I suppose the whole point of writing a research paper is to write what has already been written. The other day, someone wisely instructed me to tell my reader that my honors project was already written and was in the library--he just has to find it. So much for contributing something original to the greater cause. Before I talk myself any lower, I will remind myself that research papers of the sort I am crafting are also written in hopes of adding new insight or making connections (valid ones, i hope) that were not thought of before.
That off my chest, here's what I am really and truly after:
With our (the human race) current knowledge, what is the best neuropsychological model of hypnosis as used in the treatment of patients with chronic pain?
And every scientist's favorite: What next? or: what more do we need to know? or: where does this knowledge put us in the grand scheme of pain management?
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Questions
After reading my 3 page 'manuscript', my first reader, Dr. Skidmore, writes:
I am also a bit concerned that the focus of your paper keeps changing. While this may have an educational benefit in the sense that you are looking at your topic – hypnosis – from many different angles; it does have the limitation of putting you back at square one again.
And:
It seems you have jumped from overly broad to overly narrow.
And:
Now, before you revise your paper (or write a new draft), the next steps I suggest would be for you to (a) Write your primary research question, and any related secondary questions, (b) obtain scholarly articles that address these questions, and then (c) outline the structure of your paper.
That seems straightforward enough, but not very heartening. Since recieving this feedback yesterday at 5:37 PM I have searched the psych databases for work by the scholars that he has recommended (Herta Flor, John Gruzelier, and Helen Crawford). I found some stuff, but mostly I think I need to go to the library and scour some specific journals. I can't find my student ID card, so I'm going to have a hard time checking stuff out of the library-good thing journals can't be checked out in the first place!
I am also a bit concerned that the focus of your paper keeps changing. While this may have an educational benefit in the sense that you are looking at your topic – hypnosis – from many different angles; it does have the limitation of putting you back at square one again.
And:
It seems you have jumped from overly broad to overly narrow.
And:
Now, before you revise your paper (or write a new draft), the next steps I suggest would be for you to (a) Write your primary research question, and any related secondary questions, (b) obtain scholarly articles that address these questions, and then (c) outline the structure of your paper.
That seems straightforward enough, but not very heartening. Since recieving this feedback yesterday at 5:37 PM I have searched the psych databases for work by the scholars that he has recommended (Herta Flor, John Gruzelier, and Helen Crawford). I found some stuff, but mostly I think I need to go to the library and scour some specific journals. I can't find my student ID card, so I'm going to have a hard time checking stuff out of the library-good thing journals can't be checked out in the first place!
It begins
Welcome to the latest attempt to ignite the learning fire mandated by these people. I have to write my honors thesis before they will let me graduate with my bachelors. I have under 2 months to complete my first draft, and i'm still working on the details of my topic. Yarg. For now, I'm looking at the underlying neurological mechanisms of hypnosis in the treatment of chronic pain. My hope is to come up with a title for my project that is as pretentious and cumbersome as possible. The finished product should have at least one ":". I would welcome all and any of your comments--even if they are of a ridiculing and/or jovial nature (in fact, especially so).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
