Explore the vast range of titles available.

National and institutional policies to escalate the production of doctorates have raised concerns about the quality of PhDs in South Africa. This study evaluates examiner reports of doctorates by thesis and publication in clinical medicine to ascertain the criteria that examiners used to define a successful doctoral thesis. A qualitative hermeneutic approach through document analysis was taken, involving 54 national and international examiner reports of 18 doctoral theses, half of which were by publication. The examiners rated the majority (81%) of these theses to be of a high quality. Our results show a scatter of positive and negative aspects distributed across all 18 theses, with corresponding commendations and criticisms. Notably, almost equal emphasis was placed on conceptual and communication issues. Ratings per thesis were not always concordant, with five theses each given widely divergent ratings by three respective examiners. The study also found differences in ratings between examiners, based on whether they were medical or non-medical, international or national, and with or without PhDs themselves. While no single criterion was identifiable as being diagnostic of doctoral quality, the identified strengths and shortcomings of these theses serve as a useful platform for supervisors and students aspiring to cross the doctoral threshold.

Aim/Purpose: The conventional model of doctoral education, centered on conducting original research within an apprentice-supervisor framework, has evolved progressively toward alternative models, including shorter duration, the incorporation of a teaching component, a collaborative approach, and an emphasis on practice-based problem-solving. Using bibliometric methodologies, this paper aims to examine the intellectual landscape of doctoral education and supervision research over the past decade by identifying core literature, influential works, and key research trends, thereby supporting knowledge growth, innovation, and informed decision-making. Background: Doctoral education and its related supervision have undergone multi-dimensional transformations over the past two decades, leading to increased scholarly interest and an expanding body of literature. Despite this growth, we still know little about the intellectual structure of research within the field. Furthermore, hitherto few bibliometric and meta-analytic reviews have been conducted, leaving the conceptual landscape of doctoral education and supervision research under-mapped and difficult to navigate. Methodology: The study employs bibliometric methodologies, specifically citation and co-citation analyses, as well as bibliographic coupling, to rigorously and objectively map the intellectual structure of doctoral education and supervision research. These methods provide quantitative insights into relationships between documents, authors, and journals, facilitating the identification of research clusters and networks. Contribution: Drawing on a corpus of over 2,000 journal articles, the study analyses and maps the intellectual structure of the field, spotlighting influential researchers, institutions, and networks. The study identifies the areas where assimilation has taken place as a guide for future research. Further value is derived by identifying areas where there has been limited assimilation, and conclusions are drawn as to why such limited assimilation has occurred. Logical conclusions are then drawn regarding where future assimilation within doctoral education and supervision is needed, and how the field can make distinctive contributions to this literature. These contributions point to more effective collaboration, policymaking, and funding decisions within doctoral education and supervision research. Findings: The interdisciplinary nature of doctoral education and supervision is evidenced by the distribution of journal articles, which suggest a broad range of research interests, with a significant concentration in the social sciences. The findings have implications for various stakeholders, including doctoral students, educators, and policymakers, who seek insights into past research and contribute to an understanding of applying bibliometric review methodologies to capture insights into the intellectual structure of research fields. The study identifies a rapidly growing body of literature, reflecting an increasing interest in research on doctoral education and supervision. Citation and co-citation analyses reveal key academic communities and emerging trends within doctoral education and supervision research. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper represents a call to action, recommending that researchers continue to engage with rigorous bibliometric review methodologies to deepen their understanding of the field of doctoral education and supervision, moving beyond intellectual structure to intellectual content. Impact on Society: The study enhances institutional decision-making in doctoral education and supervision, supporting the development of effective teaching and research environments. Mapping intellectual communities fosters collaboration and knowledge sharing, ultimately benefiting doctoral students, educators, and policymakers. Future Research: While bibliometric analysis provides a broad overview, systematic reviews and meta-analyses could explore other diverse perspectives and methodologies, contributing to the intellectual development of the field. Despite the interdisciplinary nature of doctoral education, publications are predominantly found in the social sciences, which contrasts with the global dominance of STEM doctoral programs. Expanding research beyond social sciences is essential, as supervision practices vary across disciplines, with different approaches, actors, and dynamics shaping doctoral training. Recognizing these differences reinforces the need for tailored approaches – one size does not fit all.

