Discussion section: Rough calculation to explain unexpected results

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP












5















Unexpected results were attained in a simulation that point to a possible problem with the dataset. While writing about this in the discussion section, I'd like to elaborate on my explanation for this by presenting a simple calculation that reinforces my interpretation. Is it allowed to do this in a discussion section or should I lay the foundation for this in the method section and then include it in the results?










share|improve this question


























    5















    Unexpected results were attained in a simulation that point to a possible problem with the dataset. While writing about this in the discussion section, I'd like to elaborate on my explanation for this by presenting a simple calculation that reinforces my interpretation. Is it allowed to do this in a discussion section or should I lay the foundation for this in the method section and then include it in the results?










    share|improve this question
























      5












      5








      5








      Unexpected results were attained in a simulation that point to a possible problem with the dataset. While writing about this in the discussion section, I'd like to elaborate on my explanation for this by presenting a simple calculation that reinforces my interpretation. Is it allowed to do this in a discussion section or should I lay the foundation for this in the method section and then include it in the results?










      share|improve this question














      Unexpected results were attained in a simulation that point to a possible problem with the dataset. While writing about this in the discussion section, I'd like to elaborate on my explanation for this by presenting a simple calculation that reinforces my interpretation. Is it allowed to do this in a discussion section or should I lay the foundation for this in the method section and then include it in the results?







      thesis






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Feb 16 at 15:25









      cheesuscheesus

      463




      463




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5














          Generally yes. The purpose of a discussion section is to interpret your results, both in light of what was previously known (hopefully described in the introduction), and with new supporting arguments or hypotheses. A calculation (possibly short or rough) is a good way of providing a supporting argument, and it's quite common to see one in the discussion section of a scientific paper. However, theses are often subject to local rules, some of which may be silly, so make sure to check your institution's style or thesis guide, or check with your advisor whether they have any preferences.






          share|improve this answer























          • This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

            – Buffy
            Feb 16 at 15:52


















          1














          I think it is fine and preferable. This really more "analysis" than "method" at least in the context of the original study design. Also for a reader it makes more sense in that order.



          In general, there is some looseness about the exact configuration of discussion and results. As long as you are organized and show an understandable narrative, I highly doubt you will get someone telling you "that doesn't go in that section". I can look at papers in my field and see differences in how discussion was organized in any issue of the major journals and it is fine, no heads turned.



          See also pages 8-15 of the attached: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf






          share|improve this answer






















            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "415"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125067%2fdiscussion-section-rough-calculation-to-explain-unexpected-results%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            5














            Generally yes. The purpose of a discussion section is to interpret your results, both in light of what was previously known (hopefully described in the introduction), and with new supporting arguments or hypotheses. A calculation (possibly short or rough) is a good way of providing a supporting argument, and it's quite common to see one in the discussion section of a scientific paper. However, theses are often subject to local rules, some of which may be silly, so make sure to check your institution's style or thesis guide, or check with your advisor whether they have any preferences.






            share|improve this answer























            • This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

              – Buffy
              Feb 16 at 15:52















            5














            Generally yes. The purpose of a discussion section is to interpret your results, both in light of what was previously known (hopefully described in the introduction), and with new supporting arguments or hypotheses. A calculation (possibly short or rough) is a good way of providing a supporting argument, and it's quite common to see one in the discussion section of a scientific paper. However, theses are often subject to local rules, some of which may be silly, so make sure to check your institution's style or thesis guide, or check with your advisor whether they have any preferences.






            share|improve this answer























            • This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

              – Buffy
              Feb 16 at 15:52













            5












            5








            5







            Generally yes. The purpose of a discussion section is to interpret your results, both in light of what was previously known (hopefully described in the introduction), and with new supporting arguments or hypotheses. A calculation (possibly short or rough) is a good way of providing a supporting argument, and it's quite common to see one in the discussion section of a scientific paper. However, theses are often subject to local rules, some of which may be silly, so make sure to check your institution's style or thesis guide, or check with your advisor whether they have any preferences.






            share|improve this answer













            Generally yes. The purpose of a discussion section is to interpret your results, both in light of what was previously known (hopefully described in the introduction), and with new supporting arguments or hypotheses. A calculation (possibly short or rough) is a good way of providing a supporting argument, and it's quite common to see one in the discussion section of a scientific paper. However, theses are often subject to local rules, some of which may be silly, so make sure to check your institution's style or thesis guide, or check with your advisor whether they have any preferences.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Feb 16 at 15:48









            AnyonAnyon

            8,16223244




            8,16223244












            • This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

              – Buffy
              Feb 16 at 15:52

















            • This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

              – Buffy
              Feb 16 at 15:52
















            This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

            – Buffy
            Feb 16 at 15:52





            This sounds about right. You should also consider whether you should say something in a Future Work section, as well.

            – Buffy
            Feb 16 at 15:52











            1














            I think it is fine and preferable. This really more "analysis" than "method" at least in the context of the original study design. Also for a reader it makes more sense in that order.



            In general, there is some looseness about the exact configuration of discussion and results. As long as you are organized and show an understandable narrative, I highly doubt you will get someone telling you "that doesn't go in that section". I can look at papers in my field and see differences in how discussion was organized in any issue of the major journals and it is fine, no heads turned.



            See also pages 8-15 of the attached: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf






            share|improve this answer



























              1














              I think it is fine and preferable. This really more "analysis" than "method" at least in the context of the original study design. Also for a reader it makes more sense in that order.



              In general, there is some looseness about the exact configuration of discussion and results. As long as you are organized and show an understandable narrative, I highly doubt you will get someone telling you "that doesn't go in that section". I can look at papers in my field and see differences in how discussion was organized in any issue of the major journals and it is fine, no heads turned.



              See also pages 8-15 of the attached: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf






              share|improve this answer

























                1












                1








                1







                I think it is fine and preferable. This really more "analysis" than "method" at least in the context of the original study design. Also for a reader it makes more sense in that order.



                In general, there is some looseness about the exact configuration of discussion and results. As long as you are organized and show an understandable narrative, I highly doubt you will get someone telling you "that doesn't go in that section". I can look at papers in my field and see differences in how discussion was organized in any issue of the major journals and it is fine, no heads turned.



                See also pages 8-15 of the attached: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf






                share|improve this answer













                I think it is fine and preferable. This really more "analysis" than "method" at least in the context of the original study design. Also for a reader it makes more sense in that order.



                In general, there is some looseness about the exact configuration of discussion and results. As long as you are organized and show an understandable narrative, I highly doubt you will get someone telling you "that doesn't go in that section". I can look at papers in my field and see differences in how discussion was organized in any issue of the major journals and it is fine, no heads turned.



                See also pages 8-15 of the attached: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Feb 16 at 16:01









                guestguest

                512




                512



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125067%2fdiscussion-section-rough-calculation-to-explain-unexpected-results%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown






                    Popular posts from this blog

                    How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                    Displaying single band from multi-band raster using QGIS

                    How many registers does an x86_64 CPU actually have?