Print

Print


Mandy

Great question. But if this is a PhD I’m worried about this: “the word mechanism confuses some who are unfamiliar with Pawson & co’s version of a Realist Approach”.

If they don’t understand this version of realism, they shouldn’t be examining your PhD. Negotiate with your supervisor to get examiners in the appropriate paradigm, THEN write the thesis for that audience.  

Also, inlcude – up front – a table of definitions. In THIS thesis, I am using the word ‘process’ to mean xxx. In viva, if challenged, refer to relevant table and page (which you will have flagged).  PhD is a game. 

Trisha Greenhalgh

Professor of Primary Care Health Sciences 


 

T: +44 (0)1865 289363 E: [log in to unmask]

www.phc.ox.ac.uk | @OxPrimaryCare | @trishgreenhalgh

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford

New Radcliffe House, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG


From: Mandy McGirr <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards" <[log in to unmask]>, Mandy McGirr <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, 10 August 2015 03:12
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Defining mechanisms as processes? What Realist findings look like? PhD newbie questions

the word mechanism confuses some who are unfamiliar with Pawson & co’s version of a Realist Approach