Finally, our data describing strong correlation between noise correlation during on-going activity and during auditory stimuli support the idea that distributed groups of interconnected neurons are coactivated during tone stimulation.
Despite the local disorder, large-scale organizing principles do exist. Results Thesis discussion part are "sidelights" should not receive equal weight When presenting the results for the main hypotheses, consider: Are the results of statistical analysis presented?
Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane or desflurane in oxygen. Scientific Style Writing the Discussion The discussion section is a framing section, like the Introduction, which returns to the significance argument set up in your introduction.
Relate your findings to the issues you raised in the introduction. Own interpretations have been included in the discussion. This summary is made only in order to go on to do the real work of finishing off.
It is as Thesis discussion part doing the doctoral research actually taught them nothing and they are the same people at the end as they are at the start. The dynamic produced between organization, leadership and personnel, the theoretical model states, must be approached with careful consideration of key characteristics of the organization and externalities of the industry and market.
So I suggested we try using a matrix. Unanticipated amounts of side effects or pain? Saying what the research shows is related to 3.
Discussion The validity of the research is demonstrated. I know I can work from a spider diagram, but Wendy was still not comfortable.
The introduction of new material is often indicative of someone who has written the introduction of the thesis a long time before they have actually worked out what they want to argue.
Results can take the form of data, hypotheses, models, definitions, formulas, etc. Then discuss the results and indicate whether they meet your expectations. Begin with a restatement of your research question, followed by a statement about whether or not, and how much, your findings "answer" the question.
We started by drawing a table like this: Use each of these points as a prompt to write a short paragraph on why.
The last column is a list of subheads. This may be a more contentious point and variable from discipline to discipline… but in my experience many examiners do expect to see some reflexivity at the end of a long period of time spent thinking, writing and doing research.
The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a difference between ondansetron and droperidol in preventing PONV. Such a model would result in the formation of small subnetworks of highly correlated neurons, partially overlapping in space.
Specifically, at short distances, a minority of the neurons are coupled rather strongly, whereas such coupling is absent at longer distances. Sometimes, like the null hypothesis, talking about the limitations can help you better define the contribution your study has made.
Think beyond replicating your study and overcoming your limitations. If you have unexpected findings, try to interpret them in terms of method, interpretation, even a Thesis discussion part hypothesis; in extreme cases, you may have to rewrite your introduction.
Well, the best way to start in my view is just to write, but perhaps start to write without the specific purpose of the discussion chapter in mind. It thus seems that local heterogeneity is embedded in larger-scale order in A1. These should have been carefully considered before you started your research.
Furthermore, imaging dozens of neurons simultaneously allowed us to unravel temporal interactions between thousands of neuronal pairs as measured by noise correlations. In fact, the precision of tonotopic organization in A1 has been a controversial issue for a few decades and remains unresolved to date9, 34, 35, 36, CRNA Forum ;9 2: This process enabled us to see how some findings from the mud map might fall under multiple themes, which suggested a satisfactory repetition was emerging.
I think we made good progress with a whiteboard in the last meeting and I asked her if I could share what we did with the world, she generously agreed thanks Wendy!When writing a dissertation or thesis, the results and discussion sections can be both the most interesting as well as the most challenging sections to write.
You may choose to write these sections separately, or combine them into a single chapter, depending on your university’s guidelines and. How to write a Discussion chapter for your thesis or dissertation I noticed that the Discussion chapter is one of the hardest to write, especially when you are so close to the results and your head is wrapped up in all the data.
How to Write an Effective Discussion Dean R Hess PhD RRT FAARC Introduction Elements to Include in the Discussion State the Major Findings of the Study The discussion should remain focused on the your data and the patients and/or devices in your study.
If the sub. The discussion section is a framing section, like the Introduction, which returns to the significance argument set up in your introduction.
So reread your introduction carefully before writing the discussion; you will discuss how the hypothesis has been demonstrated by the new research and then show how the field's knowledge has been changed by.
The discussion chapter is the problem child of the thesis. The chapter most likely to provoke fear, uncertainty and doubt. Not everyone writes a chapter called “discussion”, but everyone has to do discussiony bits because, well – that’s where the creative magic of the PhD happens.
The discussion section is often considered the most important part of your research paper because this is where you: (November ): ; Bitchener, John and Helen Basturkmen.
“Perceptions of the Difficulties of Postgraduate L2 Thesis Students Writing the Discussion Section.” Journal of English for This part of the discussion.Download