covid 19 phd thesis

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

The dissertation journey during the COVID-19 pandemic: Crisis or opportunity?

Despite dissertation's significance in enhancing the quality of scholarly outputs in tourism and hospitality fields, insufficient research investigates the challenges and disruptions students experience amidst a public health crisis. This study aims to fill the research gaps and integrate attribution and self-efficacy theories to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic influences students' decision-making and behaviours during the dissertation writing process. Qualitative exploration with 15 graduate students was conducted. The results indicate that adjustment of data collection approaches was the most shared external challenge, while students' religious background and desire for publishing COVID related topics were primary internal motivations.

1. Introduction

Dissertation writing is an essential part of academic life for graduate students ( Yusuf, 2018 ). By writing the dissertation, students can build research skills to analyse new data and generate innovative concepts to inform future scientific studies ( Fadhly et al., 2018 ; Keshavarz & Shekari, 2020 ). Therefore, scholars in higher education are dedicated to guiding students to complete impactful dissertations. Duffy et al. (2018) note that thesis advisors can empower students to explore novel ideas and identify new products or services for the tourism and hospitality industry beyond the traditional contribution of extending the existing research literature. Namely, the intriguing ideas proposed in students’ dissertations will eventually enrich and diversify the literature in the tourism and hospitality academia. Furthermore, the process of identifying impactful ideas will prepare students for a successful career either as a researcher or practitioner.

However, dissertation writing can be a challenging experience for both native and non-native writers. Students are sometimes confused about the characteristics of the dissertation or the expectations from the academics and practitioners ( Bitchener et al., 2010 ). A graduate student has to make numerous decisions during the dissertation writing journey. To successfully guide the students through this complicated writing journey, thesis advisors need to understand the factors influencing students' writing motivation and decision-making process. Previous studies have suggested these influential factors can be broadly classified into external sources (e.g., advisor/supervisor's influence, trends in the field, or publishability of the topic) and internal sources (e.g., researcher's background or researcher interest; Fadhly et al., 2018 ; I'Anson & Smith, 2004 ; Keshavarz & Shekari, 2020 ). Despite this classification, the discussions related to the impacts of macro-environments, such as socio-cultural trends, economic conditions, or ecology and physical environments, on students' dissertation writing are extremely lacking. Since the time background and the world situation when writing a dissertation are also critical factors influencing students' writing goals, more research should be done to broaden students' dissertation writing experiences.

The COVID-19 pandemic has immensely impacted global education, students' learning, and research activities. According to Dwivedi et al. (2020) , the COVID-19 pandemic has affected international higher education leading to the closure of schools to control the spread of the virus. Meanwhile, Alvarado et al. (2021) found that the global health crises have seriously disrupted doctoral students' Dissertations in Practice (DiP). Specifically, students must learn new methodologies and adjust the research settings and sampling techniques because of virtual-only approaches. Some have to find new topics and research questions since the original one cannot be investigated during the quarantine period. However, students may turn this current crisis into an opportunity as they build a shared community and support each other's private and academic lives. Apparently, the crisis can result in a stronger bond of friendship, and this may generate more collaborative research projects in the future.

As mentioned earlier, some studies have tried to identify factors influencing students' dissertation writing journey, albeit lack considerations related to the effects of macro-environments. Given the severe impacts of COVID-19 on the macro-environments of global higher education and the tourism industry, this study aims to fill the research gap and explore how a public health crisis may influence graduate students' dissertation writing, especially in the field of tourism and hospitality. Specifically, this study utilizes attribution and self-efficacy theory as the research framework to examine the internal and external factors that influenced graduate students' dissertation journey amidst the COVID-19 pandemic (see Fig. 1 ). The use of attribution and self-efficacy theory is appropriate in the current study because both explain how people make sense of society, influences of others, their decision-making process and behaviours. Although some may argue these theories are outdated, many scholars have used them to explain students' behaviours and experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, Xu et al. (2021) found that social capital and learning support positively influence students' self-efficacy, employability and well-being amidst the crisis. Meanwhile, Lassoued et al. (2020) used attribution theory to explore the university professors and their students' learning experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. They found that both groups attributed the problems to reaching high quality in distance learning to students' weak motivation to understand abstract concepts in the absence of in-person interaction.

The theoretical framework.

