I need help with the "Implications of your study" in the "discussion" section of MSc Health psychology thesis/dissertation/research project.By this level I should have learned to write a discussion...
I need help with the "Implications of your study" in the "discussion" section of MSc Health psychology thesis/dissertation/research project.
By this level I should have learned to write a discussion section, i know. But I just want to make sure I really am hitting the nail on the head. What I've been doing so far is reiterate my findings and say whether these are supported by previous research or not. That's it. Do i need to go deeper and say why my findings may not have been supported by previous research too? For example, the previous research had a different sample compared to my study....or...the lengths of the studies were different. How can i analyse differences between studies more critically?
Without knowing anything about your study or the other study, it is a little hard to advise you. However, it seems to me that you should be mainly concerned with the “implications of your own study” and not be overly concerned about some other study, regardless of how it compares with your own. You say that you only reiterate your findings and say whether they are supported by previous research or not. But you don’t seem to be dealing with the implications of your findings—possibly because those implications are that the other findings are questionable. It seems that you will have to make some reference to the fact that there are differences between your findings and those of previous research, but instead of saying that previous research doesn’t support your findings, you can say that your findings do not support those of previous research and that therefore the implications of your study are that more research needs to be done. Then you might suggest other possible ways in which the problem might be studied. Don't be too apologetic or defensive. I don't think your are required "to analyze the differences between the studies more critically." That sounds like a red herring. That is how it sounds to me without knowing anything specific about your study or the other studies.