Aim/Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between psychological capital, academic motivation, and academic performance in doctoral students and to develop a structural equation model that elucidates the interplay among these three variables, providing a comprehensive framework to better understand the factors influencing academic outcomes at the doctoral level. Background: Current research on the relationship between these variables in doctoral students is limited, with mostly independent approaches to each variable. This study seeks to overcome this research gap by exploring the intersection of these variables, providing a more holistic understanding of the motivational processes and positive psychological resources that impact the academic and personal success of doctoral students. Methodology: A quantitative approach with a non-experimental design and cross-sectional and correlational scope. The sample was collected by simple random sampling; 190 doctoral students participated, 82 men and 108 women. Three online scales were applied: the University Academic Performance Scale, the Short Academic Motivation Scale (SAMS), and the Psychological Capital Scale (PsyCap Scale). The following programs were used for data processing: SPSS version 25, AMOS version 24, and R-Project, and a six-step statistical procedure detailed in the manuscript was followed for data analysis. Contribution: This paper significantly advances doctoral education by addressing critical gaps and proposing valuable insights for future research. It offers a comprehensive understanding of challenges within doctoral programs, emphasizing factors like work-study balance and student well-being. Additionally, it advocates for a shift towards a positive paradigm, focusing on well-being and academic motivation. This paper catalyzes further innovation, fostering a deeper understanding of the doctoral experience. Findings: The three scales had a high internal consistency: PsyCap 0.858, AMS 0.844, and University Academic Performance 0.767. It is observed that the internal correlations with the dimensions are high. It was found that 38% of the respondents had a low level of PsyCap, 35% had a low level of academic motivation, and 36% had a high level of university academic performance. Amotivation was a singular behavior that was discussed in the study since all the responses were in the two extremes, high and low, with 0% at the medium level. It is observed that there are significant differences between males and females concerning academic motivation, and there are also significant differences between study cycles in academic motivation and performance. The occurrence of a “motivational curve” in doctoral students has been discovered. This finding shows a high motivation at the beginning of the doctoral program, an abrupt drop during the intermediate cycles, and a progressive and sustained rebound towards the final cycles, reaching the highest motivational peak at the end. It is observed that all the dimensions of the PsyCap variable are linearly positively related, with predominance in the Self-efficacy dimension (0.839); likewise, all the dimensions of the Academic Motivation variable are linearly positively related, with predominance in the Intrinsic Motivation to Know dimension (0.887). In addition, all the dimensions of the variable University Academic Performance are linearly positively related, with predominance in the dimension Contribution in academic activities (0.862). On the other hand, Introjected Regulation is positively related to the organization of teaching resources (0.198), organization of teaching resources is positively related to Self-efficacy (0.122), and Dedication to Study is negatively related to Resilience (-0.150). Some covariance errors were detected, and finally, according to the fit indicators, the estimated structural model is acceptable. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should develop tailored support programs focusing on building PsyCap and academic motivation, implement early intervention strategies to counteract motivational declines, adopt gender-sensitive approaches, integrate positive psychology practices, promote collaboration among students, continuously monitor program effectiveness, and provide faculty training to create a supportive academic environment. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should further explore the dynamic interplay between PsyCap, academic motivation, and performance longitudinally, employing mixed methods approaches to capture nuanced experiences. Additionally, investigating the effectiveness of intervention strategies targeting these variables and examining cultural and contextual influences on motivation and performance can enrich understanding and inform evidence-based practices. Impact on Society: Understanding the relationship between PsyCap, academic motivation, and university academic performance in doctoral students has significant implications for society. By elucidating the factors that contribute to academic success, this research can inform the development of more effective support systems within educational institutions. Empowering doctoral students with the psychological resources and motivation needed to thrive academically not only enhances individual well-being but also fosters innovation, knowledge creation, and societal advancement. Ultimately, by nurturing the next generation of scholars and researchers, this work contributes to the cultivation of a more knowledgeable, resilient, and prosperous society. Future Research: Among the limitations of the study was that the cross-sectional design restricted the possibility of establishing causal relationships since the data were collected at a single point in time. In addition, generalization of the findings should be approached with caution due to the size and composition of the sample, which was limited to doctoral students from a single country. The exclusive use of self-report scales could also have generated response and perception biases. Future research could adopt mixed approaches that integrate qualitative techniques to delve deeper into participants’ meanings and experiences. Also, the use of larger samples, including cross-country comparative studies, would allow for a more robust understanding of the relationship between psychological capital, academic motivation, and doctoral performance. Longitudinal designs would offer a better evaluation of the evolution of these variables over time. Regarding future thematic lines of research, there is a need to delve deeper into the balance between study, work, and doctoral well-being, as well as the success factors in face-to-face and virtual dynamics in the supervisor-candidate relationship and emotional management in the academic writing process. In addition, analyzing the motivational curve, characterized by a start with high motivation, an intermediate fall, and a final rebound, would allow the design of interventions to mitigate its impact on mental health and academic progress. Likewise, identifying risk and protective factors would contribute to strengthening the resilience of doctoral students.

