How To Write A Thesis - A Complete Research Writing Guide | Dr Amina Yonis | Skillshare

How To Write A Thesis - A Complete Research Writing Guide

Dr Amina Yonis, Academic + YouTuber

Play Speed
  • 0.5x
  • 1x (Normal)
  • 1.25x
  • 1.5x
  • 2x
24 Lessons (3h 40m) View My Notes
    • 1. Welcome to the Class

      1:26
    • 2. Generating a Thesis Template - Part One

      14:33
    • 3. Generating a Thesis Template - Part Two

      13:51
    • 4. The Best Referencing Manager

      10:54
    • 5. The Abstract - The Sentence Model

      5:09
    • 6. The Abstract - Writing a Strong Abstract

      11:44
    • 7. The Abstract - A Practical Example

      6:53
    • 8. The Literature Review - Defining The Research Question

      10:13
    • 9. The Literature Review - Searching + Selecting Papers

      11:09
    • 10. The Literature Review - Reading Critically

      7:40
    • 11. The Literature Review - The Sentence Model

      3:18
    • 12. The Literature Review - In-Text Citations

      5:51
    • 13. The Methodology - The Sentence Model

      9:40
    • 14. The Methodology - Writing the detail and justifying choices

      8:47
    • 15. The Methodology - Statistical Analysis + Limitations

      11:46
    • 16. The Results - Selecting Appropriate Results

      11:21
    • 17. The Results - Drawing Figure + Writing Legends

      10:09
    • 18. The Results - Describing Data Effectively

      11:14
    • 19. The Results - How to Address Limitations

      12:07
    • 20. The Discussion - The Sentence Model

      7:21
    • 21. The Discussion - Evaluating the Research Effectively

      11:20
    • 22. The Discussion - Future Recommendations

      7:04
    • 23. Writing a Concise Conclusion

      6:15
    • 24. Creating a Strong Working Title

      10:21
47 students are watching this class

About This Class

Why can thesis writing be challenging?

The hardships faced while writing a good-quality thesis are numerous, particularly for early-career researchers. Written research papers are a key method of communication within academia. The goal of a research paper is to draw on what others have to say in literature, to engage the sources and to offer a unique perspective on the issue at hand.

The skill of writing academically is not formally taught at university, however, it holds such high value and the way that research is written up can lead to a difference between a pass or fail. Unfortunately, this lack of formal teaching of how to write academically means that many students are unable to communicate their research in a coherent manner. Having said that, it's easily learnt and that's what this course will achieve.

Who is this class for?

This Complete Research Writing Guide will teach you how to write a research-based report, resulting in a thesis that is academic and concise. This course will work well for undergraduate students or Master's students that are working on a short research project and most certainly for PhD students from all disciplines. The structure described here is transferrable to research writing from a range of fields including law, business, biosciences and midwifery.

How is this class unique? 

In this class, I will uniquely provide the sentence and paragraph breakdown for every chapter of your report. I also include sentence starters, in the form of academic words and phrases, to give you that kick start and to direct your thoughts. This may sound too simple, but it really is. There is no secret formula for how to write a strong thesis. Normally, the skill is acquired over time and with plenty of challenges along the way. This guide will be providing you with that short-cut, all in one place, to be able to write like an academic.

What will I learn on this class?

The chapters included in this class break down into the following topics:

1. Thesis Template (MS Word)

2. The Best Referencing Manager

3. Writing a Strong Abstract

4. Literature Review 

5. The Methodology

6. The Results

7. Discussion & Conclusion

8. Creating a Title

How do we know this method works?

I am an alumni of King’s College, Imperial College and University College London where I completed my BSc in Biochemistry, MRes in Biomedical Research and PhD in Cell and Developmental Biology, respectively. Studying at such prestigious universities and carrying out research in high-ranking laboratories led me to rapidly pick up skills from professors and post-docs who have won millions in research grants. I learnt how to discuss my research academically and how to communicate my results (even if things did not always go to plan).

I applied this to my PhD thesis and, to my surprise, my examiners requested extremely minor edits. One examiner asked for a spelling correction, whilst the other asked to expand a paragraph. I know this structure works. It ensures that you are communicating academically, regardless of the specific results themselves. I have since advised and mentored hundreds of students, all of whom have successfully defended their PhD thesis or passed their dissertations with flying colours. 

Final words.

I hope this course provides you with the confidence to write a strong academic piece of work.

This course will equip you with a life-long skill that you will take with you through your education and even through your career in academia for years to come.

Happy Thesis Writing :)

