Speaker 1: please stop letting your PhD supervisor dictate your project or your thesis topic. The thing is, is that these supervisors tend to choose something that interests them. The topic tends to be related to their current research, and in my experience, they're getting worse and worse at selecting a PhD or thesis topic. They either choose a project that's far too narrow or far too broad, they're not very good at looking at cross-disciplinary stuff, that's what I wanna say. So what you've gotta do is choose your own research project with your supervisor, I think that's very, very important. And the first thing you need to look at is novelty. Novelty is, has this been done before, and is it new? Now don't overthink this, it doesn't have to be amazing, it doesn't have to change the world, it just has to be a little bit new. So, go check out my other video after this video, obviously, where I talk about how to find a research gap, but importantly, it's about finding that thing that no one else has done that contributes to the field. Easier said than done, I know, but there is no shortcut to just reading the literature, the current state of the field, and coming up with your own questions, and being like, I wonder if this has been done, I wonder if this has been done. Trying questions larger. Larger. Trying questions smaller. Oh, a new tiny question. So all of those things need to be considered when choosing the novelty, or looking at the novelty of your research question. The first thing I like to do is use semantic search, so I head over to tools like this. I head over to illicit.com and I ask a research question, and I see what's come up. So, if I've got a question in my mind, like, are aardvarks good at dancing, I can go there and find the aardvark's dancing abilities. Research has shown that certain dance moves can influence perceptions of dancing ability, and that blah blah, so there we are, you can see that further research is needed to determine if aardvarks are good at dancing, so there we are. There is a research gap. It's not an important research gap, and no one wants it in the world, but that's how you do it. Another kind of tool that I can go over to is consensus, and ask the same question, or a similar question. Let's see if, there we are. So, this is the sort of question I'm interested in, apparently, and it's this sort of search that you need to go through over and over again. Start reading papers, review papers in your field. Start looking at very specific questions to see if they've been answered, and then you'll start to build up this kind of sixth sense as to what is new, what is novel, what's interesting, and to be honest with you, these days, a lot of the most novel and interesting questions are found at the interface of different fields, which is why relying solely on your supervisor can be a bit dangerous, because they like to stay in their own little box, and they don't like to go outside of it. I've seen it firsthand. So, that is how you do it. So, let's have a look. Something new, yes. Unique contribution, yes. Research gap, yes. That's what you first need to look at, but that's not the only thing you need to look at. This, arguably, is more important. There's your transition. The second thing to consider about a great research topic is, is it relevant? Does it matter? Who benefits from you answering this research question? One place I like to go when I'm unsure of the current state of a field, or if I just want to get a little bit of inspiration on what's hot, like a hot new topic, because that's what we really want, is I head over to something like SCI News or Science Alert. These are written by science journalists, and journalists have a really great way of framing exciting topics and finding out what is new, current, and interesting to the general population. I'm not saying this is the only way you should select a research topic, but I like my research topic to be at least a little bit interesting to the general population. So, if I go to Science Alert, for example, and I type in bats, then we can see, okay, what sort of stuff is being asked about bats? I can go here. Bats and humans are closer than ever, and the risks have never been. The secret to avoiding the next pandemic. Okay, so now we're looking at bats and pandemics. So, that clearly was interesting to people during COVID, and then we've got huge bats used to walk around in New Zealand, and four limbs. That's interesting. I'll open up that. So, this is where I can find interesting, relevant, new research that the general public are arguably more interested in than something that's really blue sky. Now, I'm not saying that the blue sky research is not important. What I'm saying is this is a great way of finding out if something is relevant to the population at the moment, and it is a really nice way to find out if your research field is going to be valued. Valued by people outside of academia, but also inside of academia. Money flows to where the hot topics are. That's why you see all these researchers trying to mold their research into the latest thing, whether it's 3D printed food, whether or not it's flexible organic photovoltaics like it was years ago. That is why people shift topics, like professors shift topics, because they're finding where the money is. If you find a hot topic that's relevant and is easy to kind of answer the question, why is it important, and who does this benefit, the money starts flowing to you like a river. Oh, I'm getting my mouth money. So, if you want longevity in research after your PhD or thesis, that is something very important to consider. The third thing that's really important is, is it feasible? A lot of the times, PhD supervisors forget that you should actually think about doing this in two or three years, because their career's been going for ages. They're dinosaurs of the academic world. They don't care about one or two years, but you do, because that's all you really have to do your PhD in. Now, you'll think that I just said one or two years as like a slip up. I didn't, because there is so much failure in a PhD that about a year of any PhD is just failure, going backwards, trying things again. So, when you're thinking about feasibility, you need to think, what project can I do in two years? That is really the feasibility marker, because there's so much failure, there's so much wasted time and effort, that if you were to only work on successful things during your PhD, they'd probably only take about one and a half to two years. So, you need to really change that frame of reference and not say, oh, what can I do in like five years or three years? What can you do in two years or three years? That is really the most important question that you've got to answer. So, is it feasible in terms of the data that you can get access to? Are you accessing data or are you creating your own things? If you're creating your own data, have you got access to the equipment and the expertise that you need? You've also got ethics approval. Is it feasible to do your project with all of the paperwork that you have to go through? Consider that before you even start your research project. And then, also, time. Don't choose something that's super narrow that you can do in like a weekend, obviously. That's not a PhD or a thesis. But don't choose something that you think is gonna take 10 years. Your research supervisor is working on stuff that takes 10 years and his PhD students are little tiny steps along the way. What little tiny step can you do in about two years? That's a good rule of thumb. So, play about with the size and scope of the research project. Make it narrow, narrow, narrow, narrow, and then go, oh, that's a bit too narrow. Make it larger, larger, larger, larger, and go, oh, no, I wouldn't be able to do that in two years. And then, somewhere in the middle is the good sweet spot. And remember that every research project fails multiple times and it is about sort of like readjusting your focus and what you're doing. So, don't make it too narrow that when stuff fails, you're just at a dead end and you're like, oh, no, this is terrible, and you've got nowhere to go. You always want options, options, options, options, options. That's the best sort of like scope of a research project. The last thing I want you to know is that these projects aren't made on their own. You shouldn't come up with a research project on your own, sat at the computer. Talk to people, talk to your research supervisor, talk to other people in the field, talk to other PhD students, postdocs in the group that you want to go into. The best research projects have been pressure tested by many, many people before they even started. So, that's why you can't rely on just your supervisor or just you to come up with a good research project. Have it sort of like pressure tested by a few people, ask questions, and then that will help refine the idea and ultimately lead to better foundations for your research thesis or your dissertation. There we are. If you like this video, you should go check out this room. I talk about five tips for choosing a PhD research topic. I think you'll love it. Thank you.