This study focuses on the changes that doctoral education has experienced in the last decades and discusses the role of doctoral supervisors. The figure of doctoral supervisor continues to be a subject of much debate; therefore, the aim of this study is to provide a universal, global, and common definition that clearly establishes the roles and functions of doctoral supervisors. Employing a multi-method approach, the study utilized the perspectives of linguistic relativism and prototype theory to understand how linguistic and label diversity may influence the perception and approach to supervisory tasks. We examine a corpus of 55 different labels to refer to \"doctoral supervisor.\" Data was collected from 116 countries, encompassing 47 different languages and 55 distinct labels from Europe, Africa, America, Asia, and Oceania, forming a unique corpus of information. The results reveal a total of 18 functions to be fulfilled by the doctoral supervisor. Additionally, the findings underscore the significance of linguistic influence in conceptualizing the functions associated with the supervisor in various cultural contexts and highlight the necessity for redefining the role of the thesis supervisor. The results hold potential benefits for doctoral schools and supervisors, serving as guidelines for standardizing the functions of the doctoral supervisor. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).

Aim/Purpose: The research is aimed at understanding the role of curiosity in obtaining a PhD degree. The differences in the expression of curiosity between PhD and unsuccessful doctoral candidates are studied. Background: Differences in the expression of curiosity predict differences in behavior and achievement of results. The role of curiosity in research activities and progress has been recognized in the literature review. However, the influence of curiosity on the success of researchers has received little attention as a subject of empirical research. Methodology: Quantitative methods were used to examine differences in curiosity among PhD candidates and unsuccessful doctoral candidates. The study involved PhD (n=181) and unsuccessful doctoral candidates (n=194) aged 29 to 49 years. A questionnaire of socio-demographic characteristics, the tests “Curiosity” and the “Test for assessing research potential” were used to collect data. Independent groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, and relationships between variables were studied using the partial correlation matrix and Network Plots, to determine statistically significant differences between the strength of the relationship between two pairs of variables. Partial correlations were compared. Contribution: The study initiates a new line of questioning and contributes to the study of factors influencing the successful completion of doctoral studies. The focus of the study is on a group of respondents who have previously received insufficient attention. Findings: The comparison analysis of partial correlations lets us establish the differences in all components of curiosity (target, motivational, cognitive, productive, dynamic, emotional, regulatory, reflective-evaluative) and research potential. The differences relate to the desire for research, the importance of scientific knowledge, priorities, ways of expressing curiosity, emotional experiences, comparison of intentions, and achieved results. The profiles of curiosity in research activities are described based on the identified differences. Recommendations for Practitioners: From a practical point of view, the research results can help organize and plan the research activities of doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: The authors recommend researchers study in more detail the nature of the connections between the components of curiosity and their impact on research success. Future research could focus on a detailed analysis of curiosity profiles, including in the context of various personality traits. It is also recommended that a longitudinal or experimental study be conducted that involves diagnosing curiosity in doctoral students at different stages of training and with different research productivity. Impact on Society: Doctoral studies are considered as an important strategic resource of the modern economy. The development of curiosity can help increase the research productivity of doctoral students and competitiveness in the globalizing scientific world. Future Research: Following research on curiosity as it relates to research activities could contribute to the development of a conceptual framework.

The purpose of this study was to examine variation in doctoral students’ experiences of ethics in doctoral supervision and how these experiences are related to research engagement, burnout, satisfaction, and intending to discontinue PhD studies. Data were collected from 860 doctoral students in Finland, Estonia, and South Africa. Four distinct profiles of ethics experience in doctoral supervision were identified, namely students puzzled by the supervision relationship, strugglers in the ethical landscape, seekers of ethical allies, and students with ethically trouble-free experiences. The results show that the profiles were related to research engagement, satisfaction with supervision and studies, and burnout. Not experiencing any major ethical problems in supervision was associated with experiencing higher engagement and satisfaction with supervision and doctoral studies and low levels of exhaustion and cynicism. Similar profiles were identified across the countries, yet with different emphases. Both Estonian and South African PhD students were overrepresented in the profile of students with ethically trouble-free experiences, while the Finnish students were underrepresented in this profile. The Finnish PhD students were overrepresented among the seekers of ethical allies. Profiles provide information that can alert supervisors and administrators about the extent of the risk of burnout or discontinuing of PhD studies based on students’ negative experiences of the ethics in supervision.