Transcripts

1. Welcome to the Class: Hello everyone and welcome to this class how to write a thesis, the ultimate reports Writing Guide. My name is Amelia, and I am a scientist by day and academic, a teacher and also a huge Uber. And when he adjusting of the numerous words about how to write a thesis, how to us a citation, how to write a research based reports. That took me years and years to work out a blueprint and a whole PhD to figure out exactly how. Unfortunately, although this is such a valuable and important skill, it's not formally taught at university. And so it takes years and years of experience and research to actually figure out how to write a thesis, how to write and communicate Research, which is super, super important. So I, in this course we'll be teaching you exactly how to go through all of the steps. Everything from devising a research question to searching for literature in online databases, to writing the methods and materials and the results and coming up with your own conclusion and a discussion. In order to make this course even more unique, I have included lots of sentence starters and lots of qi. Pick words that are frequently used in academia. And so even if you're stuck and you're not sure on how to begin a sentence, you can use one of those keyword or key phases to accelerate your writing as why this course is particularly unique. Joined the ride. I really hope you guys enjoy the course and happy learning. 2. Generating a Thesis Template - Part One: The template is probably one of the most underrated parts of actually designing and completing the writing of your thesis. It's really important that you have a thesis templates to be able to automate your work and to be able to speed up the writing process and have sort of consistent formatting. You will see that there are many benefits of a thesis templates. And this can include, first the having a consistent structure and layout. You want to make sure that all of your chapters emerge and look the same. Have a similar formats, have similar font sizes, have similar margins, have similar indent. This can really make a difference in how professional your thesis looks. Secondly, want to automate formatting. This is just to save yourself time to make everything smooth, everything ease. And you'll see as I go through this chapter that there's a lot of automation that you can do through having a template like this. Of course, you save time. It's easy to use, it's straightforward. And of today's chapter, you'll find that we've completed your thesis templates and you can get started straight away. Thesis has a number of different section. You have the cover page, the declaration, where you state that everything in this work is original. You have the abstract, which we're gonna go through in a, in a following chapter. You have the acknowledgements where you acknowledge the people that helped you buy this thesis and get the work done. You have your contents page, your lists of tables, your list of figures, and a list of abbreviations. And these are all parts of the thesis that you can really automate using this template. You then have the bulk of your thesis and this is your literature review your methods and your materials, your results should end your conclusion. It references, of course, very important hirer thesis and your appendix which just ensures that you've got any sort of additional information that isn't required for your main bulk of your thesis, but it is sort of maybe something that can help the examiner understand your work a bit better. And what I recommend is for you to now open up a Word document and to follow these steps with me, they're quite technical. There's quite a few sort of nitty-gritty the steps that we just have to kind of get through. So do open a Word templates, just a word, a blank document, so you can get star Sydney who worked through with me. So let's start off with spelling and grammar. Now this is a section that you can very, very well automates. And really there shouldn't be any spelling mistakes or very minimal spelling mistakes and grammar mistakes in your thesis. When you click on spelling and grammar, you end up with another tube. Or these checks ensure that you have a high level of proofreading with eat without even trying to proofread it yourself, ensure that all of these ticks are checked. So you've got always suggest corrections. Always check spelling as you type any repeated words, frequently confused words, double words. You want to make sure that all of these are checked and it checks it for you automatically. You also want to make sure that your grammar is checked as well. So any terms, your grammar is checked as you type is nice. I think the default is, I'm here to have two spaces within sentences. But what you actually want is one space with incentives. And what that means is if you're writing a sentence and then you get a full stop there, you only have one gap before you can write the rest of the sentence. So moving on to margins now margins ensure that you are able to print and bind your thesis with the correct space given on both the inside and the outside of your documents. So if you think about your thesis as a bit of a, let's say it's a two pager like this. You want to make sure that the gap in-between here where the, the, the thesis is going to be bound. We have a spine and the outside has a margin that is sort of wide enough. So when you open your thesis up, you can see all the writing in the middle. So do look at a university website, which I think is why I haven't given sort of specific sort of measurements because every university has a slightly different requirement as to their margin sizes. So the waiter edit this document and this should be one of the first things they do is to go to layout in your Word document, and then you want to go to customer margin. So you've got layouts, margin, customer margins, and miss custom margin allows you to change up the width of each of your margins. And I think this is a very important thing to do quite quickly. Example, I just searched for the week, the UCL one as that's where I did my PhD. And as you can see, the UCL requirements are that you have a margin of no less than 40 millimeters. And last in the insights, if you think about your document, and let's just say that she'll Word document. And then here's your margin. This bit here they say to be no less than 40 millimeters, which is about four centimeters. So when you bind, you've got that sort of overlap gap of 40 millimeters. And then they say other margins should not be less than 20 millimeters. So that means the margin here on the edge should be no less than 20 millimeters. So your work really kind of just be in sort of this space here. And that's something to be aware of. They also go on to state that work should have either double spacing or 1.5 spacing. So that means that when you're writing, that should be a space of either two or a space of 1.5, which is slightly, slightly less. And that's something that we'll look at in a second. Styles. This is probably one of, I'm gonna say is every single one, but it's probably one of the most important settings that you want to sort out quite quickly before you even start writing a single thinking or thesis. Now styles allow you to set different formatting for different parts of texts. These are the main parts of your texts, are the main parts of what make up your thesis. So the main Texas and main body headings subheadings. So am Chapter two, Chapter 4.3. And the quotes. If you're someone who has quotes or equations, for example, and captions and legends. So every single figure has a caption or a legend which describes what that figure is showing. They all should have a slightly different formats when it comes to the styles. Now, when you open up your styles, you might see something that looks a little bit like this. So you've got low different styles and, and, and really you don't use the majority of them, if anything, you probably always stick to normal when you're writing your style. In order to modify your styles, all you have to do is click on Wonder styles and right click. So let's just say for example, we're going to go for the normal. You just have to right click and click on modify. You then want to change any of the formatting settings so you can change the font, you can change the font size, you can change the color. I stick to the classic. I like classic font sizes, classic fonts. So I've just talked with Times New Roman, as you can see there. I've also worked for 12. When I edit work, I usually change students font-size to either 11 or 12. So as I mentioned earlier, UCL, for example, said that they require either 1.5 or two points when it, when it comes to space between the text. And in order to change this, this is what you want to modify. So this first one here is just a normal 1. This one here is 1.5, and this one here is two. I always go for 1.5. I think it's not as wide as to, to kind of stretches the workout too much in end that with too many pages and your thesis. So 1.5 tends to be a bit more of a sort of a middle ground, I guess. You can also mess around with the space after the text. And this is where this comes in handy. So these two here, this one and this one. And they help with, they help with changing how much space there is after or before your text you want to do is modify each of the styles to suit what it is that you want for your desired formatting. Quick trick that I actually discovered not too long ago is the Styles pane. So here on the edge of a hair of your Word document, you'll see you have something called the styles pane. And it just means that this pane here on the side stays open at all times when you're writing. So as I'm writing my thesis and here you can see my thesis. You could see what styles I have within this text middle onto headings. Now headings on other parts of the thesis that are super important as your thesis is broken down into different chapters, you've got a number of different chapters and there are a number of different subheadings and headings within those subheadings and get quite leveled and tid. So it's important to have some sort of structure that means that you're staying consistent in your chapters, in your headings look the same. So chapter one would refer to heading one, chapter 1.1. first heading two, 1.1.1, heading three and heading force. When it comes to edit the different headings, think about what you want and from each of those sections. Again, in order to modify the headings is quite straightforward, is quite simple. You just have to right click on that particular style, as I showed you earlier with the normal and then you can change it. So here for example, you can see how I've done it with heading one. I've sought to Times New Roman. However, I've made the font slightly bigger. So I've changed the font size to 14 rather than 12, just so it stands out a little bit. However, you do not need to do this at all. A lot of times I see students and sticking to the same font size, which is absolutely fine. And also play about a little bit with the indentation. You can also play about with the space before, after the text. I personally like, let's just say I have my title here, so I've got chapter one. I liked it to be a little bit of a gap before the next Writing and the next field text begins a kind of paid about a little bit. And when I edit other student's work, I take a look to see what suits their writing and what looks good. So you want to do the same thing with every single headings. So hey, you've got Heading one. Do the same thing for heading two, heading three, heading for Y tend to do is let's say this is heading one. For heading two, I'll indent it slightly so, just so that you've got chapter one. And then the next section begins here. And then for the next one, for number three are indented a little bit more. So it kind of like it's a bit of a step. Again, it's not necessarily required. It's not something that you might want to know. I guess it's not required. But it does make it look quite nice and it does sort of help the, the thesis floated be easier. And it helps you identify the information that you're looking for. If you've got Chapter One, man, you kinda see the next section is there. The next section is there, just helps the flow a little bit. Now you can actually change the titles, each of these headings by setting a new multilevel lists. And in order to do that, you can click on this button over here, which you'll find quite quickly on in your Word document. And then you want to go to the bottom versus defined a new multilevel list. And what this does is it makes a new list for you. And in within that list, you have your heading one, heading two, heading three and heading for. And you can change a lot of different settings to make and to formatted as you wish. So what I did was I changed the first one, so level one wasn't keeping it as just number one. I changed it to Sage hotter. So for number one, my heading one, whenever I had a new chapter, I would use that particular style. Always end up with a new chapter. So chapter one, chapter two. And if you don't write chapter, then you have to sort of manually at the end, which is, which is also fine, but I want to automate everything. And so by adding chapter every time that you use heading one, you have chapter written in front of it. You then can edit level two, level three, level four. And as far as you want to keep going down, the nice thing about it is that you can kind of indented a little bit as well. So here you can see, you can change that here as well. If you go to level two and you want to indent it slightly indented here, as well as indenting it previously as well. There's a lot of ways that you can kind of play around with it. Also the number styles for this level, the way that you actually have the numbers, you'd have them in Roman numerals. You can have them in in letters. So what style do you one, I just stuck with the numbers. I think it just keeps it clean, keeps a simple Avalon stands how to, how to read those. So table of contents really helps to organizing your work and helping the reader to navigate through your thesis quite quickly. And Taylor contents should never ever be written manually. It's important that you automate this process to ensure that your page numbers always correct, your title's always correct and you can refresh it quite quickly in quite easily. So the way to do this is again, go to references here. And then you can see here you've got the new table of contents. So when you click on that and the table of contents, you end up with this, these options here. Again, you can decide on the style you want. I've seen people use all the different styles, but you want to stick with the classic and you're able to then go on and formatted further out, there's a number of different options that you can edit. So firstly, you can show the page number. So here where you can see the page numbers, you want to show them now this is of course something that you have to show. The whole point of the table of contents is to be able to identify what Page, different chapters our page, different sections are. So that's something that you must include. Secondly, align the page numbers to the right. It just means that everything is nice and me on one side, and it's not sort of staggered all over the place. And then lastly, using links instead of page numbers. And that's more for your own benefit. It means that when you're going through your thesis, you can just click on the particular patient albino, take you to the section in your thesis. Your examiner is going to have a hardcopy, so this doesn't really matter for them, but I think it's quite nice for you to have that available. Sections are useful, especially when you are trying to break up your thesis into different parts where you want slightly different formatting to do this quite easy, or you go to Layout layer over here. You then go to section breaks and then you go to next page. This includes a new a new section and it's as if you've kind of go Ephesus Hertz or continuous, then you've broken it down with a section and then it carries on. And that's the next section. So they're very distinct. This section here is different to this section. 3. Generating a Thesis Template - Part Two: Page breaks, however, are much more useful tool that I used and I always encourage students to use when writing their thesis page, which allow you to start sections on a new page without actually adding a new formal section. So when I think section, I mean that can new chapter or a new part of your thesis. And I particularly use it for chapters. So I use sections for always for chapters. And sometimes depending on whether the figure requires it or not, I'll even use it for new figures. Or for, for tables may, for a table, for example, I might use page breaks as well just to kind of keep things neat and allow them to be on their own page and in their own space. In order to do this, again, you want to go to layout and then their page break, and it just kind of breaks everything off, puts on a new page. And it means that no matter how many times you press Enter, that section will always be on a new page numbers. So page numbers mass we can easily I'm sure, ordinance before patient numbers. The bottom of page, double-click on the bottom of the page and you end up with this toolbox over here. And so within this toolbox, you can change the alignment of the number. So you can put it either in the right-hand side, that left-hand side, the top, the bottom, middle, stick to the right-hand side. The right-hand side is nice, easy. So if you have a document, always means that the number is right there in the bottom. And you want to either show the number on the first page or not sure in the first page. Now personally, I like to use the cover page as a new sections. The car pages are completely new section. And so I let start paid page numbers from the first page after the cover page, just cuz the competitions and usually have his own and page number. Also formats your page numbers so you can make them bigger or smaller, change the font, change the color, but stick to your Classics. Stick to the same font as the rest of your texts or Times New Roman, and you can make it slightly smaller than your texts. So if your text is not as 12 font size, you might want to go for nine or ten just so it's a little bit smaller, but it has to be present on every single page. And it has to be very sort of obvious because page numbers are what's your examiner is going to use to navigate through your thesis, the landscape page, and I mentioned this briefly before when it came to section breaks. But the landscape pages is a great tool to be able to change the orientation of your page. And I use this in particular when I showing tables. So if I have a table that instead of, let's say you have, this is your document while the new table kind of being squished into this section here, you might want to turn your page over to make a landscape and sort of spread out the table a bit more. So it's more, it's nicer to read. Again, if you have a diagram, we've got sort of a lot of sort of connectivities. And I find this a lot with sort of biosciences. It might look nicer if it's on a landscape page where you've got a lot more space around, you got a lot more sort of space to play with and to show. So to, in order to do this, you use section breaks. So before your landscape page, you include a section break. Then the actual page itself, you turned to landscape by going to Insert landscape. Then after the page, you again insert another section breaks. What that does is it breaks off of those pages, as I mentioned before, breaks off to make that page in the middle a landscape page. But beware that now that landscape page is its own section is not connected to the rest of your thesis. So if you're on page 103 and that's Landscape page now the rest of the thesis is going to start from one again. So in order to have your thesis to continuous times a page numbers, because that is important. You want to go to page number formats on that particular page after your section break and say to continue from the previous section. By doing this, you ensure that the page numbers are continuous and are even included on that landscape page. Because of course, that landscape page is possibly thesis is going to be on your contents page. So it's important that you're able to have those page numbers continue on. Figures and diagrams are a part of pretty much I would say everyone's thesis and is a part that takes a lot of time and efforts and make it the way you figures and diagrams look really reflects on how professional and how academic your thesis comes across at the end, Inkscape allows you to take your graph, for example. So I had loads of graphs, UVA, Y-axis, X-axis. You might have a load of different bars. It allows you to label your axes quite well so you can lay, we accept seeds. You can label your axes quite nicely with consistent font size, consistent font styles. You can also add different bars if your data is significant and you're able to add your little significance and Asterix. And when you draw your figures and diagrams, you need to think, Can someone understand this without me being so, without me having to explain what everything is, is it possible for someone to look at this figure and say, right, I can see that this caused this to happen. I can see this is the correlation. I know what a significant, what isn't significant, what the labels, I understand them, what the units are, speaking of, trying to keep it nice and meets. The next segment you need to think about is using text wrap. So any figure that you have just right-click back the text in line with text. So if I press enter and I move everything down, everything else moves down with it at a similar space, captions are an important and integral part of understanding a figure. They help to communicate your information in your diagram without you actually saying anything. They need to be concise and they need to be descriptive, but without giving too much commentary. Now in order to do this, let's say you have your figure, so you've got your diagram here. You want to right-click on the diagram and then go to Insert Caption. What this does is it inserts a caption and directly underneath that particular diagram. It, this allows you to automate. So in the future, when you want to change that caption, if you deleted a figure before or after, and you want to change the number by doing it like this. You've automated the process and so it's a lot easier for the numbers suggest change when you refresh. I can write a cell here and that will be the caption that will be underneath my, my finger. I can also continue to write it once I actually say okay and accept this and have it on my word document, I can change the labels. The label, there's three types of labels, figure, table or equation. In this case I'm looking at figures. So it's always below the selected item. So if this is your, here is the cell, the caption will always be underneath. And the reason for that is when you read and figure, you generally go from the bottom up. So you can change the format of your caption. The format means you can change what the numbers go up. Insert for example, you can change, you can change the type of numbers so you can go 1-2-3-4-5, just normal numbers. You can do Roman numerals, you can do letters, you can do uppercase or lowercase letters. But again, I just stick two numbers. I think it's a lot easier to use and this is just generally understood by everyone. Same thing for us. Hey, walls, as you can see here, you want to change the label to table, the same exactly same method, Insert Caption, then you go to table. You then have your numbering. So numbering can change the way that you do whether you want to format it will same as whatever format it was that you use for your figures. And again, if you look at the above items, if he think about the way that you read a table. So here is your imaginary table and you read the table from the top, which is why you will your caption to be up here. So you want the information to be right at the top saying this, the table shows, and then you start to write and everything. Then he sought to read and you can read the table going from the top down, which is different to how you read a figure with the figure from the bottom up. So just make sure that it is quite clear too similar to your table of contents. You can also devise a table of figures, table of tables and table of equations. And this is just a list of those items. So, and the way to do this go to references and then insert a table of figures. And again, you can change a lot of different formatting. So you can say include the label and the label is figure, the number is one, so you want to include that. Otherwise you have minus10 point. Then you want to also show the page numbers. So it shows where is alignment to the rights. Everything's kind of nice and neat on the right hand side. And then use links that's up to you and also the tab leader. You can change that as you desire. I, again, really like this table of figures in terms of how it looks at the end. I love that. I can automate this. You don't have to think about this at all until the very end is another really great tool that a lot of students I find do not use when writing their thesis. But it's something that saved me so much time towards the end. And it was really, I would say that the, the key reason was able to write my pieces and sort of short space of time and have such minor corrections using this tool and can be accessed from inserts, cross-reference, all this is, is it cross-references your fingers, your tables, and every labels into your texts? So here you have figure 5.1, okay? So this is your figure 5.1. You've got your diagram here. This is where it is, ok, so there is. Now you want to refer to that in your texts. So you've got your text here, you're writing away. And then you want to insert a cross-referencing you're seeing, right? This is what's happening. And you want to refer to figure 5.1 walls than manually writing figure 5.1, insert cross-reference. You will then end up with this box here. So this box allows you to select which cross-reference, which references is it that you're trying to cross-reference? So you want to include the reference type. So this is, this, you change if you want to include your table or an equation, in this case, just the figure. So figure, you want to make sure that you're selecting only label a number. So label is figure and the number is one. In this case one dash four. Don't include the caption because there's another option that says Include the whole caption. I've done that. And what it does is it includes all the writing and that's not what you want. So only include the label and the number. Insert as a link. By this means you can click on it and we'll go to the figure you're interested in. What I will do is in your writing, they will automatically add your cross-reference. It's done for you. Now the amazing thing about this is the fact that you can refresh this as you desire. So you can add more than one if you want to. So I can add Figure five dash one, and figure five dash T2 in the same place. I can change them up. So if for whatever reason I end up deleting figure 5.1, then figure 5.2 becomes 5.1. And so now I don't have to go and try to find all the finger five-point ones in my thesis, I can just refresh this and all of my numbers will change as required. This is probably one of the biggest and most amazing time-saving hacks that I always give students. And I recently with editing some work where he has to go through the whole thesis and change the number of the figures one by one, because the student had deleted one of the figures. And so we had to go through all of the figures and change them. Not only in that chapter, but this student had also discussed them in the discussion. So we had to go to the discussion and change them, should also refer to them in other chapters. And so became a very long-winded process. And I'm sure I'd made a mistake somewhere. I'm sure there's one that we haven't changed and that's something that you don't want to kind of end up with. So always use cross-referencing and captioning to captioning and cross-referencing go hand in hand. Now this is a tool that you're going to be using all the time and it's to update all. We've done a lot of automation. That table of contents, that table of tables, a table of figures, the captions that cross-reference all of this is, is kind of dependent in that moment. If you change something, that's also going to change the page numbers as well. So you can update it all very, very easily simply by selecting all to control a and then pressing F9. Well, this will do is it will just refresh everything. And so like I said, refreshes all of your compiled table lists. So if you've changed a page number and if you deleted at a page and everything shifted up or shift down, it will come it will change the table of contents for you. It changes all in texts, cross-reference numbers. So if you did eat it, a diagram, it will change all of the references in your, in your, in your thesis for you. Page numbers, labels, style changes, that's very important. And I had a student recently as well, who's the supervisor said to indent all of the labels. And so sort of going through all of the thesis and indenting, we simply just changed the style, press refresh and we will gets ago our, if you've gone through this lesson and you've looked at all of the automation options. And you've gone through it with me. And you probably have a somewhat almost very thesis templates ready for you to start my senior thesis. 