It's also likely to be the first thing the examiner reads. ======= Date Modified =======Thanks everybody, much appreciated :-) I had also never considered putting the contribution bit in the abstract - D'oh! He said that the examiner shouldn't have to look for anything.
I will now though so thanks for that bit of advice, Bilbo (up) Edit: just seeing your 2nd reply there Sneaks - all I can say is that one of the Profs in my uni told a friend the other day who is absolutely fantastic theoretically (scarily so! Her thoughts are so abstract and her sentences so long, and multi-clausal that he says she won't pass unless she spells it out more. If he is reading your introduction and he still doesn't know what you're going to do that can give him (or her!!
) a negative first impression which can be difficult to change.
Quote From sneaks: Its great for his thesis, but part of me thinks its a bit 'babyish' for mine - I don't really know why, I guess its just not been convention in the ones I've read from people in my department?? You don't need to use cover pages, if that isn't the convention in your field.
Glad to help 8-) The abstract was virtually the last thing I wrote.
But before I wrote it I read Dunleavy's book, and he was very clear that, above all else, you should stress your contribution to knowledge in the abstract. It does look really good when you sum it up like that too. Sneaks, I have an intro section for each chapter, a bit like your hubby's cover page...I don;t really have research questions :$ Maybe I need to find some!and I don't really have an explicit 'contribution to the field section' - I just point out the gap in the literature and say what my thesis is going to cover if you know what I mean contributions - I have a small section in the intro of each chapter that bullet points the contribution of each chapter...In hubby's thesis we've (I mean I here as he's done the actual research and I've told him how to lay it out) really stressed the research questions, in the intro, then each chapter has a cover page - which has 'overview of the chapter', 'contribution to the field' and 'structure of this chapter' and this is all repeated again in the discussion.Its great for his thesis, but part of me thinks its a bit 'babyish' for mine - I don't really know why, I guess its just not been convention in the ones I've read from people in my department?? Quote From Bilbo Baggins: My research questions were in the combined intro/lit review.I then recap the whole lot together at the start of my methodology chapter so that I can say 'to answer these questions, I used these methods'.I will probably recap them again at the start of the conclusion chapter as ' The research set out to find out A, B and C.... My research questions were in the combined intro/lit review.As for research questions, I am going to outline the main one in the intro.I have issues that need to be dealt with before the main question can be answered, and these are highlighted through the literature reivews.Just have a couple of paragraphs at the start covering what you need. Each main chapter had a mini lit review of its own, and a clear statement of its point/questions.Then at the very end of the chapter I would have an equivalent couple of paragraphs summing up the conclusions.