Understanding the lived experience of students would enable stakeholders in tourism and hospitality education to deeply comprehend the plight and predicaments of students face and the innovate ways to mitigate those challenges amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, this study utilizes a qualitative approach to explore the impacts of internal and extremal factors on the dissertation writing process. The study was set in the context of an international graduate hospitality and tourism program in Taiwan known for its diverse student body. The research question that guides such qualitative exploration is: How have external and internal factors influenced graduate students’ dissertation writing journey during the COVID-19 pandemic?

This study is timely and critical considering the uncertainties that characterize pandemics which aggravates the already perplexities that associate dissertation writing. It throws light on factors that are susceptible to pandemic tendencies and factors that are resilient to crisis. The findings of this study would provide insights into how crises affect academia and suggest effective ways for higher educational institutions, academicians, and other key stakeholders to forge proactive solutions for future occurrences. Especially, higher education institutions would be well-positioned and informed on areas to train students and faculty members to ameliorate the impacts associated with pandemics.

2. Literature review

2.1. covid-19 and its impacts on educational activities.

Public health crises have ramifications for educational behaviour and choices; this is especially true of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most countries and institutions of higher education are still battling with the consequences suffered from the COVID-19 pandemic. Not surprisingly, there has been a tsunami of studies on the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., Dwivedi et al., 2020 ; Manzano-Leon et al., 2021 ; Alam & Parvin, 2021 ). Assessing these studies, we found that although there are substantial extant studies on the negative implications of the COVID-19 pandemic, limited studies have also emphasised the positive side of the pandemic on education. For example, Dwivedi et al. (2020) concluded that the COVID-19 had revealed the necessity of online teaching in higher educational institutions. For they observed that at Loughborough, though face-to-face teaching is practised, one cannot relegate online teaching as some students will be unable to return to campus due to border closures. Thus, faculty members have to convert existing material to the online format. Furthermore, Manzano-Leon et al. (2021) also pointed out that the COVID-19 has allowed students to interact with their peers beyond traditional education. They pinpointed that playful learning strategies such as escape rooms enable students to interact well. Alam and Parvin (2021) also underscored students who studied during the COVID-19 pandemic performed better academically than those before. This finding suggests that online education is supposedly more active than face-to-face mode.

Apart from these positive implications aforementioned, most studies have emphasised the negative impacts of COVID-19 on education. Dwivedi et al. (2020) reviewed how the global higher education sector has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. It caused the closure of schools, national lockdowns and social distancing, and a proliferation of online teaching. COVID-19 forced both teachers and students to work and study remotely from home. According to Dhawan (2020) , the rapid deployment of online learning to protect students, faculty, communities, societies, and nations affected academic life. Online learning seemed like a panacea in the face of COVID-19's severe symptoms; however, the switch to online also brought several challenges for teachers and students. Lall and Singh (2020) noted that disadvantages of online learning include the absence of co-curricular activities and students' lack of association with friends at school. Many studies have also confirmed the pandemic's adverse effects on students' mental health, emotional wellbeing, and academic performance ( Bao, 2020 ; de Oliveira Araújo et al., 2020 ).

Despite the pandemic has caused numerous difficulties for many educational institutions, scholars and educators have risen to the challenges and tried to plan effective strategies to mitigate such stressing circumstances. For example, to respond the needs of a better understanding of students' social-emotional competencies for coping the COVID-19 outbreak, Hadar et al. (2020) utilized the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous) framework to analyse teachers and students' struggles. Each element of VUCA is defined as follows:

• ● Volatility: the speed and magnitude of the crisis;
• ● Uncertainty: the unpredictability of events during the crisis;
• ● Complexity: the confounding events during the crisis;
• ● Ambiguity: the confusing and mixed meanings during the crisis.

This analysis and conceptualization of crises help to explain some of the students’ concerns on mental health, emotional wellbeing, and academic performance ( Bao, 2020 ; de Oliveira Araújo et al., 2020 ).

The pandemic also exacerbated existing challenges facing students and universities across the globe. According to Rose-Redwood et al. (2020) , the COVID-19 endangered the career prospects of both students and scholars. University partnerships with the arts sector, community service, and non-governmental organizations also suffered. The tourism and hospitality (academic) field faced unique challenges in light of COVID-19 without exception. Forms of tourism such as over-tourism and cruise tourism were temporarily unobservable, and most pre-crisis studies and forecast data were no longer relevant ( Bausch et al., 2021 ). Consequently, many empirical and longitudinal studies were halted due to the incomparability of data. Even though many studies have been conducted to explore the impacts of the COVID pandemic on educational activities, none of these studies has addressed how this public health crisis has affected graduate students’ dissertation journey. Therefore, the present research is needed to fill the gaps in the mainstream literature.

