How to write a discussion chapter that actually interprets the results.

[Alan]

I'm a 4th year PhD candidate in neuroscience. I have my results. I have beautiful graphs, significant p-values, the whole deal. My results chapter is solid. But now I have to write the discussion, and I am completely stuck.

My advisor keeps sending my drafts back with the same comment: "This is just a summary of the results. Where's the interpretation?" I don't know how to explain it differently! The results are the results! What else is there to say?

I've been trying to find a structure that forces me to actually interpret. Here's what I'm piecing together from reading other dissertations and articles. Does this sound right?

A possible Discussion structure:

1. Start with a clear answer to your research question. Don't bury the lead. First sentence: "This study found that X drug does Y to Z cells." Boom. State your main finding clearly.
2. Explain what the finding means. This is where I struggle. Instead of just saying "X increased," I need to say "The increase in X suggests that the drug is activating the Y pathway, which is consistent with its proposed mechanism." So it's: finding -> interpretation of finding.
3. Compare to the literature. How does this fit with what others have found? Does it support Smith et al. (2020)? Does it contradict Jones et al. (2019)? If it contradicts, why? (Different methods? Different cell types?) This is where you situate your work in the broader field.
4. Acknowledge limitations (strategically). Don't just list them. Explain how they might affect the interpretation. "The sample size was small, so these results should be considered preliminary." But also, "Despite this limitation, the effect was strong enough to suggest..."
5. Future directions and implications. What's the next step? What's the bigger picture? This is your chance to dream a little.

Does this structure hold up? How much detail do you go into for each point? My advisor says a good discussion should almost feel like a new argument, built on top of your results, not just a reflection of them. That's so abstract! Help!