4. The Best Referencing Manager: Using a referencing manager is important for being consistent, allows you to speed up the writing process. It takes you from having to do things manually, rotational habits of white, you references manually to being automated and it's one of my favorite things, one of my favorite things to do to automate thesis writing. There's so many parts of the thesis writing process that can be automated to make your life that much easier. You already have so many aspects of the thesis that you have to think about so deeply, your theory, your results, your analysis, that there's so many things that you can just automate and not have to think about all. So this referencing manager, and I'm going to be talking about Mendeley in particular, and there's loads of other ones out there. But I have found mentally to be what I think is the easiest out there so far that I have come across referencing manager can allow you to generate your citations as you write and automatically import a bibliography of affixing Manager can also be a bit like a notebook. In add your bookmarks. You can take notes, you can remind yourself to conductance later, you can highlight. So it's a great tool to not only help you write quicker and have a consistent referencing style and the style he didn't have to think about. But also to be a bit like a bookmark, a bit of a, a note-taker as well. Now to search for literature, you want to use an online database. And my favorite, my personal favorites are PubMed and I probably uses, I would say, around 80% of the time. And if I'm still struggling to find papers, I might go to Google Scholar because sometimes the top hits us, sometimes slightly different. And then my last option when it comes to actually searching for papers would be that Mendeley app. But you can also do it there if you want to kind of keep everything. One system. Once you found all the papers that you want to use, you want to save them to the Mendeley desktop app or even on the website. So you've identified the papers that you think are interesting. And what I tend to just kinda do this on a, on a kind of ad hoc basis. So as I identify the paper and then save it into Mendeley, I find a paper tomorrow. I save into mentally, I don't try to do on the same day. This is a process that you can actually begin in your first year. You can begin it in your second year. You can begin in your third year. As soon as you start to find papers, start to add them into your Mendeley desktop apps. So using the Mendeley desktop app, you can do quite a few cool things, I think. So here you have the paper. So this is the paper that I've selected that I, and recently published. So here this is, this is the paper that I've selected. I can save the reference. So I can say that the reference to my library, I can also highlights, I can take notes. Here. You have a note section or I used to do was when I was traveling on the train or to sit there, have R&D desktop app open and just sort of take some notes and kind of write down why this is important atmosphere, literary view, lookup, page 19 or kind of copy and paste a few parts of it and say write this. These are sections I eat that might be quite important for you. I can annotate them as well. I can favorite. So here you have different groups. So I was looking at five different proteins. And so this is a one paper for one protein. So I'd take that paper and save into. One folder, and so everything's quite nice and neat. So it's a nice sort of URM, sort of bookmarking system. It's a nice system that you can use to keep your references in organized manner as a confining them in my first year. So I had all the papers that I had read and it you'd all of them in the end. But it meant that they were all there for me to access if I needed them or the notes were there or references with that when it came to writing, it was just a matter of saving them where required. Now comes the fun part is the part where everything is polyelectrolyte change. You want to download Mendeley site, which is the word plugin. I believe it's a beta version right now, but there was a version I was using before that was quite, um, sort of well integrated. What this is is a plug-in that allows you to insert as you write. So once you've downloaded it, so you don't get it now, you go to Insert, you then go to my add-ons and men you added on and then you end up with Mendeley site available there for you in your references tab. When you open Mendeley site, you'll see this sort of toolbox at the side of your Word documents. So essentially it looks a little bit like this. This is your word document. And then Mendeley site is sort of hay on the side. It is not. I found that to be not interruptive at all to my work is quiet as you can see quite light. It's quiet, sort of earn, no, not, not very noisy. So Azure rising as not really in the way. So it's quite nice. And you can change the citation style, change it depending on your university requirements. So here you can change it. I personally change at Imperial College London, which is Harvard, but you can also change it to a number of different styles. Different journals also require different styles. So here you can see, for example, AMA acquire certain style and all the papers are there. All the different journals are there, Universities are there. So that's quite nice because you'd have to think about whether or not your style is correct. It's there for you, which is amazing. So do make sure you check just to see what style University requires. But the nice thing about this is that even if you get it wrong and you're not quite on the right track, you can change a citation. You can change the citation style and refresh them. It takes about 30 seconds to do that. So here's an example. This is a Harvard referencing example. And again, I can't go into too much video. I'm not gonna go into too much detail in this video here, but you can go and check out that video over there which includes full detail on Harvard referencing you don't need to know the ins and outs because if you use Mendeley site, it does it for you, but it is nice to know sort of what to expect if there is one or two references that you kinda have to mess around of yourself. So Todd referencing, there are two referencing types. You've got your in-text referencing and then you have your bibliography referencing. Next referencing is within your text. So as I mentioned earlier, if you are writing, you've got your reference, and then you keep writing and you've got another reference. And that is your in-text referencing and then you bibliographies at the end. So we're at the end. You have a bibliography list that will have the list of all the references that you have included in your thesis. The slightly different to the first example you can see there is an in-text reference and the way that looks is you have an open bracket. The surname, just assert aim of the first author. Then you have et al. which means and others. If there are others than you have dots comma. And then the year, if there's only one person, then you only have the surname. And then the year if there's two people, you have both surnames. So once their name and surname comma year, and that's it. So that's something to be aware of is just make sure that that's consistent. But like I said, it's automated so you actually don't have to worry about yourself. Then the second you can see is the bibliography reference that's a bit longer and includes the surname and the first initial, the first author, second, authentic keeps on going. Then you have the year in brackets, then you have the name of the paper. You then have the name of the journal, and that is in italics. So American Journal of Medical Genetics, then you have the issue number, page numbers. And that's pretty much how Harvard works and how Harvard looks like. But you do not need to know how to do this manually, purely because you're not going to be doing it. So this citation referencing manager really allows you to just kind of automate everything that doesn't require you to know how to do anything. But it is good to know sort of, I guess, how how it should look just to be able to compare and be kind of a, I guess, aware of what reference shouldn't look like. So to insert references. So here, imagine this is your Word documents. The way that looks is here is the rest of your Word document. Mendeley sites on the side. You're writing away. So hey, you're writing away. Then you want to insert a reference there. You search for the reference. So you find, for example, what? Let's go for Lee et al 2007. Searched for him, find it, insert citation and inserts it there. So what you'll see is over here, you will find, it will say ni hao 2007. There you can assert more than one citation. So if you were to select that one and that one, it inserts it inserts it together, which is quite nice. You can assert 2345 up to you. And that's quite, quite quick and quite easy as you can see, all your doing is writing in certain citation and then you keep on writing. You don't have to worry about anything else at the time. Now, once you've done this, all, you've written your thesis, he finished everything. You've got all your citations. You now what's at the bibliography and something that you would do last. You could do a bit early on, but it's generally something that you do. You lost your cursor right at the end where you went to bibliography to be. Then you go to more, Insert Bibliography and you'll find hundreds of your, your, your citations, hundreds of references will be there. Ready for you in the format you wish. Let say that you decided actually, I'm using the wrong format. I want to change it up. You can go to citation style, changes citation style, and then go more refresh references. And it does exactly what it says in the ten in refreshes or fee. And then you end up with a brand-new slate of references are in the style that you want. You can change it again. He changed again. Let's say that you decide to delete a reference. You no longer want to use this reference. You want sees another reference. It's absolutely fine. Just delete it, then go to more refresh references. And again, you're good to go. So you're not actually doing anything manually. And I think this is probably one of the easiest things that you can use and the easiest tools that you can use to help you with referencing. It just makes life so much easier and referencing and such huge and important part of thesis writing, report writing, even if you are a master student. And using this is super, super useful. And even just for ten or 15 references, it just means that you can guarantee that your references are in the correct style and in the correct format. And you know that those marks, I'm not going to be lost. And I've just shown you guys referencing manager is super, super important. It formats everything nice and neatly. It does everything for you. It automates the process. And so far, I think so far the first two chapters, the first two lessons have been all about automation, all about doing as little as possible. Because in the next, in the next few lessons you'll see that it's a lot more that you need to think about, a lot more that you need to do. So as much as you can automate as possible, girlfriend do it, and this is one way that you can definitely do it. So think about Mendeley and think about how you're going to use Mendeley with your thesis in the future. 5. The Abstract - The Sentence Model: The abstract is a condensed version of your report and of your thesis. It contains all the information that you are going to be discussing, but in an abbreviated form, in a form that's quick and easy to review. And it's almost always the first section that's approached by a reader is almost always the first thing that someone sees when reading your thesis or reading your reports. It's almost always a fasting should also have independent validity, which means that it should be something that stands in TV. You shouldn't have to read into more depth to understand what's going on. The abstract should be clear, it should be concise, and it should have enough information that I've read is able to understand what you've done, what you've results are, and what your findings where the abstract also reports the experiments, motivations, methods, the results, but with minimal commentary, there shouldn't really be discussion about what X paper has done before and what this person has done and what's present hasn't done, and what the results might mean. It's simply just a description, it's just the report. So what you've done, what you your methods were, and what your results shown. Now y is if it's written loss, you might be wondering why the abstract is the last thing that I, you a writing when it comes to your thesis. And it's because the contents come from the research paper. So if you think about the research paper, Think of it as your story. You need to know what the story is. We want the blurb sheet. It's a bit like a bird's eye view. It is kind of looking at what's going on, looking at what the papers showing, and then it's describing that through 250 or 300 words better include key words or phrases that appear in topic searches. So as I mentioned in the previous lesson, when you search for papers, you might search on Mendeley, you might search on Google Scholar, you might search on PubMed. And those search bars allow you to search through the use of keywords. What are maybe the five or ten key words that I think are important when it comes to my work and my content, and then tried to include them as much as you can within the abstract. And lastly, no references, but I'm going to caveat that by saying usually no references as the reference and the abstract them as the abstract I'm going to be talking through. Actually does have references. But I think it's important to remember that if you're talking about and referring to work that isn't yours and is sort of a motivation and something that you are using quite heavily in your abstract. And it is important to reference it as it isn't your own, your own work. I've devised something called the abstract sentence model is basically a guide. So if you're stuck and you're not a 100% sure how swat your abstracts and you just see donor West begin. Follow this model to the t And you'll be guaranteed to have an abstract that strong and that contains all the relevant information that you need. So the first sentence is the introduction of the background, and this is typically one to 21 to three, I would say sentences than humans identify the problem, what the government literature is. And the Ames, again, a couple of sentences, the methods and the analysis. So this could include your stats. What stats are you using to find these results? Analyze, then your main results, your conclusion and how significance is, and then the applications in the future work. Now I've kind of given a bit of a guy when it comes to the sentence numbers, but don't kinda focus on those too much. If you want, you can skip the applications and add a bit more in the results, as you will see that we did in the next abstract that I'm going to show you. But ultimately it's a bit of a guide in terms of the ratios that you want to include when it comes to your abstract. So this abstracts is the one that I'm going to be going through in this this abstracts is one that I'm going to be going through in this lesson. It's one that I published early in my PhD. And it's quite soon after I started in the lab, I was given some work to do. And luckily enough, it was for the edits for paper. And so I was able to jump on on this paper. That's a top tip. If you're someone who wants to get into publishing a bit more, try to, you know, ask for any work that you can do that's helping with edit or paper that's already in the works and it's already kind of, you know, out there to be published. It means that it's seen to be published and you publish in the next couple of months. So as you can see, it's quite a long abstract. Probably is around 250 to 300 words I would say. So it's on the longer end. So it's, the reason why I chose this is because I know that it includes all the aspects and all the different sections of the abstract sentence model. And it also has references. And I think, you know, I, like I said, I give you a caveat saying that it depends. Really usually doesn't include references, but in this case, I'm talking about quite, some quite fundamental biological aspects. So it wouldn't be right and not to reference where we got the information from. It's quite a long one. It's a one paragraph. And it does, its quite a strong abstracts and it really gives you all the information that you need to know to understand what topic is and what it was that we found here. 6. The Abstract - Writing a Strong Abstract: First section is the introduction of the background. And I've highlighted this by saying I'm establishing significance and that is what you're doing in this section. You are establishing the significance of your topic. What is it that is significant about your topic? That once that attracts others to want to read in and find out what you have, you know, what you found in your research. So here is my abstract and here's what I found and here's what I've written for the introduction. And I describe this as a bit of upside down triangle where the first sentence is general. It's quite generalized. So someone who has a bit of, a bit of knowledge can understand it. Whereas the next couple sentences asked for someone who might be bit more specified and maybe a bit more specialized in your field. So the first sentence, and then the second one and the third one. So here, the first sentence, the contractile actin cortex, a thin layer of actin myosin and actin binding proteins that subtends the membrane of an animal cells. And so that first sentence is a sentence that really anyone can understand where they come from, a science background or not. And the next sentence goes into a bit more depth, stating the processes that the cortex is, is relevant and is important in then you go into a bit more detail. And now here is where you really have to know the topic to understand what's going on. And that's why I'm saying it's a bit of an upside down triangle, these first few sentences. And it's pretty much reflective of what your literature review should be like as well. We'll go into a bit more detail in the next lessons. I haven't references here. So like I said earlier, usually you don't, but because this is quiet biology sort of facts, heavy topic, it would be incorrect not to reference where your information is coming from. Here are some terms and vocabulary that you might want to include when it comes to this. The first couple of sentences and they all established significant. So you're saying that this is a widely documented, is a widely accepted study, its extensively studied and there are many investigations. The fundamental issue. And it's a powerful methods to think about what it is that your topic, how it reflects in literature, and kind of what suits it best to help you with it. Maybe look up ten papers in the are relevant to your research and look at what they said and how they've framed their language to. For the next couple of sections, I'm gonna do a similar thing and I'm going to give you these vocabulary phrases that are sort of sentence starters and really helped with when you're stuck and you're not quite sure about how to, how to go on. These phrases are excellent for just giving you that little push and they'll direction for where to go next. Then you want to identify the problem and the gap in which now this is probably the most important part is also the partners and missed the most by students. I find that when I'm editing abstracts, I tend not to find the sentence in many abstracts. I tend to have to give feedback saying, where is the problem in your literature? What's the problem in your field? What's the gap we're doing here is you're making the case. You stay to the issue. You've stated this significance, and now you need to make the case and say, what is that is the problem. What is it that you're looking at? And so here is that the case for me, despite it's important. So I've just said how important is despite its importance, our knowledge is poor as quite emotive language. And I've just told you, super important is the main determinant of this. So many important processes, yet their cortex that information is poor. This key word puer means we don't know that much about what we do know isn't very strong. And the proteins really an, even the proteins nucleating it remain unknown. So the fact that it's so important, but we don't know that much about it at all. And it's unknown, which means no one knows about its quite a strong statement. So if you are making a statement that's Zhuangzi, make sure that you it's true and you're able to reference that if possible, but try to keep it short and sweet. Tried to kind of grab the reader with that one sentence. Here are some phrases and vocabulary that you might want to use for this. And I've, like I said, he's poor. Few studies that's quite commonly used. This one is quite commonly used. A gap in knowledge. I always, always, always see that phrase used. Little evidence is available. So again, maybe a couple of papers, I would say I would use that for maybe 5-6 papers that missing this evidence is available. And think about an alternative approach. That's also methods. So when you think about research being unique, it's not just that x correlates with y. And asked unique if you shown that x correlates with y with method one, someone else shows it with method two, that still a unique bit of research. So that can be an alternative approach. You also want to state the aims and the reason why I've kind of kept this within the same subsection. So identify the problem, stay the aims is because sometimes you might find abstracts, kind of merge them into one. So they'll say this is the problem and the misses the aim, or they might make it separate, but it's sort of in this within the same realm, within the same session. Here are some phrases that you might want to use for this. So this paper, in your case, you're writing a report or a thesis. This thesis will examine, compare, outlined, illustrate, describe. There are so many more terms than mess that you can actually use. I kind of pick those as the most common ones that I use and that I've seen in academia. But you can very easily just go to Synonyms online and search for honor, propose, and look to see whether you can find a word that you think suits your research and your sentence a bit better, then you're moving on to the methods and you want to describe the methods and describe how is that you are going to be finding out and closing this gap in the literature. And I'm coordinates established significance. But actually you can think of it more as approach. So I'm gonna write that here because I think it's a bit of a better, a better way of thinking about it. So experiment one and experiment two, they are very different. They are independent. They are looking at the same thing. They're trying to identify and research the same idea. But they're different, they're different approaches. So we use two independent approaches to identify cortical acts in new creators. So one is a proteomic analysis, so we're using blebs. This is method number one. Then second is going to be an SH RNAs screen. So those are two different things. We're looking at their very, very different and that's why we made them very clear in the abstract here. And that's that. That is your method. And then the analysis part of things would be kinda this pi here where we've kind of just touched upon it a little bit and said, We're looking for weekend cortex or altered contractility. That's the analysis. That's what we're going to be analyzing. So when we had all our data, we're looking for whether the cortex have been weakened a little bit, or whether the contractility has been altered. It's really dependent on your study and your rapport as to how much depth you want to go into. If that's a key part of your work, then that's something that you might want to go into a bit more depth. But for us that was enough to sustain. We're looking at y and two, we're looking at this and that some terms that you might want to use. And again, it depends on sort of what you're looking at. But the experiments, the cells, the investigation that quite commonly used aware and menu for those terms. Moving on to the main results, I like to call this section the USP, which is the unique selling point section. And you're in this section stating what it is that you found that's new and that's different from what everyone else has found Before. You cannot publish a thesis without something new. As I mentioned earlier, we use two methods. And within those two methods we did use so submitted as well. So it'd be a shame to kinda miss out and kind of skip those methods in the abstract. So here you can see that we said the study was unbiased. It wasn't sort of based on what we knew before. It was based on no knowledge, so it's completely unbiased. You're encouraging the reader to come and read on. So if you're not including the main kind of juicy parts of your research here, they don't know that that's what they're expecting to see that think about what you're showing and what that might mean for someone who's kind of come and crush your abstract for the first time. We go into some depth, but not in, Not that much. There isn't much of a discussion. It's more of just stating the facts. So each nucleated contributed as similar amounts when I find out the values come and see more inside, but had very different accumulation kinetics. So again, no Valley who just saying similar mounds of actin but different kinetics. We don't need the numbers in the abstract. If someone wants to find out more, they can go into the thesis and find out more the key terms that we've used in the abstract when it comes to the results are quite general and in fact they're quite near non-scientific. If you think about it, you never would say similar or different when it comes to your results in your discussion inside your thesis, but in the abstract, it doesn't need that much detail. You want to use kind of like quantitative terms. Approximately in little greater, fewer. I mean, these are all relative terms. But in the actual thesis themselves, you have only these held that it really helps to have sort of some, some sort of indication as to what occurred. And if people are interested, they'll just go into your report, into your thesis and find out more. Then edging towards the end, you now have your conclusion. So you've given your results, you've said what you found, and you now want a take home message. So what is the message that you want your readers to walk away with? One sentence is more than enough. Basically that sentence, our findings indicate that look at the keywords of use. So we've used indicate which is here. Use suggests which is here. You're saying that they, it suggests that you're kind of softening a little bit. And I find that researchers and in academia would do that quite a lot. We use terms that are a little bit softer than saying that know this for sure shows and miss foreshore is a mechanism. This is definitely, um, use terms that are a little bit more relaxed because, you know, as, as researchers, what you're finding is just an indication of that one particular story. If you were to repeat it with a different mechanism, you may not find the same thing and so on. These terms indicates, show and suggest, take off the accountability slightly from the author. Moving on to the last section and as applications and future work. Now in this section, this section is a bit more. I mean, I've added it into the sentence model and sentence framework. But if you don't feel like you have some sort of strong application that your work's going to kind of be applied into use, into an feel free not to include it. And as you can see, we didn't include this in our abstract, and rather we decided to use those words in the results section two to kind of both our little bit more. So this is a really important section if you know that your work can be used in the future by others. 