2.2. Attribution theory and self-efficacy

The current study employs attribution theory and self-efficacy to understand graduate students' dissertation writing journeys. Attribution theory explains how individuals interpret behavioural outcomes ( Weiner, 2006 ) and has been used in education and crisis management ( Abraham et al., 2020 ; Sanders et al., 2020 ). For example, Chen and Wu (2021) used attribution theory to understand the effects of attributing students' academic achievements to giftedness. They found that attributing students' academic success to giftedness had a positive indirect relationship with their academic achievement through self-regulated learning and negative learning emotions. However, attribution theory has been criticised for its inability to explain a person's behaviour comprehensively. This is well enunciated by Bandura (1986) that attribution theory does not necessarily describe all influential factors related to a person's behaviour. Instead, it provides in-depth accounts of one's self-efficacy. Hence, scholars have advocated the need for integrating self-efficacy into attribution theory ( Hattie et al., 2020 ).

Self-efficacy is closely related to attribution theory. Extant studies have investigated the essence of self-efficacy in education and its role on students' achievements ( Bartimote-Aufflick et al., 2016 ; Hendricks, 2016 ). For instance, in their educational research and implications for music, Hendricks (2016) found that teachers can empower students' ability and achievement through positive self-efficacy beliefs. This is achieved through Bandura's (1986) theoretical four sources of self-efficacy: vicarious experience, verbal/social persuasion, enactive mastery experience, and physiological and affective states. The current study integrates attribution theory and self-efficacy as the research framework to provide intellectual rigour and reasons underlined students' decision-making during their dissertation journey.

2.3. Internal and external factors that influence dissertation writing processes

This study considered both internal and external factors affecting graduate students' dissertation journeys in line with attribution theory. Internal factors are actions or behaviours within an individual's control ( LaBelle & Martin, 2014 ; Weiner, 2006 ). Many studies have evolved and attributed dissertation topic selection to internal considerations. For instance, I'Anson and Smith's (2004) study found that personal interest and student ability were essential for undergraduate students' thesis topic selection. Keshavarz and Shekari (2020) also found that personal interest is the primary motivation for choosing a specific thesis topic. In another study focused on undergraduate students at the English department, Husin and Nurbayani (2017) revealed that students' language proficiency was a dominant internal factor for their dissertation choice decisions.

On the other hand, external factors are forces beyond an individual's control ( LaBelle & Martin, 2014 ). Similar to internal factors, there is an avalanche of studies that have evolved and uncovered external factors that characterize students' dissertation decisions in the pre-COVID period (e.g., de Kleijn et al., 2012 ; Huin; Nurbayani, 2017 ; Keshavarz & Shekari, 2020 ; Pemberton, 2012 ; Shu et al., 2016; Sverdlik et al., 2018 ). For instance, de Kleijn et al. (2012) found that supervisor influence is critical in the student dissertation writing process. They further revealed that an acceptable relationship between supervisor and student leads to a higher and quality outcome; however, a high level of influence could lead to low satisfaction. Meanwhile, Pemberton (2012) delved into the extent teachers influence students in their dissertation process and especially topic selection. This study further underlined that most supervisors assist students to select topics that will sustain their interest and competence level. Unlike previous research, Keshavarz and Shekari (2020) found that research operability or feasibility was a critical external factor that informed students' dissertation decisions. In other words, practicality and usefulness are essential in determining the dissertation choices.

These studies above show how internal and external factors may determine students' dissertation decisions. Despite those studies providing valuable knowledge to broaden our understanding of which factors may play significant role in students' dissertation journeys, most of their focus was on undergraduate students and was conducted before COVID-19. Given that the learning experiences among graduate and undergraduate students as well as before and during the pandemic may differ significantly, there is a need to investigate what specific external and internal factors underline graduate students’ dissertation decisions during the COVID-19. Are those factors different from or similar to previous findings?

