experimental results, and to a certain
degree, widely accepted models and wisdoms;
Discovering evidence of
sound technical implementation, including mathematical reasoning,
algorithmic development, system engineering and deployment,
experiment design, execution and analysis, and so on.
Contemplating significance and impact through
speculative discussions (short-term), usability studies (medium term),
and comprehensive surveys (long term).
Balanced assessment appropriate for publication venues
The priority is ordered as Originality, Rigour and Significance
Evaluation of Originality, Significance and Rigour
Research Activities
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
Individual Research
Collaborative Research
Contract or Supervised
Research
Research Training
Research and
Development
Blue-sky Research
Research Students
PhD or DPhil
MPhil
MRes
MSc
Research Officers
Independent Researchers
Academic Researchers
Industrial Researchers
Research Personnel and Activities
PhD Projects
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
First Year
Literature study (3 months)
Pilot project (9 months)
First attempt for a research publication
Second Year
Full-scale project development
Thesis outline
Another attempt for a research publication
Third Year
Refining research results
Dissertation writing
Another attempt for a research publication
Fourth Year
Standby
My Ideal Template for a PhD programme
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L To know the student
Research interest
Strengths and
weaknesses
Literature survey
Typically 1-2 surveys
Pilot study
The work usually forms a
chapter in the thesis.
Only a few students
succeeded in their first
attempt for publication
First Year
Math.
Ability
Technical
Dev.
Technical
Writing
organization
communication
team
work
artistic
skills
creativity
work
ethos
critical
reading
Student-centred Design
Usually this is a preferred approach
Constraints
Deliverables defined in a grant that provides the studentship
Expertise of the supervisor(s)
Available equipment or other resources
For students:
Supervisors are NOT your boss, and help them to know you
Better to do a GOOD uninteresting project than a BAD interesting one
For supervisors:
Students are NOT me
Project description is NOT set in stone
Bring additional expertise when it is necessary
Project Designs
1. Know the background
literature, identify all
potential benchmarks,
respect and critique them.
2. One step each time
focusing on a subset of
functional components
adding assumptions and
constraints
using your strength
3. Map out several possible
research directions.
4. Face the problem, together!
1. Wishful Benchmarking
2. Start with a Big and General
research question
3. Narrow research scope
4. How is your project going?
No worry, I am OK.
Common Problems
1. Teamwork often features in
many aspects of science
and engineering
2. This can often be extended
to international partners
3. Avoid dependency.
4. Breaking the rhythm.
1. A PhD thesis is a piece of
work accredited to an
individual
2. Literature survey
3. Collaborative development
4. Too much teamwork
Teamwork?
Initial excitement and
ambition
Things are not going well
as planned
Maybe my supervisor is not
so smart
Maybe I am not so smart
Other students seem to have
better projects or supervisors
So and so said that I should
do this or that
...
Typically a 2-6 month
period of frustration.
I-am-not-Einstein Syndrome
PhD Examinations
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
UK, Denmark, Germany, USA, Norway.
Typically UK Setting
External Examiner
Internal Examiner
Convenor (or Chairperson)
Candidate
Supervisors as observers only
A presentation is usually to the advantage of the candidate
Introductory questions
General questions
Chapter-specific questions
PhD Examinations
Has the original contribution reached the level of PhD?
Originality, rigour and significance
This is largely determined based on reading the thesis before the viva.
Good publications help examiners to assess this.
Was the work done by the candidate entirely or partly?
Reading thesis, questioning during the viva, and examiners own
background knowledge
Is the candidates general knowledge about a subject
adequate for a PhD degree?
largely by explorative questioning during the viva
Clarification and correction
What Examiners Want to Know?
A thesis is NOT a report!
Typical structure:
Introduction (1 chapter)
Literature Survey (1-2 chapters)
Your own work (3-4 chapters)
Conclusions (1 chapter)
Defining objectives
Write your own exam questions
They must be PhD level questions
You must be able to answer
How many pieces of work?
PhD Thesis
PhD Thesis: Quantity vs. Quality (Breadth vs. Depth)
PhD
threshold
Reputable
Int. Conf.
Reputable
Journal
Top Conf.
or Journal
Ideal Planning
Likely
Delivery
Risky Problematic
Knowing your thesis well
Always preparing well for the introductory questions
Always dressing smartly (usually suit for male students)
Defending your castle
i.e., your main technical contributions
Always polite, but firm on important points.
Dealing with negative questions
There will always be questions that you cannot answer.
Do not dwell on them.
When your mind cannot concentrate, ask for a break
e.g., the Table example.
Viva is also called Thesis Defence
Research
Publications
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
A paper typically transforms to the 2/3 writings of a chapter.
The supervisors usually spent much more time on planning,
and revising a paper.
A good paper gives the student much-needed confidence
during the viva.
Even if a paper is not accepted, the reviews help the student
prepare for the possible questions and critical comments.