7. The Abstract - A Practical Example: So when you have a task and I'd like you to pause the video and just take a couple minutes to just think about what the different parts of this abstract are in terms of the abstract sentence model. This is another paper that I published not too long ago, Eddy this year based on my PhD thesis, Snell's joint first author. Pause this video right now and think about the different sections and try to identify them if you can. So here, the first sentence, this first sentence here. And in fact the first he said The Zohar, say R, one there, the introduction. So cell ships controlled by XY sed. That's quite general. Then it goes to a bit more depth peer we investigate. So this is an aim, but it's also a bit of kind of describing, I guess, what the issue is and the gap in knowledge. It hasn't been very specific and saying this is the gap in knowledge. But you don't always have to, have to say like that. You do have some kind of flexibility in how you describe your gap in knowledge. So in this case you see, we said, hey, we investigate how nucleation protein factors media interactions between nucleases, which kind of says, we don't know that right now. So it's a bit of an aim and a bit of a gap in knowledge sentence, which is quite nice. We interestingly use a slightly different method, which I'll describe in a second. In features, this is a method, so this is number one, this is number three. In vitro, the nucleation frozen factor promotes formation of unbranched filaments. Now this is number four. Then it goes onto another number three cells and then another number for now you're probably wondering that went back and forth. Well, that's possible. You have a number of different methods and a number of different results. And it might make sense for you instead of saying method, method, method than result, result, result, it might flow it better to use the method and then describe the results than the methods and then the results, et cetera. So you might want to do it like this method. Then results. Then for the next one method, Ben, results. So this way you have, I guess it's a bit more reader friendly because you are describing the method. You're saying that this is the direction and the approach that we're gonna go down and visit the results that we found for. Then secondly, this is these other next method that we're gonna go down. These are the results. Then next n next. It's quite a nice format. I think. It's quite, I structure. It is a bit different. So here we've done this hair. So in vitro, that's the method. Those are the results for that. Then paradoxically, in cells, that's another method. Then those, those all stat. And that's quite nice because it just means that you have sort of a nicer flow and a better understanding for what you, what your approach and sort of the results for that. A bit of a conclusion birth mechanisms yielded thus in networks. Spin 90 does this. Again, we don't really have an application sentence here. Bear in mind the Journals do have specific requirements. So this is in Nature cell bio, and they do sometimes require certain formats when it comes to your abstracts. So that's different too. If you are writing report, you generally stick to, stick to what university requirements are, which will be quite similar to the previous abstracts. The one I just showed you earlier, a bit more bulky, contains a lot more information in each section. This is a lot more, I would say a lot sort of more condensed, but it's probably what this journal required in terms of an abstract, but it is another way of doing it. And if you did like this for your thesis, is still would be absolutely fine. And if you're still stuck, because, you know, That's a heart, you can use this sort of thought process. Think about your work in one word, one line, one sentence, one paragraph, one page, and one chapter. If I, we're gonna think about my PhD in one word, I probably say cortex, and then in one line I'll say negotiators and that Nuclear Cortex. And then one sentence and you kind of keep on going. And what you're doing is you're really thinking about the most crucial part of information that that's kinda flight for each of those sections. And that can really help you collate. And if you can get to this part here where you have kind of one paragraph on one page. And that section there is essentially your abstract. You should have in that section there described your thesis in pretty much in sort of the best way possible and most concise way possible. So hopefully that will be easy for you if you're still stuck with trying to write your abstract. But do you the sense that scientists do use keywords as they are super, super helpful when it comes to writing your thesis and the classes are really, really helpful. I found them to be my absolute bank and sort of my fall back when I was a bit stuck and didn't really know what rights when I pulled out the sentence starters and I looked at what other people had written, even if it was a completely different topics of mine. Just looking at a sentence starters really helped as I just kind of thoughts, right? If they've used that term, how can I apply that same term in my work? And it just kind of directed me in the right direction. And it made me think about wave formation. I wanted to include abstract ESA going back to this abstract centers model, here we are again, we have the six different sections. That's absolutely foolproof, I think now, now I've gone through this. You completely agree that by looking at each of these sections and by including the introduction, that problem, the methods, the results, the conclusion and the application. And thinking about the sentence starters that I suggested and the keywords I suggested. And each of those sections, you really conquer wrong. I mean, it's just a matter of what you've written their sentences. It would just be a matter of tailoring it and kinda modifying it to make sure that you've said the right thing. But really by the time you've written the abstract, you should have those sentences available to you in the other sections. So it's just about kind of pulling out the sections. So this would be chapter one, the mature view. Then disconnect chapter one, then your chapter to your Methods, chapter three or main results chapter for your discussion and your conclusion and all see applications. So this should already be available to you within your report. And it should just be a matter of pulling out the words that you want, putting out the thoughts and the ideas that you want and putting it in a model like this. And one big paragraph where you have an abstract that is concise and contains all the information that someone would need to read and understand from the first look. 8. The Literature Review - Defining The Research Question: It should review. It's the first large chapter that you write in your thesis and its purpose is to be a critical evaluation of the current literature. So that means that you're looking at the literature's out there and trying to figure out where your research standards within the literature. Critically evaluating which means you're not just reading and reviewing it and trying to find out am floors within it's trying to be selective and trying to find gaps within the research to fit yourself into a bit of a research space. So you are trying to look at the literature and find that gap. Where do you fit in? Any answers them on unknown, Are there any questions that have been unanswered? So really the literary review should not have any new information is simply a review of what you found. I think that's why the mixture views probably on the most important parts of your thesis. Particularly because it really does define and encourage the reader to understand what it is that you are going to be presenting. An importance of Thrace focus would be on the literature review, which is the second section here. And we're gonna be talking about how to plan for in situ review how to search for literature, how to refine that search to find those papers that can really add substance your literature review and also how to actually write and how to structure the review in detail. So thinking about the structure of a literature review, you may have seen something like this described before, which is sort of an upside down triangle. And this essentially is the structure of a literature review. So you want to start off with the background. And so as you can see, the background here includes everything that's sort of as general as possible. So you want to be as general as possible. When you begin, you then want to go into more narrow categories and Mrs. where the review becomes a bit more evaluative, I'm also a bit more critical in its description. The second would be no more narrow categories. And then you go into a beam move, focus and many lost the state where the hypothesis is based on the missing information and the critique and analysis, the evaluation that you've done in this review. So you're telling a story, you're starting as general as possible. And then you're going to more specifics. And many are saying, right, based on this information, here is what I want to look at and here is the gap in MS research that I've just selected. As I mentioned earlier, you want it to be selective but substantial. So selective means you're picking out those papers that are relevant for substantial means. You've given enough detail that you really can have pinpointed what the missing part is of your, of your topic. So before we even think about the literature review, we need to think about the research question. Now if you're in the stem subjects and you probably have this question defined for you pretty deep in lot of detail. So like a general PhD in stem, subjects like science or biology may have funding or VD. And this funding is defined based on the research question. So the supervisor has a fondling and they ask for funding for his very specific but of research. So you don't necessarily have a lot of autonomy when it comes to deciding what the question is. Or you can have some leeway as to mean what methods you use, what technique you use, or what the specific focuses. Whereas in the humanities or the social sciences, you may not necessarily have a specific question. And so you actually need to design it yourself. Now there are four types, four main types, I would say, of research questions. The first is a descriptive, one is hype is a question that describes what's going on. So for example, you might want to survey or I'll have a questionnaire to identify what people in a specific area think about a specific thing. And that's just the description you not finding out why or how or when we're going into too much depth was simply just finding out some information. And that's the first type. The second is a comparative type, is also known as relational or causal. And so you're comparing two sort of variables against each other. So what is the effect one variable on another variable? And so that's a comparative type. The third type is experimental. Now, if you are doing, for example, a biology based PhD or biology based research, then you're probably looking at experimental type of research question. You have two or more variables that you're comparing against each other. But in this hype, you probably are going to change one of the variables. So you might increase the concentration of something. You might move one of the variables to see the effect on the other one. And this question will be quite measurable. So you might be doing some sort of experiments. We are measuring the length, the size, the amount, the concentration, the effects through some sort of experiment. So this is another type of research question and then fourthly have historical. So this one you tend to be asking the y's, the causes, the house, the whens, What happened, what happened in that events? So this would be a historical type research question. So think about what your topic is and what kind of question you want to be looking at if you do the formula you in question, and even if you have a question already, where does your question for? What kind of search question Is it does really make a difference when it comes to the review that you're writing, the mixture that you select. Now that you've formulated your research question, you need to think about the outline of your literature review. So this is a work in progress simply because the more that you read, the more you might think this topic is interesting, and you might want to change up your order a little bit, but it's good to think about the outline and sort of how you're going to draft your literature review. So what I said is to use similar theses to help you structure your review. So if there is a thesis of someone who has published recently and he finished their Ph.D. recently, you might want to look at their review to understand what topics do they think is most important to support their research. I have given these three types of structures. The first is a chronological order, and second is schools of thought for arguments, and the third is boundaries of research. Professional is chronological order and simply describes the order of things happening. So this could probably be, for example, the order of time. So when distinct happens, if you're maybe discussing a particular event in history, you might want to go and chronological order from sort of the first thing that happened and what, how that led to the events, later events. And the second one is schools of thoughts or arguments. So if you're thinking about a topic where there's different points of views, then you might want to think about the schools of thought and arguments. So this would be maybe a point of view type of literature review. And the third is boundaries of research. So imagine a Venn diagram. So a Venn diagram has overlapping sections and you've got the spit in the middle. So this bit in the middle is your research. And you want to think about what is it that fits into these gaps. There might even be another circle here, might be another circle here. What topics overlap in order for your research to be understood? For me, I was not the actin cortex. So actin cortex when in the middle, topics that were on the side who were actin myosin and the actin cortex or cytoskeleton movements, cell division. All these topics were around this Venn diagram because my research is on the boundary of other topics. So it wasn't really sort of one specific topic by itself. So think about these three structural and possibilities and which one you want to go for. Again, you can change it. Not all. Reviews will suit all of them for me, it wouldn't make sense to do chronological order because there isn't really an order for anything. But definitely the third one fit for my PhD. So here is the introduction for my thesis and I thought would be nice to see an example of the kind of content I would include for my type of PhD. So here I had 1.11.2, all the way down to I had 1.7, but I've just kind of left it fit on this page. And you can kinda see how I've, I've sort of planned my structure. And he was a planet in a similar way. So I started off with the largest, most general part of my, my, my, my research. That would be the molecule and that would, I would say would be activates. Let's say that's my molecule that's acting. So that's 1.1. I have then gone on to 1.2, which are the proteins that bind to this actin. So here's my actin. Here are the proteins that bind to the actin. That would be 1.2. So we're now going sort of more in more depth as we go along. Then 1.3 is active nuclei to surveys are proteins that caused this actin and molecule or the actin filament to nucleate such a form. So that's looking up more proteins that help these guys to form. So again, gone into more detail. Then number 1.4 is nucleation promoting factors. So it's factors that help this thing to happen. Then we've gone into even more depth and saying, look up the actin cytoskeleton, which is what is made up of this. So you've got your cytoskeleton here and that is kinda made up there. And then I went into even more depth and looked at more poverty's of this. And you can see kind of how that staggers and how that looks. So the most general thing. And the next thing, then a next and the next and men lossy, where this leads to, it wouldn't make sense for me to start talking about these promoting factors without knowing what acting is, what the proteins are, et cetera. So you want to think about your budget in a similar way. What is the most general piece of information that someone needs to know? Then what's the next thing and what's the next thing? And maybe even something that you could do is work backwards. So why not start here and say where I'm looking at the promoting factors, what is the thing I need to know, to know those? And I'll say where I need to know the nucleases. So what's the thing that I need to know? To know that you need to know those and kind of maybe go backwards if you're not a 100% sure, the order. 9. The Literature Review - Searching + Selecting Papers: During the search well can make a big difference for the papers that you find and the research that you actually come across. So first you start with an online database and you can choose more than one. So I'm going to say stick with, you can choose Mendeley simply because it's the software, the referencing manager that you're using. You can also go ahead and use Google Scholar. That's a good one, especially for the humanities subjects, the social sciences subjects, Google Scholar I find to be very, very useful for that. And then most importantly, and this was sort of my go to, I would say is PubMed and no should be your go-to online databases for finding really any mixtures out there. Google Scholar is really good for finding literatures different, so different sources. So for example, finding a book article and finding a book chapter Gil scholars vehicle for that. Pubmed doesn't really have that kind of stuff on it. So do take a look. What I tend to do is go to PubMed, do better research. Go to Google Scholar, debited research there, and you find slightly different results. So definitely stick to those two when you're searching. What are the key words that someone from your field would jump to when they think about your topic. So what's that key word for me, it would be acting. So I'm gonna just rather here as that is, my keyword, acting would be my big keyword. And then I'll probably say the next big keyword would be cortex, because I'm looking at the actin cortex. And then maybe I'll say my third big word would be the cytoskeleton. As that's another way that people would describe the actin cortex. So those are my sort of three keywords are searched for. And then on top of those words are looking at the different proteins I was looking at. So those would be my other worlds as well. So what are commanded to do is maybe write down ten keywords that you think would be something that people would look for, would give you the right information for finding out your specific review in the literature. Might them down having my hand and keep on using the same word to search for your literature. Now there are three types of keywords that you can go for. First is truncated words. So that might be short words that describe, um, you're saying the same, whether you're looking for. So for example, and one thing I used to look for was a protein called diaphanous. So people will sometimes look for the truncated word, which in our case would be DIA from S1. Or sometimes you might see MDR1 as an option as well. And then similar words. So whereas it might be slightly similar to, for example, like looking at actin, sometimes looking for the protein myosin, which is generally associated with each other quite a lot. Sometimes by search for myocin are find papers are actually quite relevant for actin as well. So what was, could you use to really select as many papers as possible? And remember, what you're doing is trying to do a really In-depth search for literature that could be applicable and you never know you might find something that you wouldn't have found otherwise by using a similar word or a truncated word, you can then refine your search hits using these combinations. So you can use end. So you might want to say, I want to look for a paper that has the word actin and the word, let's say myocin. Okay, so that's gonna give me papers that I have the title of the word actin and myosin in them. So that means I'm gonna look for specifically both of them. You can look for all so Actin Myosin. So look for either one. You can also say not all near. So you might say act in not myocin. So you don't want a paper that has myosin and actin, or you can say near, so a paper that has actin and myosin nearby. So think about your search hits and what exactly, again, you want to find and for me literature review. You will further refine using the date published and publication type. The date published. It depends very much on the subject we're looking at. In the biological sciences. Ten years is a very long time. Three years is probably kind of a gap, but you want to look out for the most recent research. And whereas it may be that the social sciences or in humanities, ten years might be pretty recent for you. So think about how early in, how color, how late you want to look at them in terms of what research there is out there. And then publications hike. So book chapters or journals. You can even kind of refer to refine those as well to find specific review papers only. Review papers really can summarize everything. And what you can do is sort of a shortcut. You can look at that and you can look at a review paper, look what they've written about. Go to the references in that review paper and then do your own research and kind of write em and expand on that yourself. Bit of a shortcut. But if they've done the work for you, they reviewed that topic for you is definitely, definitely you're allowed to do. And maybe you can just initially think about review papers while then digging up kind of primary research articles. The date published again, I think is really important as to when you're seeing terms like the most recent paper or in a recent study. In a recent study if they, if you, if you reference status tooth out in the year 2 thousand in the sciences that's not very recent. So think about the deep published for refining your papers. You can then go in this kind of a black hole of snowballing by finding similar articles. So I've taken an example, this is from Google Scholar. So here's a paper from 2014 has published, and you can see these two points here. So you have this here. So you have cited by and you also have related articles. So those are two tabs that you can click on and they're really, really useful. Ethene the quite underrated. I just kind of stumbled upon it myself when I discovered them. So cited by shows you how many papers have cited this paper. So how many other papers after this one have mentioned and reference this paper and in this case is a 158. There have referenced it since 2014. So can you see how much research that's been done all the time, just in the past six years. Whereas related articles shows the articles that may have similar keywords, may have a similar title, may have similar authors. I find that Miss helps to find the most recent paper. So if you set click on cited by what you'll see is the most recent papers and 20-20-20, 19 that you can see that has referenced this. If they reference this, it means that it's somehow related. This is the same thing, but using PubMed, you can see here the bottom, you have similar articles and cited by. So it works in pretty much exactly the same way as Google Scholar. And while we're here on this page, something that I use quite often is the Sites button over here, slight button over here. I use this quite a lot to generate a reference quite quickly. So if you don't necessarily want to go through the whole referencing system and he wants to quickly reference a paper. I can just click on that site and then choose the style of referencing that you want and copy and paste it takes about ten seconds to do, are used up all the time and also favorites or paper as well. If you have your own PubMed login and then you have all your papers there so you can quickly reference them as you go along. Now at this point, you probably have saved hundreds of papers. And if you've done this really early for doing this in your first year PhD or your fantasy of your Masters, or even your undergrad, you might have 50 to a 100 to 200 papers that you've saved and you want to start to read. But there needs to be a way that you're managing and literature. Otherwise it can get very complicated and very messy and kind of pointless after awhile, invest 70 papers. You don't know what you shouldn't have said. You can't really refer to them in the future because you've forgotten which one he referred to. And if you think about it two or three years in the future, you most likely will forget which papers have said what and what's relevant and what isn't. So one nice thing to do is use Excel for this managing system. Now you want to create a table that looks a little bit like this. And what I've done is I've just added a few kind of key words that I look for when I read a paper. So this is going to be present dependent, project dependent. It really depends on what you're looking for in that paper we tried to pick out when you're reading. So you definitely want the authors names, the year. There's a kind of, you could have a title as well. Those are sort of typical thing that you want to write down and add the title here because that might be something that you are looking to add. You then want to think about them as search question, research question is something that you want to try to summarize in your own words, what is it that they are looking for in this particular research paper? You don't want to look at the methods. So this can all be in bullet points. You don't have to write full sentences. So for example, let's say here in methods, say why the method is. We can say they use a knockdown system. So a Muslim, I knockdown KD like that. I know what that means and I know the user knockdown system, that's enough for me, which is really good. Then the key results. So Azure reading given kind of write down what the key results are. Again, just bullet point. They found this protein does this, they found the knockdown, does that. And just kind of the key results. If you're looking at hypotheses or discussions, maybe the key discussions, and then any notes. So what I tend to write in the notes, it's something like this paper added to your intro or look at it later or are too presentation or a question mark or if I don't understand it that well. Here are some other types that you might want to include a Penning, like I said on your, on your research and we're looking for sample size. This is useful because let's say you've read 50 papers and all the sample sizes are a 100. It goes to show you that actually 100 is a number that I'm accepted in the field as a sample size. Your research will also have a 100 participants Data Analysis, what kind of analysis they did. And again, this is important because you need to know what kind of analysis is accepted in your fields. If everyone's doing ANOVA t-test, you can do an ANOVA test involves doing a different kind of test. You can do that. It just kinda helps you think about what the accepted kind of structures in your field. And, and then you can kind of go on ethics limitations. There's so much that you really have no limits as to what you want to add to this. Try to keep it short and sweet. You don't want to spend too long kind of adding to your Excel file. But what you can't do is when you come to write in a year's time, six months time two years time. Humans go control, find such with this breadth I remember, I read somewhere and you'll find exactly where it is. And it's just a nice way of managing a literature. Your supervisor will be very impressed, especially if you do so as well. 10. The Literature Review - Reading Critically: Thinking about how to explain, how to read critically and how to read intensity or how sweet actively. And this is probably the most common question I get. Reason why those critical discussion marks are the top end of the dissertation is because it really requires a certain type of reading style. The problem of writing critically comes from the lack of reading in a specific type of way. Chemicals, this sort of list and guide of waste to read critically, written by a librarian from Harvard library. And I found it, I think probably the best description that I found. And so I've solved it here. Feel free to go and check it out. It's a lot more detail. There's a lot more detail there or the link for it in the show notes, the lesson is down below, but essentially it's composed of six main things that you do as you read. The first is previewing the text seconds, annotating a third outliers, summarize and analyze the fourth look patterns and repetitions. Contextualize, compare and contrast. Those six things that you should be doing when you read any text book. What does journal was article. The first one is to preview the text. Now preview the text means to look at the text and to gain some assumptions before you even read it. So you might wanna look at the prefatory materials. This can include the abstract. This can include the title. This can also include the office. Dna about them. What do you know about a title? What does the abstract say? Some prefatory just means sort of what is the material that comes before the actual paper. So you're looking around a kind of a ton of feel around and get, getting or get an idea for what's to come. The layout. Is it an article that has lots of diagrams? Little diagrams look like medium, think, yeah, just kind of look and kind of engaged in the text before you actually start to read it, then the office as well. So who are the authors of the mentioned here? Who are they? Dina, who they are? Have you read anything from them before? Do you have any expectations as to what may come in this paper? So you haven't heard anything yet, we're just previewed. The text is a bit like when you get lecture notes and before lecture, a flip through and try to figure out how long it is, how much work you don't have to do, how much writing I have to do. It just kind of sussing out. And that's the first thing that you want to do. The second thing you want to do is to annotate. Now, she says, first and foremost, get rid of your highlighter, highlighting text. Just kind of making yellow marks everywhere doesn't mean I think when you come back to look at it in a month's time or years time. It doesn't mean anything. So get rid of it and instead use these three techniques. The first cus your margins as memory triggers. Imagine you have your page, you've got your margin. What are you writing hay on the side that is going to help you in the future when you come back to Vedic texts. So imagine you come back in six months time. What is written here that can trigger your memory from what you read because you will remember it somehow. And but what can you right here to help you? So kind of a few notes, maybe a few thoughts that can really help. So use your margin. You're not printing out surfing lots and lots of us are just writing our iPads or on our phones or just not laptops. You can still kind of add notes on PDFs. So Y1, the second is a symbol system. So you can use symbols like an asteroid or even an exclamation marks, question marks, I tend to use those three the most. So for example, if I want to remember something and I put a six there, if something's shocking to me or surprising opened exclamation mark, if I meet an earbud more, I'll put a question mark. So those three m symbols, and you can use any symbol you want triangle circle, as long as you define them and you're consistent with them, that's most important thing. So if you flick back at any of your notes, you'll see exclamation mark and you'll say, I know that shocked me. So let me look at it again or a question mark. So later on when you're purchasing advisor, if you ask a question based on where question marks are, ask yourself questions. What this does is it actually helps you later on when you go to your supervisions or you go to your meeting with your supervisor and he says or she says, what do you have any questions about this text? Is NP, you know, you have a bank of questions there already. And that really helps because it means that you're engaging with the text in a way that means you're thinking critically, you're asking yourself, why did they do this? What's the evidence for this was could they have done in this way? Was the reason for for this result and what this actually shows. Sometimes you just don't understand. We read and that's completely okay. But most of the questions write the questions down somewhere, maybe at the end of the paper or in a book somewhere. So you've got this questions there you can refer back to in the future. So moving on to the next is outline or summarize and analyze. So these are three methods, again, that are parts of reading and intensively to firstly is being able to outline. So once you've read the paper, think of if you can write the outline, the skeleton in sort of one sentence. So what is the outline of your particular paper that you've just read in a second one, summarize it. So can you summarize it maybe in a few sentences or a paragraph, then analyse. And now that you've kind of force about the summary and the outline, can you analyse it? Can you think of why things have done had been done in the way that it was. Can you think of how strong or how weak the evidence was? Can you think of alternative methods that could have been used, alternative arguments or explanations? And can you reflect on the arguments being made and tried to make connections with other texts that you've read. This is where the analysis part of it really comes from. And this is sort of something that you're doing Azure long and, and this could actually be part of your excel spreadsheet. So maybe you can have a tab for Outline and summarize. And as you're reading, you can try to fill this, fill those gaps in, maybe even add a bit of analysis nodes. So when you come back to where you're able to just quickly and figure out what it was about that paper that you really loved. And that kind of led me to thinking a bit deeper. So the fourth technique is to look at repetitions and patterns. So this can include the choice of words. It can include repeated phrases, illustrations or examples given. And this is supposed to give you an idea of the turn. So what is the tone of the text? What is it that the author is trying to relate to the readers? What's the author trying to say? What does the author find important? The fifth technique is to contextualize. So now that you've done the reading, you want to think about the same situation in different perspectives. Lastly, being able to compare and contrast. So now you've done the reading. You've got your bank of information, you've analyzed there, you've given a summary. You can think about the themes of text. So this again, actually themes. The themes could be part of the Excel spreadsheet as loudness, Pretty good, pretty good ones add into it. So if themes, themes in this paper, and then maybe we could do is sort of try to compare different papers with similar themes. Be a good way to critically discuss what are the connections agentic, and connected through the themes to the ideas. For the limitations may be for the methods and fill the gaps in the research. So this is way of really leading tools. You're leading towards trying to read as much as you can to find that gap that you are aiming to fill through your research. 