3. Methodology

Previous studies have disproportionately employed quantitative approaches to examine students' dissertation topic choice (e.g., Keshavarz & Shekari, 2020 ). Although the quantitative method can aid the researcher to investigate focal phenomena among larger samples and generalize the results, it has also been criticized for the lack of in-depth analysis or does not allow respondents to share their lived experiences. Given the rapid evolution and uncertainty linked with the COVID-19 pandemic, the contextual and social factors may drive individuals to respond to such challenges differently. Therefore, efforts toward analyzing individual experiences during the public health crisis are necessary to tailor individual needs and local educational policy implementation ( Tremblay et al., 2021 ). Accordingly, the current study adopts a qualitative approach grounded in the interpretivism paradigm to explore the factors affecting graduate students’ dissertation research activities and understand the in-depth meaning of writing a dissertation.

3.1. Data collection

Since statistical representation is not the aim of qualitative research, the purposive sampling instead of probability sampling technique was used for this study ( Holloway & Wheeler, 2002 ). Graduate students who were composing their dissertation and could demonstrate a clear understanding on the issues under study are selected as the target research subjects. To gain a rich data, the sample selection in the current study considers background, dissertation writing status, and nationality to ensure a diversified data set ( Ritchie et al., 2014 ). Data was collected from graduate students in Taiwan who were currently writing their dissertations. Taiwan was chosen as the research site because the pandemic initially had a minor impact on Taiwan than on other economically developed countries ( Wang et al., 2020 ). In the first year (2019–2020) of their study, the graduate students could conduct their research projects without any restrictions. Therefore, traditional data collections and research processes, such as face-to-face interview techniques or onsite questionnaire distributions were generally taught and implemented in Taiwanese universities at that time. However, in their second year of the graduate program (2021), the COVID-19 cases surged, and the government identified some domestic infection clusters in Taiwan. Thus, the ministry of education ordered universities to suspend in-person instruction and move to online classes from home as part of a national level 3 COVID-19 alert. Many graduate students have to modify their data collection plan and learn different software to overcome the challenges of new and stricter rules. As they have experienced the sudden and unexpected change caused by the COVID-19 in their dissertation writing journey, Taiwanese graduate students are deemed as suitable research participants in this research.

Following Keshavarz and Shekari (2020) , interview questions were extracted from the literature review and developed into a semi-structured guide. Semi-structured interview was employed allowing for probing and clarifying explanations. This also allowed both the interviewer and the interviewee to become co-researchers (Ritchie et al., 2005). The questions asked about internal, and external factors influencing dissertation writing (including topic selection and methodology) during COVID-19. Specifically, students were asked how they chose their dissertation topic, how they felt COVID-19 had impacted their dissertation, and what significant events influenced their academic choices during the pandemic. Before each interview, the purpose of the study was explained and respondents provided informed consent. All the interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed.

Interviews, lasting about 50–60 min, were conducted with 15 graduate students as data saturation was achieved after analysing 15 interviews. The saturation was confirmed by the repetition of statements like, “personal interest motivated me”, “my supervisor guided me to select a topic”, and “I changed my data collection procedure to online”.

3.2. Data analysis and trustworthiness

Before the formal interview, two educational experts who are familiar with qualitative research were solicited to validate the wording, semantics, and meanings of the interview questions. Then, a pilot test was conducted with three graduate students to check the clarity of the expression for every interview question and revise potentially confusing phrasing. Validity and trustworthiness were also achieved through the use of asking follow-up questions. The transcripts of formal interviews were analysed using Atlas.ti 9. Qualitative themes were developed following open, selective, and axial coding procedures ( Corbin & Strauss, 1990 ). Finally, the relationships among themes and codes were identified, facilitating the research findings and discussions.

In order to prevent biases from affecting the findings of the study, series of procedures were undertaken following previous qualitative research. First, multiple quotations from respondents underlined the research findings which meant the respondents' true perspectives and expressions were represented. Moreover, the analyses were done independently and there was peer checking among the authors. There was also member checking where themes found were redirected to respondents for verification. In addition, external validation of the themes was done by asking other graduate students who share similar characteristics for comparability assessment to make the findings transferable.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. profile of respondents.

Respondents were purposively drawn from diverse backgrounds (including nationality, gender, and programs) to enrich the research findings. The sample includes graduate students who began dissertation writing in Taiwan during the COVID-19 pandemic period. The majority of the respondents are female and from South East Asia. Table 1 provides background information of these interviewees.

Background information of study respondents.

4.2. Internal factors

As Table 2 depicts, the themes ascertained from the data analysis were categorised according to internal and external factors which underpin the attribution theory ( Weiner, 2006 ). In consonance with previous studies, graduate students’ dissertation writing during the pandemic was influenced by internal factors (i.e., personal interest and religious background) and external considerations (i.e., career aspirations, society improvement, language issues, supervisor influence, COVID-19 publishable topics, data collection challenges). The analyses of each factor are presented below.