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has had its impact on research and researchers, potentially influencing the future of academia. Yet, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are no empirical studies on the alignment between supervisors’ and supervisees’ estimates of the impact of COVID-19. This study aims to contribute to bridging this gap by exploring PhD candidates’ and supervisors’ perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on candidates’ study progress and study well-being, and whether the estimates were related to supervisors’ and supervisees’ well-being.Design/methodology/approachA total of 768 PhD candidates and 561 doctoral supervisors from a large multifield research-intensive university in Finland participated in this quantitative study. Data were collected with the doctoral experience survey and the supervisory experience survey.FindingsIn general, the results show that both supervisors and supervisees recognised the negative impact of the pandemic on candidates’ well-being and progress, and their perceptions were quite well aligned. However, supervisors estimated that the impact had been more detrimental than the supervisees did. The results also show that the supervisors’ perceptions of the negative impact of COVID-19 on candidates’ progress and well-being were related to reduced levels of their own well-being.Originality/valueResults can be used in developing effective support means for both the supervisors and supervisees to overcome the hardships caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and to avoid long-term negative consequences for the candidates in degree completion, career trajectories and the future of the academy.

Students who enter post-baccalaureate studies face numerable challenges during their tenure in graduate school. Although researchers have studied these inherent challenges, a gap exists in the literature concerning doctoral students and the impact of their studies on their personal relationships. As such, the purpose of this collective case study was to examine the effect that doctoral studies have on the relationships between select doctoral students and their partners. Semi-structured interviews of six participants, selected via convenience sampling (i.e., current doctoral students who have been in relationships during their doctoral studies), generated data concerning challenges, coping mechanisms, personal emotions, and relationship concerns. These findings provided a composite understanding of the potential inherent struggles of doctoral students and the corresponding role that their doctoral studies have on the relationships of these specific doctoral students and their partners that matched much of the findings noted in the literature. It is the researchers’ hope that the results will help guide future researchers but urge caution concerning the generalizability of the information gained from this study due to its small sample size.

Aim/Purpose: In the United States, where educational access is shaped by the intersecting forces of race and gender, the expansion of online doctoral education presents both new opportunities and enduring inequities. This study investigated how doctoral students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and Women of Color (BIWOC) enrolled in online doctoral programs experience the impostor phenomenon (IP) and how their social networks and institutional supports influence these experiences. Background: While online education has expanded doctoral accessibility, BIWOC remain underrepresented in these programs and disproportionately experience academic marginalization. National data reveal that women of color represent less than 12% of doctoral degree recipients in the U.S., with even fewer advancing into academic leadership. IP among BIWOC is compounded by racialized gender stereotypes, isolation, and limited culturally affirming support. Methodology: Using a phenomenological qualitative approach, this study conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 doctoral students who identify as BIWOC at a United States midwestern primarily white institution to explore their lived experiences and the role of social networks in navigating IP. Interview data were coded using thematic analysis, guided by intersectionality and impostor phenomenon theory. Contribution: This study shifts the focus from in-person academic spaces to the underexplored terrain of online doctoral education, offering practical and theoretical insight into how BIWOC navigate structural and psychological barriers in virtual learning environments. Findings: Participants reported that family, peers, faculty, and institutional relationships were critical in helping them overcome IP. However, the lack of BIWOC representation, microaggressions, and institutional biases often reinforced feelings of self-doubt. Recommendations for Practitioners: To support BIWOC in online doctoral programs, institutions should develop structured cohort mentorship programs, increase faculty diversity, and better implement culturally responsive pedagogy. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should explore IP among other marginalized doctoral students (e.g., LGBTQ+, first-generation, disabled students) and investigate the effectiveness of specific institutional interventions for reducing IP in online education. Impact on Society: Addressing systemic biases and the IP in doctoral education can contribute to greater representation of BIWOC in academia and leadership, fostering a more equitable and inclusive higher education landscape. Future Research: Further studies should analyze how different types of social networks (e.g., professional organizations, online communities) influence BIWOC’s doctoral success, as well as explore institutional policy changes that improve retention and inclusion.

While extensive research exists for both the doctoral experience and career paths after the doctorate, less is known about the initial motives for starting a PhD. In this study, 11 History PhD holders from an Australasian university were interviewed about their reasons for embarking on the doctorate. The motives and aspirations cited by the participants validate several of the categories identified in the limited existing literature, such as improving career prospects, personal development, and intrinsic interest in their discipline. Moreover, the data support the contention that candidates enter the doctorate with multiple motives. From this History sample, however, there were no overt motives relating to the participants' sense of their own identity and pressing social justice concerns or 'research as politics'. The data reveal that third parties (friends, colleagues, family members, and academics) when consulted prior to enrolment did play a generally encouraging role in the decision to start a doctorate. A recommendation emanating from this research is that universities consider offering workshops for would-be candidates before enrolment so that initial motives for doctoral study can be explored and reflected upon before a candidate embarks.