11. The Literature Review - The Sentence Model: So this could be a bit of an outline if you are looking at in the humanities subjects or the social sciences. Whereas in a stem, I feel I've already gone through this already. So I described how I went from the biggest sort of molecule, that biggest entity, the most general entity, and then went into sort of a smaller and more narrow focus. You've kind of understood sort of the main topics, the main aspects, the main arguments to main discussions perspectives that you want to talk about. And like I said, it's work in progress as constantly changing. So just try to think of an initial outline am and write that down just so you have something that's kinda work from. So thinking about the paragraph structure for your literature review, this is probably the most important parts because now you've got all your papers. How do you actually put it together to make it look like an academic piece of work. Your first section should be the main idea or the topic sentence. Then you want to think about the literature and what, where, and what is the evidence that is going to support what you've just said? So you've given a statement, you now want to find the evidence for it through the reading that you've done. And you want to reference this as well using citation methods I have discussed previously. You then want to use some analysis. You might want to think about the limitations. You want to think about why it supports of the methods used. Just go into as much depth as possible. That's kind of support what you've just said through the evidence that you've just found. You can then give some more evidence, many typical evidence, and analyze that again. And you can kind of go on this sort of gray section head I've kind of shown device. You might want to expand on this gray section a few times. Read dependent on how much you need to write to support that particular idea. You might only need to include one reference for the idea. That's fine. You won't include ten to 20 references for that one idea, and that's also fine. So this is sort of the way that you want to do it. Evidence from the mixture reference it gives some evidence, reference it, and then analyze and interpret what you've just said. Linked to the previous idea, linker to the next idea, and keep on going like that. And then you want to conclude that particular section. So you might have a few sections that look like this. If you have a review that we're looking at in a six ideas, for example, you might want to include a subheading. So something to think about here is a subheading. Now a subheading is important for a number of reasons and I always stress this with students. Think about your structure and in particular thing about subheadings. Sub headings help with flow. They help with showing the reader and hold the reader's hand through what it is that they are reading. And it really guides them. Subheadings show you exactly what it is you're speaking about in that section. So if it's very distinct from the next section, you might as well use a subheading. This not only helps you, it helps you to stay focused and no, right, what I'm doing in this sections about this and this only and then next section is about that. And that's only. So use subheadings, don't be afraid to use them. You can use up to 567 in a Literary Review, as many, as many as you need to, I guess help you and me. It makes sense. 12. The Literature Review - In-Text Citations: To cite your sources in text, there are a few different ways that you can do this. And I've given you four examples here. So I've just used that this paper, Eunice et al. 2020, doesn't exist to investigate this protein interactions. What I've done here, I've actually given the aim first. Then they did this. And lastly acid in a recent studies have really sort of shown how new this is. And I've highlighted that because I've said in a recent study first, isn't watching, supported by etc. Now you can clearly see the four different sentences. They say the exact same thing. The meaning is exactly the same, but the tone is slightly different because of the language used. Here are some vocabulary and phrases as I did in the previous lessons as well. He has some vocabulary phrases that you could include. So let's take a look at a few of them. You might want to say so-and-so attempts to show us tau attempted to show this thing. You might want to use Kuwait compare, demonstrate is one that I use quite often, is how demonstrated this finding and determined, established. So these are terms that you want to use when you're citing your sources and you're using a reference, am you're mentioning a source and then you're mentioning what they did and what they showed. And you might want to use any one of these terms. And actually I found a really good resource. I'd highly recommend you to read if you're interested in knowing a bit more about how language and turn read dictates how your review sounds. And it's this paper over here called writing an effective literature review. And it's about second parts about citation technique. And this water describes how words can sound, either neutral, affiliate, or distance. So let's take a look at these three sentences. Understand describes how the assessment under soon discovered that the assessment or undersand claims that the assessment. So these are three sentences that sound quite similar. They are saying the same thing. Tone suggests something slightly different. So the first one under describes how to describe this just as neutral. We don't know what the reader thinks. We don't know what the writer thinks about. This particular statement is just a description. That's it. The second one is undersand discovered that. So it seems like the writer is proud, inspired, feels positive about this particular thing. The third one is more distant under some claims. So if I claim that you set something saying that you're saying, if I'm not sure if it's true or false, or fact or fiction. And so the word claims is a bit more of a distance sort of term to use. So in this paper, and like I said, the sources here are links down below as well. There's a lot of detail as to the words that you use in your lit review and what that can make your review sound like. And like I said, if you're aiming for those from top marks, you really should read this is really powerful and a 70 pages or some things I've had two or three pages. And it gives a very good summary on the terms and the choices that you can use. And this is something I find quite interesting because we tend not to think about what are tone is. As a writer, we tend to only think about what are we saying? Are you saying the right thing? Have we said it in the right order? Have included RBF machinery to include. But actually we haven't necessarily thought about what terminology we're using to make that review sound, how, how we want it to sound. And then moving on to the conclusion. So now we've written our hieroglyphs than our review and got all information that we will use computer somehow. So this is the so-what? So you've reviewed everything, critique to E found your gap. You've mentioned all the arguments out there. You now need to conclude by saying, right now I have given a tone device information. What's next? So what's, what's so what? When state in the gap of knowledge. So as if we're writing, we should be doing is mentioning things are unknown. So if you pick up a paper, you've picked our paper, you've described what you found in that paper. Whether paper saying you then what's his kind of mentioned? Although this is great, this bit of information is yet to be discovered or yet to be described, yet to be revealed. So he wants to reinstate that. So kind of put all of those yet to bees in one little sentence. Then you want to relate the literature to your research aims and methods. So this is probably the, the kind of the next step, the aims and the method. So what is the next thing? You've got the gap in the knowledge, how your aims. Now, then you want to state a hypothesis. Hypothesis is essentially a statement that seeing that if I do this, this will happen. Well, I think this is going to happen. So you don't have necessarily state in that way. So I think this, but you could state hypothesis saying that based on what we've looked at so far, it's possible that these nucleates on nucleated by VSD proteins. And in order to do that, I'm going to be doing a project based on this method. I'm amazed my aims. And then moving on here is the next chapter or you actually describe exactly how you're going to do it. So this section here, I would say is the what section. And then when you move down, you are in the how section. Sometimes I tend to actually skip reviews and the cut, the conclusion and then carry on look at the results. So think about the conclusion as possibly a standalone section where someone might not actually look at the review and just look up the lost conclusion. Just kind of see, right, this is the gap. This what they want to do, how they're going to do it. Let's keep on reading and see the results. How's that you're gonna collect your data? What is you analysis that you're going to be doing? And that is where the next chapter, the method materials comes in. 13. The Methodology - The Sentence Model: In this lesson, we're going to be looking at how to write the methodology section, also known as the materials and methods section. And this section is important for a number of different reasons. I would say it's probably one of the most important sections to really clarify, your work, helps to show power library workers. So an unreliable method would suggest that your results are also unreliable. Secondly, it shows that your work is accepted amongst your field. So if ever in your field is due certain method and easily assess material, you want to use a similar thing to be accepted for being reliable and for being rigorous. Thirdly, you want to include limitations. And so the methods section includes these obstacles and these barriers that you might have wanted to while senior research. And so it shows that you've identified issues, you've overcome them, and you've had a positive outcome. Lastly, they allow the paper and your research to be replicable. Usually especially in the biological sciences, is your redo someone else's experiment in order to build upon it in your own, in your own unique way. So to have all the methods there means that you're not constantly transit contacts people to find out every small detail to be able to actually caveat that bit of research. Please think about your thesis overview again. You saw signal for the abstract. Then the literature views just talked about in the previous lesson. And then your methods and materials section. So comes just after the movie. So you never view is kind of the what Soviets, what you're doing and sort of why you're doing it is the justification, your method, the material is sort of how, how are you doing in Soviet? What's your approach and the results and the discussion will be based on your approach and based on what the gap is that you're trying to fill, form the, you even start to write the materials and the methods chapter either gather the content, but it's everything, every single thing that is required to collect your data, everything from what the inclusion criteria as for your interviews, what cell type you use, what concentrations you used, and what type of rock you've looked at every single detail that is needed to collect your data, to run the experiments and to investigate the hypothesis is better to go into more detail and to give more information than it is to lack information. So these are things that you want to include in your chapter. Firstly, the type of research that you did. So this can include kind of whether your message is quantitative or if it is qualitative. So there is a distinct difference between them. So you to think about what kind of research is that you're doing. How you collected or selected your data. So what are your methods? So exactly, I guess the key word that I used to think about this is how, how did you exactly do it? So what would the particular steps but you took if you are running, for example, a focus session, how did you recruit the participants and what was your inclusion criteria will be exclusion criteria's while the ages, genders. How how long did you have, What did you do? What will your role as a, as a, as an interviewer? Every single detail needs to be there, how you analyze your data. So this would be the stats. The type of stats that you use can have any determine whether your findings are significant or not. You need to be able to justify why is this particular stats and what your reasons were. Behind using them and what you can do actually for this section, if you're struggling with stats, is to visit your University of University has a statistician and those are people, scientists policy. The people that people who are trained to identify patterns within data and are experts in knowing what kind of analysis you do for different data types in different comparison types. For example, if you use any other software that needs to be there, if you use, for example, S8, I used a microscope, electron microscopy 1000 massive tool that I used. I'm not should be in there as well over detail that I've used. Then lastly, your rationale for choosing these methods. And I think this number five here is what I'm going to emphasize a lot in this lesson. And the rationale should be the one. Stand out. As point through out your materials chapter, milk constantly justifying everything that you've done. I'm doing qualitative because I'm doing quantitative because I chose this. That's because it's, the whole chapter I would say is justifying why you, what you've done and why you're doing it. Now that you've got all your methods, you've got a list of the methods or the materials that you're using, use to think about how you're going to arrange this content. So there are two ways of arranging it. You might want to use chronological order. So chronological order is within the order of time. So time, as in how you process look like, what your journey look like of this research. So this is particularly the case when you're doing a more quantitative research, purely because you're probably going to start with identifying your question, finding a research question, then you might want to go to the Ethics Committee for university and get approval. Why she got approval? You might want to write the questions out properly and then print them out and then go and stand outside the library or go and recruit participants somehow. And then was recruited them, you wouldn't inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. And then he wants it bloody block. So that's your political order in terms of time, and that should be the order of the methods and materials. And that makes sense for that kind of project was for me, I use a more method type arrangement and I use three types of cells. So I use N2 cells are used, hela cells like also used another cell called heck, tonight three, now these are three very different types of cells. And so what I did was I stopped to describing my methods in terms of the different method subtypes. Look at your content, take a look at the list of methods that you've written and try to think of an order. What makes sense if someone were to replicate your work, what order would make sense for the content? Firstly, I've got cell culture, and this is sort of the main first method that I use, as I mentioned earlier, with the different cell types. Then secondly, I've got transfection. To transfection is where you manipulate your cells to change a characteristic about them so you can study and track the effects of that deletion. And that's what you call transfection. Sudden a funeral transfection studies SH RNA, SIR and a, which are long-term deletion or short-term deletions. And all those details are there. I've ended transduction, which is another type of deletion or manipulation, even some imaging and some molecular biology as well. I believe I have some more sections, but with the interests of space, I've just shown you those five there. And we can see is that it's really broken down in terms of method. Now, you can kind of say that I've sort of used the chronological order because generally you start from the cell culture, you'd look off to yourselves. You then manipulate them, you then image them. During my masters at Imperial College London, this was the structure that I was presented with by my supervisor. And it completely changed my life and it's going to change the rules. And second, Hold on. This is the structure that you want to use when you write every single method section. So as you saw from my section, I had loads of subsections. Each of those subsections are laid out like this. There are four parts to each subsection. So starting off with number one, you have the general overview of the subsection. So a bit of an introduction, you kind of orientating the reader. You're reminding them of what you're doing and why you're doing it, justifying it, and you give some background information. So if you're using a particular technique or particular approach, you just give a reason why I'm doing individual interviews are great. Yeah, give me a reason why in academic, scientific way. Number two, you want to give specific detail about the methods so you've justified, you've given you insure, then we want to give that detail. So that's what the juices, that's where all the info and that's when the nitty-gritty concentrations are in the ratio, the percentage is all of us in here. Continue to justify your choices. You're justifying here. You also justify here, it never ends. You're constantly justifying why you're doing, what you're doing, and how that adds value to your particular work. Important. In a second section, you also want to give emphasis on the care that you've taken. So your weapons themselves were throwing the cells onto your lab bench. That's not what we want to hear. We wanna hear that you've generally placed them in the lab bench. You've given them some care, love, and attention. That is what you want to say when you are describing your methods. And I'll show you some language that, that can really put it towards them. Thirdly, you analysis and processing. So what does your analysis and what statistical approach to do take to determine the validity and sort of I guess the final results and the last few limitations in your solutions. No experiment comes without limitations. Every experiment has issues and you have to overcome them. So here in this section you will sit in detail. So like I said, this is the order for every subsection. Any method you describe, no matter how large or how small, how how irrelevant is or my appear, you want to justify everything that you've done using this layout. 14. The Methodology - Writing the detail and justifying choices: Section, you're given a general overview of a subsection. So you're going to give a sentence or two ot one sentence that summarizes what you've done and why you chose it. So, for example, of qualitative, you've chosen to go for interviews, find y while they can give an in-depth understanding, they can allow you to ask for a follow-up question. They can allow you to ask for expanded text. They can allow you to ask for a description. So that's why it's great. Quantitative allows you to measure something. It I just take numerical measurements, which is good for ranking or generalization. He also want to mention ethics, rationale, and the criteria that you might have picked out. So for example, individual criteria for inclusion will there has to be, for example, a smoking male under the age of 70, for example, that show inclusion criteria so that detail needs to be there, but constantly justifying why. Why have you done a YB chosen there? What should reason? And any background information. So if you have to reference and for whatever reason, because you're using similar methods someone else and you're not retaining much, you're changing really small amount, amount, the numerous references. So here are some terms that you might want to include for this. So you might notice is something like the test, the samples, the experiments, the models were carried out where devise were obtained from, were supplied by etc. So this is some, sometimes there are loads of times or you can use a stick to the terms are accepted in your field. These are terms that I picked out from sort of mind thesis or the scientific, biological, scientific field. But look in your field and pick out those terms. Forget the storyline. You get what the researchers just looked at the language, use and apply that to yours and it makes it, we'll make it sound more academic. And like you've kind of done a lot of reading in your field. Here's an example of an introduction. So this first section, my thesis, and we'll briefly go through this and show you exactly how much justification I'd been doing as I write this. So I've said for the initial screen to determine the role of proteins. So I've, I'm justifying why I've done this. I want to determine the motor proteins. I image the impacts of protein depletion on blending. So that's the exact same method I've done. I want to determine this and I've done it in these blaming cells and I reasoned lands. So can you see that it's quite, it's quite emotive. I would say. I've reason. So I've thought about it. And this is the reason I'm giving you I reason that changes in court squats, nucleation, Sacha, should be most obvious and blebs. So the reason why I have twins cheese blebs it because what I use blebs, the changes are the most obvious. So I'm saying that's going to make my life a bit easier to use, to use living cells because they are initially devoid of effective justification. Why? Because of this? So for this, I use these cells that black continuously and have a well-defined cortex. So I'm, I'm still, I'm still justifying what I've done. I'm using empty cells because they, blebs are great, because they've got good cortex. And thus they are a good model system as if I haven't sold this enough. I'm saying, therefore it's a good model system to study. And then lastly to end off, I'm saying the hela cells are used to investigate the next step. So can you see how much justification I have actually done here? I've done one part there, two parts, 34. In this small section alone, I've justified four times y, I've done something. Why I chose the method where it shows the technique why I chose this cell line, I have constantly justified. So for the first section, justified why you chosen a particular method. And now in the second section, you want to talk about the actual method itself. So what is it that you've done? Again, you're still justifying. So let's just keep 1.The financial going along. Keeping given reasons, keep on giving the verb because and also emphasizing the caretaking, gentle procedure. So look at these two lists here, pick up where it is that you're doing. So in this sexual helmet Monday to use visual aids, that means using a diagram. So if you're, for example, with an experiment, I would talk about electron microscopy. So for electron microscopy, it would make a lot more sense than describing, trying to describe every little detail of how the microscope works. If MIT probably a bit more sense, maybe suggest draw it out using software or maybe just kind of referencing. So you can say the beam comes down here and then my sample is here, and then it reflects, um, and it absorbs the electron beam, et cetera. And here's my image. So that in itself is a more, is better where was sea to communicate what the detail of that electron microscopy than kind of trying to write out in too much depth. One thing that I find quite useful and one thing I always recommend is to use flow charts to mention how your qualitative data is going to work. So if we come to, for example, this section here, where we're looking at interviews or focus groups, thinking about how those interviews are going to take place. So day one, this happens, day too that happened. They three, this happens. It makes more sense to kind of put that into a flowchart. You could also describe it in your, in your, in your method. That's not a problem, but having a flow chart just summarizes that can process a lot better. So try to use referencing as a shortcut a lot more. So again, if there's a method that you're using and it's been used a lot in the past. And then reference that paper that's used it, it means that you'd have to write down as much detail if you've used exactly as that previous paper. So think about whether you made any changes at all no matter how small. If you've made any changes, then just mentioned the changes and say, these are methods had been adapted from that particular paper. But it's exactly the same. Feel free to reference as a shortcut. It definitely helps to justify. Here are some language that you might want to use to justify. So saying something like in order to determine, et cetera. So you're justifying it. We can say in the middle of sentences is something like this technique was used in order to show et cetera, or in order to be et cetera. And here again, this was quite a nice one in an attempt to, so it shows that you're really trying to do this thing. So in attempt to identify the interaction that interacting proteins, I've done this. I really like this one to this aim. So with to this aim, well, I tend to do is I'll give the intention of what I want to do. Switch, switch out the words that you decide to use instead of just using the same word again and again and again, switch them out. If you've used designed two or three times, change up, use another word he's modified, use Vicodin, use sampled. Change things up. Changing up can make your works on a lot more academic. It makes a sound fresh, and it can make it sound like you've done something different. So think about the language that you use. It's crucial to, to kind of the tone and the temperature of your work. And again, here are some terms to show the care that was taken. As you saw in my review, I think I showed you that I used gently. This allows the reader to trust you the more it allows the reader to take your word for what you've said. And it can really make a difference as to how it's perceived by your reader. So moving on to an example of this, here are two sections that I have within this chapter. I'm going to just show you a few pointers here. So the first one is looking at the reference. So here is a referenced by calling an hour and there's also one down here as well. So I've just referenced where the cell types came from. The first one I am the first one is m2 sells, Second one are hela cells and I'm just referenced them just to show where the original work came from. And that's very important as I am describing. I'm kind of giving a fact here. So I need to say where I've come where these things have come front. I'm also going to be as detailed as looking at percentages here and looked at ratios, and even going as far as giving the location for where I've purchased this media. So someone else to replicate this result, um, and replicate my, my research can, can go as far as buying the exact same media that I used from her as far as using the exact same mix that I used. Again here got a ratio of one to five. The percentage where everything formula just gives that extra bit of detail that shows the reader that I've been consistent with my work. 15. The Methodology - Statistical Analysis + Limitations: Three is the analysis and the processing. So this is where your statistics come into it. So the first section I'm going to think about is the quantitative. So if your research is more based on more points, then think about these three things. When you're discussing that analysis. The first thing is how you checking for your data before you actually analyze it. So what are you looking at? How pairing or data, so are you looking at for missing data? Is there have you, for example, one experiments with is one that you haven't named 13 times over. If that's the case. It mentioned that are there outliers is there was a particular day. There are things that don't really go to the pattern. And so you move that section of data if that's the case, I mentioned that. Which software do you use? Analyzer data. So how you analyzing it and the program that you use, in this case, for example, MATLAB and software that you might want to discuss and how it works. And then lastly, the methods that you use. So as I mentioned earlier, stats is such a heavy topic, make a difference between whether or not something is significant. And so BAM, to justify what stats you use and why you said it is really important. If you don't justify, it's a question that you're most likely be asked in your survivor. What what are the methods that you used? Why do you use it? And why is that the best method that you could have used? Qualitative, slightly different looking our observations, images and language. So observation means you've got all the states are, you've done questionnaire, you've given out 50 people. You now have all these results. How do you categorize the themes and the ideas and how do you code that observation? Looking and thinking about the recordings that you might have taken, how, how, how others categorize and think about the structure. How, how can we interpret meaning from their structures and also the communication? And look at the language. How do people speak? What are the non-verbal interactions that you took note of Juno's interviews? How are you processing that analysis? And for quantitative, you need to go into a bit more detail when it comes to this van for quantum, simply because you are also in limiting factor, you are variable if someone were to analyze your results and in a slightly different way, that will be because it is a different person. Every person analyzes things slightly differently. So usually the detail as to exactly why your analyzing