Major themes and codes emerging from the data.

The most salient internal factors affecting dissertation topic selection were (1) personal interest and (2) religious background. For personal interest, respondent 1 expressed:

The first thing is that [it] comes from my interest. I'm currently working on solo female traveller [s], which is the market I want to study. So, the priority comes from my personal preference and to learn about this market no matter the external situation. I also think that this is due to how I was brought up. My parent nurtured me that way, and I love to do things independently, especially when travelling.

This finding is in line with previous studies such as Keshavarz and Shekari (2020) ; I’Anson and Smith (2004) , who emphasised the relevance of personal interest in students' dissertation decision-making. Informed by the self-efficacy and attribution theories, we found that students who attribute their decision-making on dissertation writing to internal factors (i.e., personal interest) have relatively high self-efficacy levels. As argued by Bandura (1977) , efficacy expectation is “the conviction that one can successfully execute the behaviour required to produce the outcomes” (p. 193). Namely, self-efficacy is determined by an individual's capability and ability to execute decisions independently, devoid of any external considerations. Despite the uncertainties and challenging circumstances amidst COVID-19, students who believe their ability and research skills usually adhere to their original dissertation topics and directions.

Religious consideration is another conspicuous factor informing graduate students' dissertation journey during the COVID-19 pandemic. As respondent 7 mentioned:

Islam has become my way of life. I am a Muslim. It is my daily life, so I like to research this. I was born into this faith, and I am inclined to explore Halal food. I feel committed to contributing my research to my faith no matter outside circumstances. Maybe if I combine it with academic (research), it will be easier to understand and easier to do.

Although not much has been seen regarding religious considerations in students' dissertation topic selection in previous studies, this research reveals religious background as a significant internal factor. From a sociology perspective, religious orientation and affiliation could affect individual behaviour ( Costen et al., 2013 ; Lee & Robbins, 1998 ), and academic decision-making is not an exception. Religious backgrounds are inherent in the socialisation process and could affect how a person behaves or how they make a particular decision. This premise is further accentuated by Costen et al. (2013) , who argued that social connectedness affects college students' ability to adjust to new environments and situations. Social connectedness guides feelings, thoughts, and behaviour in many human endeavours ( Lee & Robbins, 1998 ). Social connectedness and upbringing underpin peoples' personality traits and behavioural patterns. Therefore, this study has extended existing literature on factors that affect graduate students' decision-making on dissertation writing from a religious perspective, which is traceable to an individual's socialisation process. In other words, during crises, most students are inclined to make decisions on their dissertation writing which are informed by their social upbringing (socialisation).

4.3. External factors

As Table 2 indicates, abundant external factors inform graduate students’ decision-making on their dissertation writing process. Except for career aspirations, language concerns, and supervisor influences that previous studies have recognized ( Chu, 2015 ; Jensen, 2013 ; Keshavarz & Shekari, 2020 ; Lee & Deale, 2016 ; Tuomaala et al., 2014 ), some novel factors were identified from the data, such as “COVID-19 publishable topic” and “online data collection restrictions”.

Unlike extant studies that have bemoaned the negative impacts of the COVID on education ( Qiu et al., 2020 ; Sato et al., 2021 ), the current study revealed that graduate students were eager to research on topics that were related to COVID-19 to reflect the changes of the tourism industry and trends.

Initially, overtourism [was] a problem in my country, and I want to write a dissertation about it. However, there is no tourism at my research site because of the COVID-19 pandemic. So, I had to change my topic to resilience because resilience is about overcoming a crisis. I had to discuss with my supervisor, and she suggested the way forward that I revise my topic to make it relevant and publishable due to the COVID-19 pandemic (respondent 8).

This response shows the unavoidable impacts of the COVID-19 on the research community. As Bausch et al. (2021) pointed out, tourism and hospitality scholars have to change their research directions because some forms of tourism such as overtourism and cruise tourism were temporarily unobservable amidst the pandemic. Thus, many pre-pandemic studies and forecast data were no longer relevant. However, the COVID-19 pandemic can bring some positive changes. Nowadays, the industry and academics shift their focus from pro-tourism to responsible tourism and conduct more research related to resilience. As Ting et al. (2021) suggested, “moving forward from the pandemic crisis, one of the leading roles of tourism scholars henceforth is to facilitate high-quality education and training to prepare future leaders and responsible tourism practitioners to contribute to responsible travel and tourism experiences.” (p. 6).

Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has significant ramifications upon the research methods in hospitality and tourism. As respondent 1 denoted,

Because of [the] COVID-19 pandemic, there were certain limitations like I cannot analyse interviewee's body language due to social distancing … some interruptions when we conduct online interviews due to unstable internet connectivity, which would ultimately affect the flow of the conversation.

The adjustments of research methods also bring frustrations and anxiety to students. For instance, respondent 3 expressed: “I became anxious that I won't be able to collect data because of social distancing, which was implemented in Taiwan.” The volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) feelings caused by the COVID-19 pandemic significantly influences students' mood, thinking and behaviour ( Hadar et al., 2020 ).

Apparently, during crises, graduate students' decision-making on their dissertation writing was precipitated by external considerations beyond their control. Based on self-efficacy and attribution theory, the fear that characterises crises affects students' self-efficacy level and eagerness to resort to external entities (e.g., supervisor influences or difficulties in collecting data) to assuage their predicament. In other words, some students may have a low self-efficacy level during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was triggered by the negative impacts of the crisis. Furthermore, scholars may need to notice that COVID-19 is likely to affect conclusions drawn on studies undertaken during this period due to over-reliance on online data collection.

5. Conclusions and implications

Although numerous studies have been conducted to understand the influences of the COVID-19 crisis on educational activities, none of them focuses on the graduate student's dissertation writing journey. Given the significant contributions dissertations may make to advancing tourism and hospitality knowledge, this study aims to fill the gap and uses attribution and self-efficacy theories to explore how internal and external factors influenced graduate students' decision-making for dissertations amidst the crisis. Drawing on qualitative approaches with graduate students who began writing their dissertation during the COVID-19 period, the study provides insights into students' learning experiences and informs stakeholders in hospitality and tourism education to make better policies.

There are several findings worthy of discussion. Firstly, graduate students' sociological background (i.e., personal interest and religious background), which is inherent in an individual's socialisation processes, inform their decision-making in the dissertation processes during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is in line with the self-efficacy theory, which argues that an individual has the conviction that they have the necessary innate abilities to execute an outcome ( Bandura, 1977 ). Namely, respondents with high self-efficacy levels attributed their decisions to internal factors. Unlike previous studies' findings that personal interest was a factor that underpinned graduate students' decision-making ( I'Anson & Smith, 2004 ; Keshavarz & Shekari, 2020 ), it is observed that religious background is an additional factor that was evident and conspicuous during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Secondly, the complexity and uncertainty that characterised the COVID-19 pandemic made emotion a dominant factor that affected graduate students’ dissertation journey and indirectly triggered other external factors that provoked behavioural adjustments among students. The trepidation and anxiety that COVID-19 has caused significantly affects the self-efficacy level of students and predisposes them to external considerations, such as the will of the supervisor or the difficulties in data collection, in their dissertation journey. This study paralleled previous research and revealed that respondents with low self-efficacy were influenced by external considerations more than individuals with high self-efficacy ( Bandura, 1977 ). However, this study highlights how a public health crisis accelerates students who have low self-efficacy to attribute their unsatisfactory academic life to the external environment, leading to depression and negative impacts on ideology ( Abood et al., 2020 ).

Lastly, the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically influenced the direction of research and body of knowledge in tourism and hospitality. This is seen in the light of the influx of COVID-19 related research topics adapted by graduate students. Furthermore, over-reliance on online data collection approaches were observed in this research. Although online surveys and interviews have many advantages, such as low cost and no geographic restrictions, the results drawn from this approach frequently suffer from biased data and issues with reliability and validity. For example, Moss (2020) revealed that survey respondents from Amazon MTurk are mostly financially disadvantaged, significantly younger than the U.S. population, and predominantly female. As more and more students collect data from online survey platforms such as Amazon MTurk, dissertation advisors may need to question the representativeness of the study respondents in their students’ dissertation and the conclusions they make based on this population.

5.1. Theoretical implications and future study suggestions

This paper has extended the attribution and self-efficacy theories by revealing that a public health crisis moderates attributive factors that underpinned the decision-making of individuals. The integration of self-efficacy theory and attributive theory has proven to better unravel the behaviour of graduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic than solely utilizing one of them. The application and extension of the self-efficacy and attribution theories are rarely observed in the context of hospitality and tourism education, and thus, this study creates the foundation for future scholars to understand students’ attitudes and behaviour in our field.