Publications Help a Thesis
Familiarize with the publication venue by reading a good
collection of papers in a journal or a conference proceedings
Identify model papers with a structure template or a writing
style suitable for presenting your own materials.
There is nothing wrong to mimic the structures and styles of
well-received papers.
Do not reuse others text, image, equations, and data without
acknowledge and references.
Self-plagiarism is not unacceptable in a few community.
Always take reviewers comments seriously, especially the
summary review.
Reviews are not always correct. Always rebuttal in a scientific
and professional manner.
Publications (1)
Read online articles on
how to get your paper published
how to get your paper rejected
how to write a good system paper
how to write an evaluation paper
how to write a survey paper
...
Collaboration helps
Publications (2)
Research
Collaboration
Image from:
http://www.teachmeteamwork.com/photos/uncategorize
d/2007/09/15/teamwork2.jpg
International
Visibility
Image from:
http://healthyparent.com/cartoons/Cartoons%20copyrig
ht%20Garber%202004.html
Student volunteers in conferences
Attending conferences, presenting posters and papers
Networking
Visiting scholars
Organizing workshops
Seeking opportunity to host international symposia and
conferences
Seeking opportunities to join IPCs, and act as co-chairs
...
Taking Part in the International Community
Summary
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
Externally Focused
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/385701.stm
Sunday, J uly 4, 1999 Published at 13:25 GMT 14:25 UK
Your Question
Your Experience
Your Observation
Your View
Image from: http://lovestats.wordpress.com/dman/
Acknowledgement
C.-Y. Wang (PhD, 1989-1992)
Mark W. J ones (PhD, 1991-1994)
Abdula Haji Tablib (PhD, 1990-1994)
Mike Bews (PhD, 1992-1996)
Malcolm Price (MPhil, 1997-1998)
Adrain Leu (PhD, 1996-1999)
Simon Michael (PhD, 1996-1999)
Steve Treavett (PhD, 1997-2000)
Mark Kiddell (RA, 1999-2001)
Ben Smith (TCA, 1999-2001)
S.-S. Hong (PhD, 1998-2002)
Abdul Haji-Ismail (PhD, 1998-2002)
H.-L. Zhou (MPhil, 2000-2002)
Andrew S. Winter (PhD, 1999-2002)
David Rogeman(PhD, 1999-2003)
Paul Adams (TCA, 2002-2004)
Tim Lewis (RA, 2004-2005)
Gareth Daniel (PhD, 2001-2004)
David P. Clark (PhD, 2001-2005)
Dave Bown (RA, 2005)
Ann Smith (PhD, RA, 2001-2006)
Siti Z. Zainal Abdin (PhD, 2003-2007)
AlfieAbdul Rahman (PhD, RA, 2004-7)
J oanna Gooch (PhD, 2004-2007)
Shoukat Islam (PhD, RA, 2004-2009)
David Chisnall (PhD, RA, 2005-2008)
Phil Roberts (RA, 2005-2008)
Rudy R. Hashim(PhD, 2005-2008)
Dan Hubball (MPhil, 2007-2008)
Owen Gilson (PhD, 2006-2009)
Lindsey Clarke (PhD, 2007-2010)
Heike J nicke (RO, 2009-2010)
Farhan Mohamed (PhD, 2008-)
Ed Grundy (PhD, 2009-)
Rita Borgo (2009-2011)
Hui Fang (2009-2011)
Yoann Drocourt (PhD, 2010-2011)
Karl Proctor (PhD, 2009-2011)
Andrew Ryan (PhD, 2010-2011)
Phil Legg (RO, 2010-2011)
David Chung (PhD, RA, 2010-2011)
Matthew Parry (MPhil, RA, 2010-2011)
Richard M. J iang (RO, 2010-2011)
Past PhDs and ROs:
University of Oxford
AlfieAbdul-Rahman
Kai Berger
Brian Duffy
Saiful Khan
Eamonn Maguire
Karl Proctor
J eyanThiyagalingam
Simon Walton
Colleagues in OeRC,
OCCAM, ...
Swansea
Rita Borgo
Phil W. Grant
Iwan Griffiths
Mark W. J ones
Bob Laramee
Adrian Morris
Tavi Murray
Irene Reppa
Kilian Scharrer
Ian Thornton
ROs and PhDs (below)
Stuttgart
Tom Ertl
Daniel Weiskopf
Ralf Botchen ...
Rutgers
Deborah Silver
Carlos Correa
Purdue (VACCINE)
David Ebert
Heidelberger
Heike J nicke
Utah
Chris J ohnson, Kate Coles,
J ulie Lein, Miriah Meyer
Chuck Hansen
Cardiff
Andrew Aubrey
Dave Marshall
Paul Rosin
Gary Tam
RIVIC
Nigel J ohn
Ralph Martin
Reyer Zwiggelaar