it the way that you are and the justifications for in a bit more depth than maybe quantum. So to describe the analysis, here are some terms that I've picked out. And again, I think these are applicable for really any type of research. But again, look at your field and look at the terminology that you see repeatedly coming up when you're doing a lit review. So definitely something to do with significance. That's obviously a big one. Software to do quantification, tabulation. I like this one though, saying put into a table, tabulated, it's nice word and something to do with collecting, counting, selecting software that pick the program, the application. These are good terminology as well. So really tried to think about how you're describing your analysis using academic words that will help to elevate. And your dual methods. So again from my thesis. And again, this is an analysis section for just one of the methods I used. So when you analyze your data, depending on how many methods you use, you'll have a number of these sections. So this is one of them. So to quantitatively assess changes in mesh size. So here is the y of, I guess what I'm doing. I collaborated with this person. So this is a really important fact. I didn't do, or myself or collaboratively Matthew Smith. And then I said that images of the act and quarter, that's 70 k magnification was selected. So if you've read my whole methods, you know, light of images at 1020507000. So here I'm saying that I'm assessing not just not all of them, only 70 because so here is the because remember I said was little because, because single filaments could easily be identified and because another because they possess a relatively large field of view. So too becauses for one, for one thing. And then I said using Fiji, which is the software's Here is the software. Again, really important. It's a trainable and plug-in was recognized to train to recognize and differentiate between filaments. So this is what we did. Here is another justification was trained to recognize between these things here. And then I'm given a reference. So here's the reference figure 22. So that is actually a screenshot of that page. So I've opened the FEA software. I've input my 70 came magnification image, and I've taken a screen shot just to show the reader what I'm looking at. I can't input the software into my thesis and hardcopy. So this way, the reader can see exactly what it is that I was looking at when I was editing and when I was looking at my work. So what this does is it highlights the upper most cortical mesh level. And then they were tabulated and converted. So converted them to nanometer squared using a matlab. So let's think about how many justification sections there are here. So justifying here to what to assess changes. Justifying here because they can be easily identified. Just Fei again, because they have a large field of view vendors from just fine again, by looking at differentiating, you can see the uppermost cortical level. So it's constant ossification. You're constantly having to show the reader why is that you do something? And the reason, the reason, the reasons why he chose to do it, and why that was the best way. Not just because not just because it was the most convenient, but why it's the best onto limitations. So limitations should be stated at generally at the end of wave described what method is that you're using. And they kind of should follow a summit at this kind of patents you thinking about, for example, why have you chosen a questionaire while then a survey? What advantage to the question I give as a christopher survey? And in fact, kids, you have user survey. Now those, but in hindsight, was a better feet user survey, was the difference in the data that you could have pulled out from it at the end mentioned any shortcomings. So for example, small sample sizes. So let's think about if you're n number is ten. For example, n equals ten is a small sample size. If your field normally sample sizes of a 100, that's quite small one. So mention that mentioned that he had time constraints. You, your software is quite cumbersome and so you weren't able to do as much as deep as you possibly wanted to. I mentioned that that's important. It's important to show the recognize that that is a limitation. Acknowledged problems or difficulties with the solutions. So if you're, you know that your n is ten, you know that, that's quite low. Is it that your data is quite consistent? So actually if we had a 100, it wouldn't have made much of a difference or isn't that your data is very different, but there's nothing you can do. But at this point, you have to acknowledge the problem, right? My data is inconsistent. I've got a low end numbers. I can't really pull out any patterns. And the solution is to do some more, but I don't have any time. So need to mention that before this time limitations and this is a solution, but actually next time I will do this. That is why language is crucial. Being able to save this in a way where you are taking away and minimize the problem and your responsibility does make a huge difference. So essentially you want to take away that responsibility from yourself. You want to take away the fact that it was you who may have been sloppy or was you who may have not taking enough care in your, in your experiments, but actually it was out of your control. So there might have been time issues, there might have been limitations. Him I had been a problematic software to use. What is it that can kind of minimize your responsibility from the limitations? And it also just emphasize the solutions and the outcome. So what is the solution for this? How have you overcome this issue? To now? Find the solution for it and to have a positive outcome in the end. In order to do this, you might want to think about this terminology. So future work, well to improve on this Iwill, building upon this work, I will. And so these language here's a time-consuming, limited by problematic, unavoidable. Those are terminology that minimize your responsibility. Here is a technique that was used, quote bio idea and it's an alternative to a more established interaction technique. I'm, I'm constantly trying to explain what the limitations are and justify why I've done a different technique to what everyone else does. Normally, I've said that all verb is technique is extremely useful. There are significant barriers and the word significant is quite a strong word. It's not just a minor barriers, but there are significant barriers. There are huge barriers that can make such a difference in the results, that can result in incomplete datasets. And I've given a reference for where this paper has published to show what these incomplete density look like. Then I just talked about the limitations. So here the limitations for this technique, this more established technique, loss of protein, solubility, lack of studying in its publicity and environments. So these are big problems. So I want to overcome this problem. So instead of using this technique, I've now gone and said why I'm going to use this one. It's a new one called by RID. Here is the solution to this limitation. So to help identify interacting proteins I carried out by ID and I've given the details hits or by ID does this in labels, proteins, it's proved effective. So I'm not just saying that I think is going to be really good, but I said that's proved effective. And here are the papers where you can check that out. There's three papers that the KDC, how I've turned a limitation over from just saying it's useful but has significant barriers to saying this. The new technique that I'm going to use here are the limitations of the old one. Here is where it's going to be useful. And if you wanna find out more, go me their papers. And that's a good way of stating limitations. So I've taken away the responsibility of For me, I haven't said that I could have chosen the best technique. I've said that actually, this is what I've gone for because of the limitations of the one that everyone else use it. Here again is the overview for the subsections to every single method that you mentioned. No matter how small, no matter how insignificant and needs to be written in a similar kind of Mahout. This will almost guarantee, but you're introducing, giving enough background. You're giving specific detail, enough detail for someone to be able to carry out. You'll justify your choices and constantly showing that you've taken care and he'd been, been kind of gentle with your experiments. Also showed that analysis of how exactly are you processing this data and misstating and limitations in our solutions. So what about your data and what about your results? Maybe you kind of stumbled upon a little bit. And how did you overcome that? So this structure is a guaranteed structure for including every single point that you need to include. Watching Britten struck once you've written out your methods like this, only minor edits will be required. Maybe a bit more detail. You'd much rather have more detail than less detail. You'd much rather that someone knew more than having to contact you to find out more details later. So definitely for the structure, it completely changed the way that I viewed and writing a methods and materials section purely because of using this exact structure. 16. The Results - Selecting Appropriate Results: This chapter forms the main body of your thesis. He wants to state the findings without bias or interpretation. So the results chapter is purely just stating and its descriptive. It's just stating what you've found. You're not meant to discuss or interpret anything at this stage that's for the discussion. By the end of your results chapter, the person should be able to determine what it is that you found and sort of what message is that you're sending across based on what hypothesis you start off with the abstract. You then go to the mitchell view, the methods and materials and kind of building up to the result. And that results section is sort of the bulkier section contains the most sort of interpret information, the most detail. And, but like I said, leave the discussion and live the interpretation to the next chapter, which is meant for that interpretation is meant to kinda give more detail and fill in the gaps. And I forget that you are telling a story with your thesis. Your report should provide sequence. So it provides sort of the steps, the process, it provides a frequencies or how often are we doing things, the quantity and it makes connections. So you're starting for the abstract. The abstract is the overview of your story. So a quick snapshot. Then you go onto the mixture review. So here you're, you're, you're kind of making that gap. What is that, that knowledge that we don't understand. That's where the gap is. And then you even most of the methods. So how are you going to adjust this gap? And with what sort of approach then the results. So illustrate the findings here you have your data, your graphs or charts, your, your numbers, your answers. If you have a survey, those are gonna go, they're moving on to the discussion here. You can make that conversation. So you're going to actually provide a discussion and sort of interpretation for what it is that you found and how your results can fill that gap. And then lastly the conclusion. So here you have an address any issues, any lessons, and just kind of kind of how you're going to move on from this research. And it's very, very short and we'll talk about that in the next chapter. In order to write your results, you need to complete a few things. First. So step number one is to fund your experiments and you collect your data so that we basically your methods, what she visited the methods you've, you've done the methods. You then actually have to run these experiments and collect those data points. Then you want to process and analyze your data. So the SUV based in a statistics or whatever method is that you are using to analyze your data. So that's gonna be a second thing. You then want to draw your graphs, diagrams, tables or charts, tabulate them next. So before you even actually come to rights your results and write down, here's Figure one, here's Figure three. This is what this is. You need to actually draw the graphs first and write the legends and the caption. Now, those two are very important things as they can determine what it is that you're talking about. It's almost impossible to actually discuss or write down anything in your results chapter without having those diagrams drawn out for you as you're going to be referring to them. So do that first, then you want to move on to actually writing the accompanying body texts. So step kind of 34 are the first things you want to do when you come to buy a results section. And I think this is the chapter that you can write sort of a first or second. So what, as I mentioned in a previous lesson, do your methods and materials first as that sort of set. And it's done for you as soon as you start collecting data and you find that this is a result that is the result that you want to keep. You can now start to make those graph. Then you can go into the discussion than maybe the lit review. Abstract loss. So this is a section that you can actually start doing as soon as possible. But you are a PhD student who spent the past three. And if you're in the UK, if you're an American, maybe seven years on a bit of research and you probably have a lot of results. I'm not everything is going to be included in your report and that's something to remember. You need to decide on the content is actually going to be included. And it's kind of, I guess a week science include every single point, every single result that you did, every experiment that you did in your report, because not everything that leads up to answering that question. So you want to firstly include experiments, or they said, wow, strong proof for your conclusion. We are looking for strong trip. That means that if you think of your question, What's your question? Which bits of data do you have? That is not just evidence for it, but actually strong evidence for the conclusions that you want to address later on do not include data that is irrelevant. So if an experiment, and even if it's a great experiment and you've got some really interesting results. If it's irrelevant to your, to your work, then there's no point including it. It's interesting because I find that a long time as researchers you want to do experiments that you think will add to your, your results. But you find that even though it's interesting and even though it's a nice avenue that you might want to pursue later, it isn't actually related to what your company different than your hypothesis. So don't include it is not important at all. Information, however, that is supplementary or that you can kind of add a bit more data to, but it doesn't quite require to be in the main body texts in the main results section, then put that into the appendix. And that will usually go at the end after your references, sort of Fourier references somewhere around there. And you can include an appendix. And then you can kind of point the reader towards the appendix would say, right, you want to meet some more. If you want to see what the data is, then go to the appendix. Now you want to characterize your gap. And we mentioned the gut before quite a few times. Now putting every single lesson I've talked about this knowledge gap. And initially you kind of have to think about it in your literature review. That's where you're sort of building to identify what the caucus as you go along and as you do your research and Azure writing a thesis, you want to characterize it a bit more to understand why exactly is that your gap is what is, what does it mean basically? And this will help you with selecting the most appropriate results because as you know, you're going to have lots of data, as I mentioned. But what kind of gap do you have? What kind of knowledge is it that you are trying to add to your field? The first one is absence of knowledge. So that means when as the absence of knowledge, it means that no one has studied it at all. So there has not been any single study that has looked at that particular thing. That means that any data that you have that's relevant is fine because there is no knowledge. It's no knowledge at all. And so any data that you show will be something new. The second one, and that's where I overlap a little bit, is a weak or limited understanding. And that means that there would be some, it might be using maybe week methods. It might be using maybe one or two types of proteins rather than the whole range that you are interested in. If you have results that can add kind of strengthened the understanding than that type of knowledge would be great to be adults here. Secondly, Thirdly, even is a scholarly disagreement. And that means that there's some, some sort of statement out there or some sort of a saw out there. But not every academic agrees with. And so this would be a bit of an argument. And so what you're doing here is you're trying to argue for, we're trying to argue against something. So think about your data that you have and think about the disagreement there is out there in the literature for your particular topic. And where does your research full? Are you trying to say that this interaction does happen actually, and here's my days to prove it or agency, it doesn't happen and hesitates to prove it. And the last one is proving an assumption. So again, into the statement out there as a hypothesis out there that is stating a certain thing, then what bits of your data, which results are going to support assumption that there is out there. And lastly, before we kind of get into the structure of your results section and think about your audience. So who is it that's actually going to be reading? Now if you think about the abstract, the abstract, pretty much I would say most people read the abstract and even if they don't go into the paper itself, they do read the abstract. Whereas the results is a chapter that is not necessarily read by every single person. And here are the four main types of person that will kind of look at your thesis and what they would do with it. Now the first one cylinder has no engagement at all. So they don't look at your results chapter ASL. They purely just kind of look at the abstract, maybe skim through the methods and the no skip straight to the discussion. And they've got no engagement at all. Then you've got someone who's skin Reads, selects sections. So if you're interested in a particular result there, look at that one and then they'll kind of skim back to the discussion may not come back, but they're not looking at it in detail, then you've got an expert or a non-expert in your field or in a subfield. So they might have some idea what's going on. Look at some parts. Some might know really well someone not new at all. So there's that kind of person as well. And then you've got someone who looks at the result thoroughly and really wants to get a good grasp what's going on. So you have this kind of, I guess, from 0, like no interaction really to I guess 100%. And that's what you are thinking about in terms of who you're aiming your results for. So you need to make sure that you're aiming to write your results in a way that every single type of person here would be satisfied with what they're reading. And to be able to do that, you need to give as much detail as possible. Because ultimately you are aiming for this person here to be completely satisfied and for that person to be satisfied. Units include as much detail as possible. There are different ways of including the results within your thesis. There are these main, two main types that I've seen and in particular, when looking at theses or even reports. So you've got this one which is the more traditional type and that's, this is my thesis looks like this. If we are abstracts and that review any methods and materials. And that's the first kind of sections of chapter one, chapter two, this would be chapter one, the lit review, and then chapter to the materials and methods. And then you've got the results. So the results and no money confusion over chapters three, then that will be chapter four, chapter 56, discussion confusion in chapter seven. So for each one of these are 4-5, so 23456, you've got the results and then a bit of a conclusion. And the results are sort of the different, slightly different, but they kind of are consecutive. So you did this thing first, you found out what you want to find out. And that helps lead on to the next kind of set of experiments. And that's the result. And then the next set of experiments, and they're slightly different, maybe you're building on the next ones. So from three to four, you're kinda maybe adding a different, maybe a kind of experiment that you want to build upon the previous one. And so these are overweighted. Whereas the method, the kind of layout you can see over there is a bit different, but it will suit someone who has a different method for each one. So again, you can see where the abstract than the lit review. So that would be sort of chapter one. Then you've got the materials and methods. So this a B, chapter three like that. So you've got materials and methods, the major result, discussion and conclusion. And I've seen it done like this. And it works really well if you're methods of very different, for the most part, this would make the most sense to kind of have your materials and methods and then the results kind of flowing in a clean and nice border. 17. The Results - Drawing Figure + Writing Legends : So the structure. Now, I've shown you one of these for every single chapter so far, and this is the one for the result structure. Four main parts for every bit of results. Firstly, a rationale, a bit of an overview aims. You want to introduce this, what I would like to call a hand-holding section. So it's where you're reminding the reader what it is that you are doing. Why is that you're doing it constantly justifying. The second section is your data. So this is where you actually say right here, speaker one. You want to put the reader towards Figure one. Speaker one. This is what it is, you're describing it, your cross-referencing it with other results as well. That could include your results and say, if you look at the last chapter, this is what we did and now this what we're doing. And you can also very briefly mentioned it, cross-reference other papers, but very briefly. And then limitations, any issue that occurred and your transition. So here kind of linking onto the next bit of results. It seems like it's a lot of detail, but actually, this can be one sentence or two here. These are just your results. And this again can be one sentence or two, so its really isn't that much. But following this layout, you're ensuring that the reader knows what you've done and then can see what you've done and why you've done it. Link to the storyline that you're telling and mentioned this to the next thing before actually writing, you need to make the figures. In a previous lesson, lesson I mentioned Inkscape. And Inkscape is a really nice open platform where you can make your images look professional and look for academic. So here, for example, is just a graph, a bar chart, where you have all the labels that you need. So you need to make sure that you were x-axis labeled your y-axis. Always have the control in the first, the first bar. This first bar should always be your control because that is what you are comparing the other things too. And then this kind of line that you can see here is what you use to show that you're comparing it statistically. So in this case, we're comparing the first one with the third one. And this Asterix means that it is significant and then the colors keeping as well. So if you're having similar graphs for more results, if your control bar is read, make sure the control is red for all the rest of the results. And also do consider colorblindness as well as make sure that you are aware that people don't always see all the colors that are on your, on your sheet of paper. To think about colorblindness as well, you want to try to form your images in a way that's pleasing, in a way that looks clean. So if you have two graphs here, align them. Can you see here how it's less than aligned? Then the same size. And then you've got a Western law here, which is kind of like centered. So you want to have a nice image that looks like it's and it's kind of ready for publishing. I just open nature, look at how they design their images. And that gives you an idea of what is accepted and what sort of best practice in the gold standard in your particular field, in this case as well, I've labeled a, B, and C purely because when you're describing your diagrams and when you're explaining them in your, in your text. Instead of saying Figure one and not necessarily pointing towards the exact image if you're looking at by having figure one a, you can directly, you can direct the reader to this one. Figure 1B would be that one, sigma one c is this one. So once you've done the best savy, save as an image and directly important word, which means that not. Around the Aztecs is not going to move around the, the letters I'm gonna be around. It's now one solid group. And that's if you want to come back to editor, you to come back to it again. Once onward it's bigger, it's a diagram M. And so you can't change any quantity on wet at all, which is, which is really good. It means I just think it's going to stay in its place and it looks professional. And as we clean. And to write the figure legend, you want to use the caption tool. And this was something that I went into detail in the first lesson. Now the title, there's two options for the title. So option number one is to explain the experiment, or option number two is to describe the results. And I'll show you two examples in a second. So you're either going to explain what the experiment is. So you're gonna say something like western blot for protein depletion for example. So it's not saying anything is just saying this is the Western blot to show proton depletion. Or you can describe the result and you can say something like IQ gap, which is a protein, is significantly depleted and often knockdown, which says what the result actually is. So it really depends but do kinda stay consistent if you're using the explanation title, type, use that consistently. If you're describing the result, trying to use that consistently as well just to the reader expects to constantly see the same type of. And Title II is an outbreak down a, B, and C to the point where you don't necessarily have to go into the texts, understand anymore. And the DES helps should really be in that sort of caption. So then you have ape and two brackets and then you describe it. So you'd say everything that's in a, all the detail that's in a, and that includes p-values. So we said that that's significant Asterix there. So what's the p-value? If the p-value is less than 0.05, you need to write down what is other descriptions. So for example, the scale bar. In this case we don't have one. But I'll show you an image. If you have a diagram, man got landscape scale bar. What sizes that scale bar? What's the width of that? So, what does that scale bar translates to? Free after image that needs to be there as well. That is exactly where the reader's going to look for a NFS not there, doesn't look very good what the colors are. So there's different colors or arrows. You need to explain that what they are and that should all be in this description over here is a, here is an example of a really good figure legend. So here is a graph. You can see that this is the control and read and hear the knock down. So the protein has been deleted. So inherits full, so it's one and abundance is one, so it's like a 100%. Then now you can see it says a lot lower, 10%, that's like 20% and that's like 30%. So it's been deleted and I've kept the colors consistent. So all throughout the thesis, the control is always in red, that proteins always in purple, that one's always yellow, et cetera. You can see the font sizes. The same font size between a and B is the same. I've kept the font itself the same. I think I did use Arial, so nice and clean, easy to read. The labels are on nice label, so you've got your, your x-axis here. That's what they are. They're empty cell lines. And then this is the y axis here, which is the abundance. And then again, for all the graphs in the future and kept the same kind of scale as well going up in 0.2. And then here you've got all the labels possible. So you've got the protein names here. You've got the size of the protein here. You've got the protein antibody that's been used up ahead. So it's really nice and clean and it's clear, it's concise, precise. There's no need for anyone to have to go into the text to try to find out more detail. Everything can be seen and nice and neatly is also aligned to the a and the b is on the same line. And these are really minor details. But if I was to show you what it looks like when it's not aligned, it doesn't quite messy. Can you imagine if the B was like down here now Scotia fall down, it looks really messy. So just having those minor thing consistently done your pieces makes a big difference. And then I've gone into more detail. So you can either use this style here. So you can see, I've, I've done is I've use a comma or you can use kind of brackets. It really doesn't matter, or you can just kind of have in bold or something, doesn't mean that. Again, consistency is key. For every single legend in your thesis, you use either this one or that one. Just stay consistent. It really doesn't matter which one you use. For a I've said this is what it is. I've given percentages. So exactly how much it is, exactly what the exact percentages, No, there's no kind of approximation at this point. These are your results. It has to be exact. In the discussion. The discussion is a place where you kind of use more conversational language and it's where you kind of take the numbers out of your, your discussion. But in the results, it's very heavy if you, if you're piece of numbers. So you include everything here. I want to highlight with this image that you really want to point the reader towards what it is that you want them to see. So can you see here that I've shown them which line I went to follow. So I wanted to look at that particular filament because that's where the arrows are. In this case, I will have that one there, right there. What happens if you don't do that is that you are hoping that the reader looks at the white one. This square has been enlarged to give this square. So that's how I'm sharing that. And again, I didn't have to put this panel. I could've just kept the last panel, but I'm not showing the bigger picture. And this is a very nice way of showing your results. If you have sort of a large data set where you want to kind of highlight small