The findings highlight some factors triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic and have not been identified previously. For example, the religious background was a significant driver to selecting a particular research topic. This research also shows a shift in research direction to hot and publishable issues related to COVID-19. The utility of the dissertation becomes a significant consideration among graduate students. Additionally, emotion is recognized as another critical factor affecting the dissertation writing journey. The current study informs academia and the research community on the extent to which the COVID-19 would influence idea generation and the direction of research in the foreseeable future, as extant studies have overlooked this vital connection. Future studies should consider those factors when investigating relevant behaviours and experiences.

The time that the current study was done is likely to affect the findings. Therefore, it is recommended that future research explore graduate students’ dissertation journey in the post-COVID-19 era to ascertain whether there will be similarities or differences. This would help to give a comprehensive picture of the impacts of the COVID-19 on education. Moreover, the findings of this study cannot be generalised as it was undertaken at a particular Taiwanese institution. We recommend that quantitative research with larger samples could be conducted to facilitate the generalisation of the findings. Finally, it is suggested that a meta-analysis or systematic literature review on articles written on the COVID-19 pandemic and education could be done to further identify more influential factors related to the public health crisis and educational activities.

5.2. Practical implications for hospitality and tourism education

The findings revealed that negative emotion might trigger students' attribution to external factors that affected the dissertation journey. Thus, relevant stakeholders should develop strategies and innovate ways to ease the fears and anxieties of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study calls for immediate actions to prevent spillover effects on upcoming students. Faculty members, staff, and teachers should be trained on soft skills such as empathy, flexibility, and conflict solutions required by the hospitality and tourism industry.

Moreover, the thesis supervisors should notice students' over-reliance on online data collection due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As it may possibly affect the quality and findings of their students' dissertations, there should be sound and logical justification for this decision. Collecting data online should be backed by the appropriateness of the method and the research problem under study instead of the convenience of obtaining such data. There is an urgent need for students to be guided for innovative data collection methods. The school can turn the COVID-19 crisis into an opportunity to improve the online teaching materials and equipment. The research programs may consider including more teaching hours on online research design or data collection procedures to bring positive discussions on the strengths of such approaches.

Credit author statement

Emmanuel Kwame Opoku: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing, Project administration. Li-Hsin Chen: Conceptualization, Supervision, Review, Editing, Response to reviewers. Sam Yuan Permadi: Investigation, Visualization, Project administration.

