Timeline for Reviewer of PhD thesis doesn't allow me to write in the first person singular
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 1, 2018 at 16:47 | comment | added | lighthouse keeper | @DSVA and JNS: Mostly agreed. I'm referring to the OP's description, according to which he already saw his preferred form in a couple of PhD theses (presumably in the same area). | |
| Mar 31, 2018 at 12:45 | comment | added | JNS | Agreeing with DSVA; different fields have different widely accepted conventions. For example in astronomy use of “I” is quite prevelant, but in say, a particle physics paper is not, showing even within the same field, different subfields may have varying conventions. That being said, the department’s PhD style guide (if it exists) always takes precedent. | |
| Mar 30, 2018 at 19:55 | comment | added | user64845 | I wouldn't say that a reviewer has an nflated ego if he demands a form to be used which is standard in that field (if that's the case). In chemistry for example you basically won't find any serious work using "I", it's passive for the most part and in introductions and such things you use "we". Everything else just looks unprofessional to most chemists. | |
| Mar 29, 2018 at 15:03 | history | edited | lighthouse keeper | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 127 characters in body
|
| Mar 29, 2018 at 13:56 | history | answered | lighthouse keeper | CC BY-SA 3.0 |