part. You can always do something like this. Show which parts of a say you're looking at an expanded and it just means that the examiners as well, they're not going to ask me Can I see exactly which behalf? So I've given all the detail that it one, you're less likely to come back with too many edits. Legends for table are written at the top because you read from the top of a table and you read it downwards. If you use this tool and then you select on the table and it automatically puts out. Anyway. So just be aware of that. And if it doesn't. 18. The Results - Describing Data Effectively: Okay, so we're going to start to go through each one of these sections to discuss exactly what should be included in them. So we're gonna start off with the first of which is the rationality overview or the aims. And this is the rationale performing the experiment. So it's repeated for what you've said previously. So the terms and the language that you use, the sentences that you use can just be taken from the methods or from the literature review. If you've already written it previously, it doesn't have to be anything new or novel. It's just a matter of kind of handholding and echoing what you've said previously for the reader to remember what it is that you're doing. And this can include either findings and other research studies. So this study did this. And so what we're doing is we're building on it by doing this. The overall aim of the research projects or what's your aim? That could be a sentence that you include their specific research problem for this, for this specific section, if you're doing maybe a more broken down Results section, that first sentence or two can be of a specific sentence. Maybe the methods that we use. So if you're using a particular method, you can say this is the method that I'm using and give a quick kind of justification as to why and how it's going to help you with your hypothesis or your prediction. And so I predict that by doing this, this is going to happen. I think a combination of them works quite well, saying what the method is and reminding the person, the previous work and what you're building on. And then kinda what you predict a bit of a combination of this works really, really well. This is the first, this is how long mine was. And then from here, you then have the results. So after this you have the result and there's not much text after that. It's just kind of result, a quick description result description. But this is the first statement that I made. So I'm going to quickly highlight some sections that I think are applicable when can kinda be transferred into really any field. The first statement here, why I say to investigate, so I'm giving a bit of a intention. So what's I'm doing? What's the aim to investigate? I examined how? So? I examined how and thus justifying where is that I'm doing. I'm explaining what it is that I'm doing. And then I've given a few sentences sort of recapping the literature. So there are many candidate proteins identified, however, little is known. So I'm kind of revisiting that gap just in case the reader forgot what the gap was or needs a reminder. That's what the gap is. Little is known about their mechanism of action and how much they contribute. So, so far stated the aims, stated sort of how I'm doing that. And then gone back to revisit what B, what would the gap is, then I'm justifying. Why is that I'm using this particular approach. Well, here is justification, is a good reporter of the effect because the cortex has this great technique. So again, I'm justifying, which I've done so much, especially in the methods section of constant justifying what it is that you're doing. Then I'm seeing based on previous works, this is a really good term that you can use even for your own report. Definitely should be should be somewhere based on previous work. And then I referenced. So here's someone from my lab who might work with kinda based on, then I said I hypothesize. So. I've sent based on previous work, this is what happened and now I'm hypothesizing what I think's going to happen to mine. Because you kind of, even though obviously, you know what the result is, you know, what's, what's found when you, you know, at this point, when you've written this, you've done the experiments. But you're using past tense to think about and to kind of show the reader that this was your previous thoughts. And then once you actually start sorts of why the results, you'll use present tense to show that what is what you're doing now. And then I said that I directed my focus. That's my initial focus, and this is the first results chatter. So I directed my initial focus towards this. And here are the protons that I, I, I initially looked up and then I referred to previously researcher Table 3.1. This is Chapter five to Table three isn't in Chapter three. So I'm referred to previous research. Then I'm starting to show the results. To this aim against is a really nice term I've mentioned before to this aim, I like that phrase. I generated this and this is what I did. And again, you can see is the first time I've actually used first-person as well. Over here. It's now why I'm doing this is now my work. So I generated this and then there are verified number into the detail. You've got your aim here. Then you've got your sort of method here. So I'm saying that I'm using it, used NEP, then I've got the gap here. Then I'm justifying. So right over here, I'm justifying the method. Then I'm basing on previous work. So this is prior work. You then make sure that you've referenced it. Then I'm saying I directed my initial focus and I'm talking about this particular chapter. So that's Chapter five. That's this particular focus. Given the details, then I've referenced another work. But in this chapter, in this, sorry, in this thesis, this is a reference for a different paper. This is the reference for this thesis. Then I'm starting with the aim, and I'm starting with Chapter five results. Now with the next, next section of writing. And, and I'm pointing the reader towards the next kind of part of the results after there. So just be sort of, here's the next image has an X figure here, the next ones, here's this, here's that. This is sort of going back and just Reese kind of rephrasing what you've said. All these sentences can be found previously. This is almost a copy and paste of wife said in other sections, the whole point of this is it's to occur. So you're just kind of saying the same thing again. And you'll say again later and again later. And thus this first section. So some phrases that you might want to use. Some of these. So as previously mentioned, I mentioned that one, this is a really good one because it kind of makes you, that forces you to say something from other people's work. So as previously mentioned, at that point you're, you're thinking what has been previously mentioned. So it's a good one to kind of push you towards that. Another way of saying the hypothesis. This is what we think with the intention to. It's another way of just saying aim has quite a nice one as well, like that one. Just my aim here. I think it really, it really is up to you if you want to use a Wii by saying, you know, we did this, we did that for I in your thesis, in your own thesis, I would use I, your own work worth in a paper that consists of more than one person, most papers contained Blackberry 8910 people. You wouldn't say I you've seen because it's a, it's a group effort. Whereas in your thesis, definitely sector first-person introduce, we've kind of given an overview if given our aims were to move on to actual data. So this is going to be your graph, your table, your figure, whatever you, whatever data means to you, whatever that result from S to u that will go into the next bit. You are essentially reporting your data and you're comparing it to other studies and other previous chances. I mentioned many times it's not a discussion and this is the key defining thing to remember. The results chapter is not a discussion. He, I've said that this is what's reported in the past. So here I've referred to another paper referred to on the paved paths. It is reported that this happens, this interacts with this. And for that reason I decided to examine this. I've given an aim. So this is a bit of a kind of ten millimeter what's happening? Then I've shared my data. Okay, so let's just say it was a graph, whatever. Show my data. Then after I show my data, I'm just saying a quick brief statement. Contrary to both predictions, this had a phenotype associated with large blebs. So in the past, I've said that it will be small or something different and then arm things consciously breadth predictions. So I'm just giving you a quick statement and saying is different what I expected. That's that that I moved on as much of a discussion that you can include. But that's enough to intrigue the reader and tell them that you know that something's different and something unexpected. And you wanna find out more. You go to the discussion section. So number one, pointing the reader towards your work, his figure one, go and take a look at it. Here's what I kind of expect his day to take a look, then this is what I expected. It's contrary, similar to I expected. It's the same f naught. That's all you need to mention. And then you move onto the next thing to put in the reader towards due to data. Figure one illustrates, shows what I like to do and I think it's quite nice is to change up the way that you use. So instead of using Figure one shows, show, show shows for every single figure of your thesis, change it up. So one figure, one shows the other one illustrates the argon. It displays all the old differently warming quite similar things you can say as seen in figure once. Let's say we want to use a scene. So as seen in Figure one, you can say this protein does this business, whatever. And what can be seen in Figure one, you can use any of those terms. Again, there are so many different words that you can include here. Just stick those into synonyms. And you can find a range of other tabs that you can use, mix and match. I found that when I mix and match my language, it made my academic, kind of made me sound more academic because it means that ACO kind of wider vocabulary as well. And then here are some language to cross-reference other results that can be your own other chapters or it can be other people's results. And here's some language that you can use. So as predicted by, as expected from, as supported by Amun here you can either use a reference, so unnatural, a reference from another person's work, or you can kind of cross reference to another section of your, one of the chatter of your own thesis. I quite like this one so inline with because what they do is they help you to build associations. So leading up to the discussion, but really not a discussion, they help you to correlate your own work. They help you to make connections that help us to build patterns without actually discussing very much. 19. The Results - How to Address Limitations: And now moving on to the limitations. Now limitations is a section where people usually think that it means that you have not done the right thing. Or it means that you're not a great academic or great recession, but actually stating any problems in the results. Any issue that might have occurred during your experiments or period, or referring even to the methods or even the analysis. Now, this can be, you know, it's not necessarily always your fault. When limitations occur. Limitations always occur. They happen to the best of scientists, best researchers. And so it's definitely not something that is a reflection of how good your paper is. Needs to two things. Firstly, to state the reasons why. So what is the limitation and the limitation occur? And many needs offer a solution. So it's really the key thing. And I think the reason why limitations on not a bad thing is because you're not just saying this is what happened in the US. There's nothing you can do about it, but actually, this is what we can do. And the submission can be as simple as a next time. We will do this, that we should have done this time. Or it can be if we had more time, which means that all I needed was more time. So the solution doesn't necessarily mean you have to go and kind of find a good reason for how to improve on something. It just means that you've thought about how you do it better next time said that I expect to see a change. This is what you read about, I guess a bit of a hypothesis this way expected. And I've given a reason why. So this is the way this is the why things went wrong. So I think it went wrong because it has a short life span. And then giving an I'm sort of minimizing, minimizing the severity. And now I am giving a bit of a positive spin, some saying to validate it. So help your positive outlook. It's own experiments at once. So that means straightaway, I am saying that this is what I'm going to do next. So here we can see hypothesis why expected what happened. So give a reason why. I'm just in case your reader isn't familiar with this particular chemical, they might not know that inhibit this inhibitor does this or it has a short half-life. And so this is why I've minimized the issue, may have had an impact, it might not have. This is just what the result is. Then I'm going to say, well, I want to do next. So it's own experimented on once and I couldn't even expand on asset because of a lack of time. And that is why it was circular because of lack of time is only experimented once we'd have to go into too much detail. And so therefore we've acquired validating by repeating as I've said, I'm gonna do again. So I'll give you a reason why in second. And here are some phrases that you might want to use for this. And remember, minimize the problem, emphasize the positive, suggest why, and suggest an alternative approach. Here are some issues. So these terms here shows that the minimal issue, even if it is a huge issue for your research and I'm sure other time was probably really stressful. Why isn't this thing working? Was things like going to plan. But actually in your thesis you have, you don't go into that detail. All you need to say and your thesis is that it's often little significance in elderly care and it's unimportant. It's somewhat disappointing. So obviously a time crying, but it's someone's acquainting, then the reason for this may have been so this, this term make is they call it a hedging, hedging word. So it's called It's called a hedging term. It shows a certain level of uncertainty. It shows that you are not a 100% sure that that's the reason why I'm not absolutely fine. Because if he said this, The reason for this is that then you're saying that the reason for your results not being as you expected is definitely because of this. But usually in academia we don't usually say is unless you nervous for sure, I'm anytime you actually don't know the temperature at the time of day. It could be the cells that could could be whatever it is that you're, you're looking at. There's so many variables that could cause the result you have. So here he said the reason for this may have been this is a really strong one. So here this is phrase here. It's beyond the scope of this study. And what that means is in this particular study in his paper in and support, I don't have the capacity and that could be used to time, it could be used to finance, can be used to understanding. It's just not part of your actual research projects itself is not. It's beyond the scope. And that's a nice kind of phrase to use when you think of a limitation that is impacting your work. But you read or have a bit of a reason of an genuine reason why didn't go down the avenue. So it's kind of beyond the scope of the study. And it usually tends to kind of read. It doesn't really ask much often. When you've seen that you kind of just think, okay, fine. You know, bigger than what we're looking at. So actually minimizing your, you're minimizing the problem you're saying. It's difficult to maintain. And actually you, what you're doing is you're, you're taking away responsibility by saying something like this. It's unexpected and it's unavoidable. So this, these terms here, unavoidable, unpredicted. You're taking away responsibility. They're saying their responsibility isn't mine. It's unavoidable issue. I couldn't control the problem. So that's a limitation. Now, you may have a limitation for every single result you have. Hopefully not because that's that would mean that things don't go to plan. But for the most part, limitations might or might not be included. For, for a major result where there are certain things that you could on better. That's fine. But for every single results, there may not be a limitation and mass ok. But there does need to be a transition on to the next result. A transition just helps the story remember what kind of reassuring you're going from the first result. You're then doing the next thing based on the previous event. Doing next is obvious the previous and keep on going. You're telling a story. Now this can just be a sentence, it could just be just one brief statement, seeing what it is you're doing next or the reason why you're leading. And the next result. Or it could be a future implication of the results. If you, at the end of a section and in the next chapter, it has its own introduction. Then you could just state what the implications of the results. And especially if it's something that can be applied in society or in clinics or pharmaceuticals for example. How can these results be applied in the world? In this section, you want to think about how to build relationships between variables that you're looking at. It doesn't have to be, even if it's outside of science, it can be any variable that you're looking at. And he was all you're looking at, going to build a relationship. And also to briefly interprets it is apparent that this is an important part of my, my, my process. And so therefore, this a bit more potentially suggest competition twice. It maybe speculate that attributed to them. They're very, they're words are very heavy. They allow you to have a couple of words following and, and that will give enough information where you don't have to discuss it any further. It's a palettes or evidence to suggest that this protein's important. Postal, which, which basically says that I've got a lot of data, as you saw in my results to suggest that it's important. And then I'll discuss later, start off real rationale. And that can be about paragraphs. Especially if it's passing off at kind of the main section of a new results chapter. That will be quite chunky section where you're repeating and you're echoing and ask can the keyword that you want to think about? When we think about the word echo, You're repeating what it is that you've said previously to handhold and show the reader what it is that you are going to be doing next. Then you're showing your data and you're describing, you're pointing towards your data. So here you really want to point the reader towards it. You're pointing towards your results and then you limitation. So this can or cannot be included if necessary for about one sentence. And then you transition is also about one-sentence. So in total for every bit of result, but you show, you have definitely your data, a bit of texts, couple of lines, maybe a sentence and another sentence including them, tensions and the transition. I thought it would be interesting to include what to avoid. Because when you know what to avoid, it really makes a difference in the quality of your results. Discuss results at all. And I mentioned this so much throughout this lesson. Never discussion results you results should be purely descriptive. And there shouldn't be any interpretation or any discussion at all. The most that you want to do is give a little bit of background information as you madam previously or you want to kind of refer to a Paypal to if necessary, to just briefly say what's going on and there shouldn't be any discussion. So Discussion means to go into depth and say the why, the how, and the what you're just saying. This is what it says here. These are my results and it's similar to this or dissimilar to I expected, and that's it. You don't want to also add any background information shouldn't be anything new in your results. If there is new information that meets me to go back to your literature review and revise it because clearly there's information that you've missed out. The reader should have all the background knowledge from MIT review. And here it's just a matter of repeating it or giving them information that they need to know for that particular, that particular result, there shouldn't be anything new. So think about that when you're writing. You want to not ignore negative results. So if you have a result that shows that something didn't happen as expected, don't just ignore that and think that's not a good result. By ignoring negative results, you're actually getting rid of data that could show something significant. And as an academic, you want to be very transparent. You wanna make sure that you're showing things that went on other spectrum, also things that didn't. Negative results are still results. So don't ignore them, just give an explanation for them and make sure that you are able to describe and explain what happened later. Don't be vague as well. See your results for how mentioned earlier needs to really try to hit that target market. That last person that wants to know all the detail and need to be able to know that detail so to be sure that you are as detailed as possible. This is important for the results chapter as being a very transparent, very clear, concise, precise chapter. Later on in the discussion, that's where you take way. You, Dennis mentioned mulberry N23. You didn't have mentioned P values at all. That's just purely for your results chapter. And then lastly, repetition. If you've shown a result once, that's it, you don't have to show them again, even if it relates to a later results. Just point towards their cross-references. Say, look at Figure 2.3. And then based on that here is what we're showing in this figure. Now that you've written your results and now you've kinda compiled them. You want to move on to your discussion. And your discussion is as happens a chapter where you are interpreting and evaluating. And we go into that debt and fitting that gap place-based whether literature reviews lacking, here's where you actually want to discuss it and add value to that literature. 20. The Discussion - The Sentence Model: Okay, so last but definitely, definitely not least is the discussion and the conclusion chapter. Now, this can either be one chapter. Sometimes people tend to include the conclusion as a short paragraph at the end of the discussion. Some people like to have a separate conclusion chapter, but nevertheless discussion and conclusion. Other last thing that you want to do when writing your thesis, the results should never include any discussion. So you've been desperately waiting to discuss those results and explain exactly what's been going on. And this is where you get the chance to do that in our discussion. Now remember, we're telling a story. You want to persuasively unfold from the introductions of formule nature view. You've shown what the GFP isn't knowledge. You're unfolding by saying this is how I'm gonna do it and this is what I'm using to do it. You then go to the results, you illustrate your findings. Here are the results. Here's what I found based on the methods, based on my, my, my knowledge gap. And then you want to make conversation. And this is a discussion section, and here is where you want to be as persuasive as possible. Your results should do the talking. But here's where you want to use language, where his way when you use language and conversational English to discuss and persuade the reader that actually you have found this thing, identified something new. But the reader can really grasp and be satisfied with through your discussion. So functions of a discussion chapter. So essentially you identifying key findings, you interpreting them meaning in relation to how they relate to resolve the research questions. So what does that mean? And this discussion chapter is going to identify the key findings. So for me, results that you've just written previously, you're going to identify the key parts that fill that gap, Dayton, your major findings. And through stating your major findings and trying to be as precise as possible and as unambiguous as possible, and also scientific. So you can be scientific even if you're not in the science fields, scientific just means having a certain amount of rigor and a certain amount of accuracy when stating your findings was a comparative literature. So here's where you really want to be confident that you understand where your research sits within the literature. Implications. What is the wider context? How can we actually apply this research? And what are the implications? Limitations. Here you can kind of expand on those limitations that you might have mentioned earlier. Last year conclusion. So first and foremost, you want to think about your subheadings. So here you have a couple of options for subheadings. Now, you want to think about how you want, you want to tell that story. What is the storyline that you want to run through your discussion? So you can either ask a question, and this is actually my discussion. I only had three sub-headings. The first was the outline. So here's where I summarize. And this has a couple of pages, about four pages. Here's where I've summarized the results. So in the best way possible, I summarize what I found amusing conversational English and academic language. Then I asked two questions, which are the questions that were my research question. And I think this is quite a nice way of doing it purely because you're directly answering the question. And it means that you stay on track. It means that you know that what you're going to be answering is a direct answer for the questions that you're actually looking at. It helps you stay on track a little bit. Through these two questions, I was able to take all the results or different types of methods and put them into the story and make them interact and communicate in a way that could answer the question best. And I've put all the results together so that the reader really didn't have to sift through the research and sifted through the results, understand how I found and how it's able to produce what I did. Second way is by mentioning key results. So one Subheading could be deafness. One regulates the activity of MPS, ME acts and vortex. So that could be one subheading. So if thousands of heading and then underneath that, I'll discuss that particular topic. And that's quite nice as well because it means that the reader, when kind of goes through your discussion, can see what the main topics is that you are going to be discussing, works quite well, is quite nice. Or you could do it thirdly, topic based. So not necessarily a question or a key result, but this is the subject that's going to be discussed in this particular section. That works best as well. It's nice and depends on really. I mean, all of these depend on what works best for you. I guess depends on what story you want to tell as well, how explicit you want to be. But I really see it done very often purely because I think you have to be very solid and in a way that you want to describe and the way you want to explain and evaluate your results. And, and my question was quite distinct. So that, that makes sense. But for the most part I would say that's people tend to use this style of Subheading. But one thing that you can do if you want to test that out, you start subheading, see how it works. And there may be uses some heading and see which one looks and works best. I also find that using a cell subheading works quite well on posters too. So if you are doing a research poster base on your, on your work, if you were to have subheadings, instead of having statements like your methods and results, instead you can have subheadings of what did we find that new, something like that. That kinda subheading means that the reader knows exactly what they're going to be finding in that particular paragraph. Giving you a bit of a breakdown to help you identify how to write and what to include in each different section. So first, you ought to declare your key results and we iterate the research question. So again, here we are kind of, I mean, we can use this word here again. We're doing an eco where, where just repeating what are key results are and what the research question is just to remind the reader what it is that we're going to be discussing. You then want to go into more detail and respond to the gut in literature. So don't forget, that is what you're trying to feel. You're trying to put us up into this place. So respond to it, connects with other published work. Submit to be able to respond to it, you need to be able to say, this was out there. This is how I fit in, this is how my work fits in implications and feature recommendations. So quite similar to the previous results section or to think about implications. But obviously you maybe goods episode that pit and any issue with the design of your method or your results. There definitely should be something I would it more as well. But that can be either power of offer them itself or it could be a few lines that you add at the end of your sort of discussion, if, if that's necessary. And then you want to conclude, I'm going to increase the conclusion as possible discussion purely because and we'll talk about later. It's quite short. It shouldn't be more than a few lines or a paragraph. So doesn't really need its own chapter. But if you do feel like you want to break off and have its own chapter, and just feel free to do the exact same description. But then an assistant chapter. 21. The Discussion - Evaluating the Research Effectively: Firstly, you have to declare your key results so to be able to do that, state the major findings. So don't forget this word major. You'll have minor findings as well. You have findings that are interesting. But don't we add to your research question in a, in a, in a major way. So here stating only your major findings. If there's only one or two things, it's absolutely fine to repeat the research question and directly attempt to answer it. So there and then in your discussion, that should be somewhere. You've said this'll my question is and this is what we found. And this is kind of where we stand with it. To continue with the previous results section. So don't forget your story. Remember that when you're writing, I think we tend to forget when you're writing a thesis, even though you probably like six months and a reader is reading over maybe a couple of minutes, a couple of hours, or a couple of days though, you want to ensure that they can follow it and kind of follow it in a way that they don't think it's been broken down too much. And so when they're reading the results, they read the results, they are in assessment mindset. It looks at results they understand. They have this question that they're trying to answer in their head. Transducers going on and trying to kind of put things together your reader then, once it goes to the discussion section and then try to find answers to those questions. So think about continuity. Think about your reader and how they're going to meet and try to answer and be as, as kind of help us possible in that sense. You also want to ensure that you are using past tense. And this is because even though you've written this altogether, when you're declaring your kind of key results and what your research question was, You're thinking about it in the past that this is what I hypothesized. This is what we thought. This is what we did. I'm not sort of past him and this is what we found. Whereas later on when you're discussing the results a bit more, you want to use present tense and say This means that. And you're kind of in the present day. So think about tenths. Tenth makes a big difference. If you're unsure about what difference it does make, look back in other papers and try to identify tenths. So just go through the paper and look at tense alone. And you'll see that when they first took about things, they initially start from past tense. And it's kind of like this is the past. This is what we thought is what we did. And then when they talk about the next flooring, the results but more and they're discussing their results and the conclusion. They use present tense. And I've could have just taken out the words I think, and senses I think that we stand down can be applied in any field. And so I've given you every detail, but in a bareback on information given a reference, then I said, I expected the depletion. So I've given you my hypothesis. So this is what I expect it to happen. And he said, I've kind of given some information before to remind the reader what the literature says. So this is a reminder and it's just copied and pasted from my introduction, my literature review. Then I said that I expected this to happen in these particular experiments. So these are the experiments that I did. And then I've said that depletion and I'll give me actual results. This is what actually happened. And then I've given the results and the kind of image, whether it can go to look at that. I also said use the word significantly increased. However, I haven't used any particular values and that's where you need to think about how you're describing your results in the discussion is my expectation. So this is my hypothesis. This is why expected to happen. This is the method that I use in this really important, especially if you've used like a number of different approaches. You want to remind the reader which one it is that you are going through. You know which one it is that you're discussing because different approaches might, might have different results. And then I've given actual results, I've kind of detailed in a way where it's different to the results. So if you look and you compare your results section where you've written about this, the results would be purely descriptive. Take a temporary five. This is what it shows. Whereas here you're given the details, if you remember, I didn't say the blebs size like the difference in websites. I just said that there had changed. Whereas here I am saying that gave rise to small and then I'm saying gave rise to small blebs and then later on I sort of gave Western large blebs. And I'm actually given the detail here, similar to depletion of this and I have given a cross-reference. So start off your hypothesis. What it is that you expected some detail. Here's algebra. So detail from the lit review. Detailed hypothesis metadata I kind of was using to identify, to identify this and investigate this and then the actual result but in depth. So this is not just result, the way that you'd have it in the results section, but actually in depth, then I've said significantly increase. So you can see I've got no data in terms of figures or numbers. So I'm just cross-referencing. I'm not actually including any figures or any numbers is just the macula. Here's the habit is going check and I, if you want to phrases these results or their results show in the k illustrate. Got a whole lot. And again, these terms just suggest they show uncertainty. And that's not a bad thing. It just means that you're not a 100% sure that that is what caused there or that's what the results show. It's not a bad thing. It's just a matter of academic language really. We use that sort of hedging language where you're, you're, you know, a 100% sure we're showing, which is absolutely fine, that's academia. So maybe on the second section is your responding to the literature. And you're connecting with other. Published work. So although you've done it a little bit in the beginning, kind of mentioned some literature. As you saw, there wasn't really a comparison of the results itself. So as you saw previously Those discussion and there's some detail on the previous and review and I have given some information, but I hadn't actually compared my own results and put my own results into the literature and found that gap. Whereas now you do want to do that. And the reason for that is to find similarities or contrasts with other studies or to expand or to confirm ideas. Don't forget that when you're looking at a research question, you want to find something, you're trying to identify what that gap is. Are you can you transfer correlated on the studies? I shouldn't expand. I just said this is the same as different. There's no work done at all. So everything you've done is new. What is it that your question is trying to answer? Sure it clear when you're referring to findings in your study, when your friends are findings from other studies. So again, in this section in the discussion, you're going to have a lot of references for different papers, different results. Make sure that you're really clear thing we found in figure x we saw and the national law school work or when your friends, other studies. So this paper showed this. So make sure you're always, always referencing. And I guess that comes back down to making sure you've gotta have good referencing manager and to be able to do that. So here's some texts that does this quite well. But again, no numerical values that leads up to the thesis is gonna find out how they want to find out how significant it is. They can go to the results and find out the exact p-values and leave them for the results section. It's consistent with its potential role in. And so it's consistent, which means it lead to a decrease in this. And that's consistent which means in a way that saying it's what I expected and it's the same as what we think might happen in literature. Then this depletion, which is another protein, also lead to decrease. And that's consistent with so again, I've used consistent with twice and then are given a previous study. As suggested by a previous study, I've given a result using general kind of conversational language. I've then said what I've kind of expected, so my expectation. So what say did it meet it or not? So does your result meet those expectations? Yes or No? It's fine if it doesn't. But that needs to be clear. And then I said this is also consistent. And I've kind of given a bit of some depth. This is now the discussion. So this is now saying it's a pretend as a potential role. So I'm now starting to discuss. And then I said as suggested by a previous study and non placing this work into the literature. So now someone that is interested in myths might say, OK, let's see what this person's done, gone, it goes into that paper and then tries to link the work together. The methods are slightly different. They would definitely slightly different. But the result is similar as suggested by a previous study. I would say even more literature. So keep adding literature. You want to add more literature and replace your work within your field. How does your work fit in Mitchell it shut and then you can kind of discuss a little bit. And then some more literature. Initially really, this section should really be Misha heavy. As it is a discussion you're placing your work within the current findings to hear some vocabulary phrases that you might want to use so your results, your approach of study. And then here are some ways of comparing. Here are some comparative terms. And then at the end of that you want to reference, so its in-line with what has been seen in this study or in disagreement with a previous study. Or you can even reference your own work so it's consistent with what we reported in a previous chapter and then you can link that. So these are really good terms to read have push you towards ensuring that you are comparing your work to the literature was you're responding to that gap and her some more terms as well. It's significantly different to significantly different. Doesn't necessarily mean statistically significant, just means that it's very different to this point. You should be the expert in your own results and what they mean, how they can relate to the literature. So you should really know which term fits in best to describe how your work. And can we described. 22. The Discussion - Future Recommendations : This is sort of the largest chunk of your work. It would be the responding to the gap and kinda connected or the published work. It then wants took what the implementation. So how does your work and kind of was the positive aspects of your work? How can your work relate to other parts of the mixture? Humans think about general truths or conclusions happened to be applied more generally. So if you are looking at if you're doing a clinical trial for example, and how is that particular result going to be used in a more general, general aspects and, and suggest any other unanswered questions. So for the future recommendations, how could you build upon so the way I think about it is if I were to hire another PhD student on other student after me, what would their projects be? How would they build on my work? So that really helps letting. Oftentimes, when you're thinking about your own work is hotter necessarily. And I think what the next, the next step. But if you were to just give it someone else, what would you want them to do next? What's the most important next step to, to answer the next question? I said that the role of this person remains unclear. So that means we don't know, even though we have all these results. Well, for that particular proteins, I was again five proteins, but this one, we still don't know in order to further work. This is what they would be saying on to understand it more. This is what the federal work would be in detail. This is what the future work can do, would be worthwhile. So it's worthwhile. So it's I'm saying it's a good guess shower for continuing this investigation. So I've said that the world remains unclear, so I wasn't able to fully deduce what it does. And here is where my command, I recommend that more work is done then in the future to confirm this date. And I gave an example of what I wanted to do to confirm this in single fisherman assays. So that's the particulars, some given at a specific example of what to do. And whether your specific or not depends on whether you are confident in what it is that you think you can do next. And like I said, you should really give it. The next step is your project. What would you do if you had another year or two years? How would you build upon it? So here are some more phrases to in the future soon possibly. The results are amazing. Oftentimes that you can use these terms here are kind of really strong. Results are compelling. That means that they're absolutely amazing, compelling the palpalis Juang, they're unique. And make sure that if you say unique, that they are actually unique in that like no one else that we looked at it like that. And they're invaluable. They assist if your results can be used for something else, they assist or they can improve the current kind of information. If you've developed a new method that can assist in building upon the method that we already have me onto the issues with the methodologies, cool design. So these are the issues with your methods. And We've mentioned sort of limitation before, and they're quite similar. Limitations are, like I said, important. It should be directly before the conclusions if your discussion and many limitations and then even conclude silicon, the last, penultimate thing that you have in your thesis when I think about how these flaws impact the validity of your results. Last quite strong statement. And you don't want your results to be seen as invalid because of the issue with the design. If it's a major issue like you're trying to control temperature and the temperature isn't being controlled very well. The whole point of the experiments looking at temperature and how that changes the rate of something. Your whole experiment is put into disappear. Because if you can even control the one variable that your experiments thing than that looks really bad on your results. So you wanna think about how much of an impact that your design or your floor, if it's a major one or even a minor one can have upon your final results and discuss that in your, in your discussion as well. And here is a large paragraph with some limitations. And this is actually from a completely different source. So not my thesis of sources over here to check it out, it's quite a strong limitation paragraph. And firstly, because it actually mentions in the first sentence that several limitations must be noted. And that's one thing that you should always do with limitations and make sure the reader knows that what's coming up is your limitation discussion. So you can say several limitations must be noted or there were a number of limitations that occurred. That we'll make note of. This statement that you're starting off with, ensures that the reader knows what's coming up. And then what they've done is they've listed the limitations. So there's not just one, but actually three. They've said first, the NIH said second, and they've said third, which is him got starting sentence. To open up. The limitations, make sure it's really clear in the first sentence what's coming up. Then you've listed, you've given a reason. So here you want to give a reason. You then want to try to minimize again, you wanna minimize the issue. So however, it's fine and you want to still make sure that your results are reliable. And Mr. valid. Then the second 1, second 1 actually, you know what? Fine. Remains unknown. Maybe it wasn't that big of a deal for that particular experiment, that particular investigation, then the third one again and have given some sorts of future work. So this is quite a nice paragraph. It was, most people are pretty bad, isn't a lot more words. But actually it's quite a short paragraph which very nicely explains all the limitations that there are, gives a reason for them. This one is quite big limitation, but actually didn't impact this one that we don't really unknown publics operate till. And then the third one, again is, has some bias, but we need to kind of verify this. And this is how we're going to do that. So really good. Here are some words, some phrases that you might want to use. So if you feel like you can't just leave it at that and you can't just see it the limitation, then that would be sort of future work. So here are the limitations. But we do need to like, we need to work on it. We need to verify this. Youtube replicates every Sir, Philip fire. 23. Writing a Concise Conclusion: Lastly is looking at the conclusion of your emphasizing your key results. And for this section, you want to think about if the reader members only one or two things, what would they be? Some collision is short. It's either one or two sentences or sort of one paragraph. It should not be a much longer than that. It's a very quick summary. And your final sort of bytes of sort of kind of information for your reader. And so it could be either the most significant findings. If you've got a number of findings, what is the most significant finding? You could include a future study or you can kind of mix up a little bit. You will make sure that your statements are supported by data. So if you've mentioned that conclusion, if you've mentioned in your conclusion, if you've mentioned a point, then you do need to make sure that that data is there in your reports were pieces to back that up. So again, here is a kind of section that I this is my conclusion. That's a couple of sentences. Elizabeth, anymore than that, which is why it makes sense attitude discussion than to have a chapter just fallen for five sentences. So overall, it's a good way of sort of starting off overall and said, this is, I mean, I'm summarizing our, that's it. I'm done. My data strongly supports some, given a really good phrase that strongly supports this as an important activator work and stabilize. I've given a reason. It appears fear copy. So in my case, I've kind of described exactly what happens, a short description in a number of assays. So although I haven't given like all the different methods I've used, because in my particular thesis I had like four or five different methods. So I don't need to say Miss method and that method in a number of different assays. So in all of them, this is what happened and it possibly some unknown. So this is where I'm saying it's unknown a little bit, but it possibly activate some kind of, you know, kind of calming down a bit and then became necessary strongly supports. But there I'm thinking possibly activates some Camino being a bit more kind of cautious, suggesting it may have a role in cross-talk. So here's where I'm getting into the depth a little bit. So if you think of my sort of upside down funnel, the conclusion works a bit like that as well. The beginning part of it was quite general. And men, as I'm going more and more depth and kind of being a bit more cautious. Some saying and ageing over all my data supports it. And then later on and kind of say watch live. Posco activates it. And it suggests the, so much sort of hedging torque here possibly suggests it may have a role. So it within one sentence, I have three words that are very kind of inconclusive and suggestive. So possibly it for four appears to as appears here as well. So I've got the word appears. So I've got the word appears to, I've got suggests. Suggest is overused in academia. I've got May. And I also have possibly. So those are full words that you probably would use a lot when you're writing just because your results and as you know for sure, for certain what they are, what they mean and explain them. And you want to use language that is suggestive and that minimizes sort of the finality of your results. But my data shows they can see that what it means, basically the reason. And they can kind of have a bit of a discussion, a bit of an explanation as to what this possibly means. One starts off with a key results, what is it that you are kinda works were maintained that you found. What's the question that you're trying to answer? So you want to handhold and echo to the reader what it is that you're looking at, then you want to respond to the gut in literature. So what is it that you are trying to fill the gap? What does that, what does that information deficit? Where's that knowledge that you're trying to translate, gain, connects with other published work. Find work that relates to your. They'll always be something that you can relate to and try to find a way of saying that similar corroborates it doesn't integrate with us in disagreement with what is it, how, how do you fit in implications and feature recommendations? How does your work important? And what can you help me build onto his weapon? Future issues with the method and the design. So how is it that your work is limited? Where are the kind of fools wear? Where the shortcomings of your work experience glucose outlook while minimizing responsibility. And then lastly the conclusion was finally emphasize if someone can take away just one or two sentences or watching quite away from your work, what would they be? That's what you want to add, new conclusion, and that is your structure. So if you have just two subheadings, further discussion, you'd just have sort of that layout if you have five bit increases and 05. So it's really just a kind of flow quite nicely to that conclusion. In that end, you should kind of go back to your literary review and ensure that you included all the background knowledge that someone would need to understand your discussion. It's quite difficult for someone to understand everything you've discussed if you haven't given them some background information in the mixture view, ensure that any topics, any main kinda theories that you've discussed in your discussion and your conclusion. They need to be given in more detail in the introduction. So think go back capacity within the session. Go back to the intro. If you haven't listened at all, if you have written it, then think about whether you include all back on knowledge needed to support the discussion. In this chapter. 24. Creating a Strong Working Title: So the absolute final thing but you have to do once you've completed writing your thesis is to choose a title. Now this is the last thing that you should be doing. After you've written your results of these included, you've got your discussion, you know, what the headliner is, is to choose a title. Now the reason why you want to choose a good title is because it's usually the thing that stands out first is read first. It should contain the keyword. It should consist of some sort of idea that's going to be communicated in the research. And it describes the content and the purpose of the paper, and it defines the research study. So by litany your title, a reader should be able to somewhat understand what is coming up and what the main results are. So you want to avoid the following things. You want to avoid long titles with unnecessary words and phrases that you don't really need. So you don't need to say, it's a study to investigate this. Just say what, what it is that you're looking at hearing to say that it's a paper that shows your ELA stuff. They're redundant phrases. They're just wet fillers and get rid of them. You don't need non-specific short titles. So a title that says Child Education and let me say that much. You don't know what they're going to talk about. You don't know what that paper is trying to say is quite broad and it's not very useful at one title. You also don't want over emotive like journalistic language or humor is an academic paper. So it needs to be quite strict and may be quite to the point and formal. So was like amazing and misses the best method ever. And it's unnecessary and it's just overwritten when it's not academic at all, it doesn't attract an academic leader. So to create a working title, like I said, you need to generate this completely at the end. So after you've identified what your storyline is and what your headline point is, that's what you think about the title now thereof or kind of prompt that you might want to base your title on the first of the purpose. So this is the y. So why are you doing this study? So against the background, The second is the scope. So this is sort of a topic and this is another maybe title that you might want to include. It could be a topic based title, the study methods. So this would be your approach. So what is your approach? What is your approach that you're going to be using during this in this paper. Then fourth is the narrative terms. So you're just going to the point. So you're saying exactly what the point is. So it's just the result. It's straightforward. Let's take a look at two of my titles are very different and over the topics are pretty similar to the first one here is example number one. And it's based on the research, the scope than in the control of cortical actin nucleation. There is no result that I didn't tell you what I'm going to say in terms of the final finding. It doesn't say anything in terms of what the unique and finding is. All it does is state what the scope is. The scope is that the cellular control is, the scope is that cellular control photographically nucleation. So all we know is that in this paper there'll be something to do with cortical actin nucleation and how it's controlled. Who we know. Then example number two, it's smaller narrative turn. So you can see it's a bit longer as well. It's still within the required some limits. Where limit, but as the narrative so it's to the point. So spin 90, which is a protein, it associates with these other two proteins to regulate cortical activity creation to the point, that is a summary, a very short summary of the whole paper. If we were to summarize, all the years of research would be that one line. So that protein associates with those two to regulate actin nucleation. And it's just, it's clean and it's to the point, they're very different styles, but they are both for very similar piece of research. So here are the characteristics of an effective title. So the first one is that includes terms that excite and encourage interests. So these would be something to do with the keywords. So if someone were to search for your title using keywords from your field, what would those words be? It identifies the variables and it suggests a relationship. So as you saw in the previous title, you had, if I go backwards, you have proteins, spend 90, you have operative proteins and you have the word associates. So those words there suggests that we have a relationship between those proteins and that's really good against them. Into the first one, it uses key terms in the feed field of study to think about what those terms were. And if you're stuck thinking about what terms were, was the Google search for Joni Mitchell review, what words would you use? Is between five to 15 words. So not too short, but also not too long. It's a question or a decorative statement. So that means it's just saying a point. So it probably might say what the results are. What are your results? Um, and that would be sort of declaring what it is that you want to say. And it also reveals the organization and the content of the paper. So by looking at the title, you should know sort of what's inside, what's to come when I search for some papers just to kind of look at different types of titles just within the stem field, for example. So the first one here you can see is zebrafish mutants have normal hearts and narrative tone. They're saying that zebra fish with this particular mutation have normal hearts. To the point, even with, before we open up this paper, we know that this is a new narrative tone for title. We know what's coming up. Number three and number two, sorry, is structural basis for PhD heating of the two-port domain channel. So here again, it's not really a narrative turn. It, it's not really a result, but as more silver study method or scope. So it could be two, could be three as looking at sort of your methods new scope. So it's more getting kinda see that it's an article of unmoved mover paper. And the last one is a review article. It's looking at animal models for covered 19. So this one is definitely a study methods one. And so here you probably won't get any results for anything. But what you might see. Different study methods, animal models that you can use to study covert 19. And that's a review articles, so there's nothing new. It's just reviewing what's out there and models that you can use a study equivalent 19. So you can really see sort of a different type of titles. They're all good titles. And the reason why I chose natures, because natures in the top journals out there. And so the titles that you might find, there are good examples of titles. So these are all really good. They're short. Sweet. To the point is, are some examples that you might see in the humanities and social sciences where there are the use of subtitles. I rarely see them in stem. I think I did see one at home when I was looking at the nature.com. And they provide additional content. They can identify the method, they can go into some more scope, or they can expand on a quotes. And generally S0 is the initial title colon, and many might see a subtitle and would be one of these four reasons. Let's take a look. The first one, the political ecology of war starts the main title. Then you've got the subheading natural resources and armed conflicts. Now what that's saying is, this is what I'm looking at, but I'm going in some more depth, not looking at natural resources and armed conflict. So if someone wasn't the king for your paper and they were interested in natural resources. They know where to go and may know that that's what it's going to be about them there. Second is investigating ideas and theories. So malignant immersion versus interactivity. One of the ideas we're thinking about virtual reality and this theory methods used, again, you've got your first standout title. And men, the methods are that it's a multivariate analysis research note. So think about whether you want subtitles, like I said, for stem, generally dirt. So again, think about whether it's commonly used in your field, but definitely for humanities and social sciences. It definitely is used just to add some more context as the ideas I presented on generally quite complex, there are theories there. They're the ideas served. Adding that extra bit of depth can help your reader know what it is that you're going to be showing in your paper. So this is probably when the hottest instituted by the title. So in order to help you with that, here's a small task. Write down five key terms that are crucial to describe your study. So if I were to say, if I were to write this down, I'd probably say something like cortex. I would say something like acting. I would say something like nucleation. I was looking at two proteins in particular served for me, I would write those two proteins down. So one of these terms in some sort of order, I would probably mix these up to make, to make my title. And if you look at my PhD title, I think had all of these terms in it. And so do you think about the terms that you are, you think is important and crucial to describe your study. If you were to ask, if you were to give an elevator pitch and you have 30 seconds to describe your work, what words would you have to include? So try to write down five or even ten key terms. Describe your study and then try to mix them up and make it makes some sort of sentence that can summarize your findings. And so this is, like I said, the last thing that you're going to be doing, which is why it's the last lesson here as it's the final, final chapter. And one of the last things that you do to summarize and complete your thesis writing.