• Abood M.H., Alharbi B.H., Mhaidat F., Gazo A.M. The relationship between personality traits, academic self-efficacy and academic adaptation among university students in Jordan. International Journal of Higher Education. 2020; 9 (3):120–128. [ Google Scholar ]
• Abraham V., Bremser K., Carreno M., Crowley-Cyr L., Moreno M. Exploring the consequences of COVID-19 on tourist behaviors: Perceived travel risk, animosity and intentions to travel. Tourism Review. 2020; 74 (2):701–717. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alam G.M., Parvin M. Can online higher education be an active agent for change? Comparison of academic success and job-readiness before and during COVID-19. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2021; 172 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alvarado C., Garcia L., Gilliam N., Minckler S., Samay C. Pandemic pivots: The impact of a global health crisis on the dissertation in practice. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice. 2021; 6 (2):5–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review. 1977; 84 (2) 191-125. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. Prentice Hall; Englewood Cliffs, NJ: 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bao W. COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking university. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 2020; 2 (2):113–115. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartimote-Aufflick K., Bridgeman A., Walker R., Sharma M., Smith L. The study, evaluation, and improvement of university student self-efficacy. Studies in Higher Education. 2016; 41 (11):1918–1942. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bausch T., Gartner W.C., Ortanderl F. How to avoid a COVID-19 research paper tsunami? A tourism system approach. Journal of Travel Research. 2021; 60 (3):467–485. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bitchener J., Basturkmen H., East M. The focus of supervisor written feedback to thesis/dissertation students. International Journal of English Studies. 2010; 10 (2):79–97. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen M., Wu X. Attributing academic success to giftedness and its impact on academic achievement: The mediating role of self-regulated learning and negative learning emotions. School Psychology International. 2021; 42 (2):170–186. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chu H. Research methods in library and information science: A content analysis. Library & Information Science Research. 2015; 37 (1):36–41. [ Google Scholar ]
• Corbin J.M., Strauss A. Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology. 1990; 13 (1):3–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Costen W.M., Waller S.N., Wozencroft A.J. Mitigating race: Understanding the role of social connectedness and sense of belonging in African–American student retention in hospitality programs. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education. 2013; 12 (1):15–24. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dhawan S. Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 2020; 49 (1):5–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duffy L.N., Pinckney IV H.P., Powell G.M., Bixler R.D., McGuire F.A. Great theses and dissertation start with an intriguing idea. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education. 2018; 22 :82–87. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dwivedi Y.K., Hughes D.L., Coombs C., Constantiou I., Duan Y., Edwards J.S., Gupta B., Lal B., Misra S., Prashant P. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on information management research and practice: Transforming education, work and life. International Journal of Information Management. 2020; 55 [ Google Scholar ]
• Fadhly F.Z., Emzir E., Lustyantie N. Exploring cognitive process of research topic selection in academic writing. Journal of English Education. 2018; 7 (1):157–166. English Review . [ Google Scholar ]
• Hadar L.L., Ergas O., Alpert B., Ariav T. Rethinking teacher education in a VUCA world: Student teachers' social-emotional competencies during the Covid-19 crisis. European Journal of Teacher Education. 2020; 43 (4):573–586. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hattie J., Hodis F.A., Kang S.H. Theories of motivation: Integration and ways forward. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2020; 61 [ Google Scholar ]
• Hendricks K.S. The sources of self-efficacy: Educational research and implications for music. UPDATE: Applications of Research in Music Education. 2016; 35 (1):32–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Holloway I., Wheeler S. Wiley-Blackwell; London, UK: 2002. Qualitative research in nursing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Husin M.S., Nurbayani E. The ability of Indonesian EFL learners in writing academic papers. Dinamika Ilmu. 2017; 17 (2):237–250. [ Google Scholar ]
• I'Anson R.A., Smith K.A. Undergraduate Research Projects and Dissertations: Issues of topic selection, access and data collection amongst tourism management students. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education. 2004; 3 (1):19–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jensen P.H. Choosing your PhD topic (and why it is important) The Australian Economic Review. 2013; 46 (4):499–507. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jeynes W.H. Religiosity, religious schools, and their relationship with the achievement gap: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. The Journal of Negro Education. 2010:263–279. [ Google Scholar ]
• Keshavarz H., Shekari M.R. Factors affecting topic selection for theses and dissertations in library and information science: A national scale study. Library & Information Science Research. 2020; 42 (4) [ Google Scholar ]
• de Kleijn R.A., Mainhard M.T., Meijer P.C., Pilot A., Brekelmans M. Master's thesis supervision: Relations between perceptions of the supervisor–student relationship, final grade, perceived supervisor contribution to learning and student satisfaction. Studies in Higher Education. 2012; 37 (8):925–939. [ Google Scholar ]
• LaBelle S., Martin M.M. Attribution theory in the college classroom: Examining the relationship of student attributions and instructional dissent. Communication Research Reports. 2014; 31 (1):110–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lall S., Singh N. Covid-19: Unmasking the new face of education. International Journal of Research in Pharmacy and Science. 2020; 11 (1):48–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lassoued Z., Alhendawi M., Bashitialshaaer R. An exploratory study of the obstacles for achieving quality in distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences. 2020; 10 (9):232. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee S.H., Deale C.S. A matter of degrees: Exploring dimensions in the Ph.D. student–advisor relationship in hospitality and tourism education. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism. 2016; 16 (4):316–330. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee R.M., Robbins S.B. The relationship between social connectedness and anxiety, self-esteem, and social identity. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1998; 45 (3):338–345. [ Google Scholar ]
• Manzano-León A., Aguilar-Parra J.M., Rodríguez-Ferrer J.M., Trigueros R., Collado-Soler R., Méndez-Aguado C.…Molina-Alonso L. Online escape room during COVID-19: A qualitative study of social education degree students' experiences. Education Sciences. 2021; 11 (8):426. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moss A. 2020. Demographics of people on Amazon mechanical Turk. https://www.cloudresearch.com/resources/blog/who-uses-amazon-mturk-2020-demographics/ Retrieved from. [ Google Scholar ]
• de Oliveira Araújo F.J., de Lima L.S.A., Cidade P.I.M., Nobre C.B., Neto M.L.R. Impact of Sars-Cov-2 and its reverberation in global higher education and mental health. Psychiatry Research. 2020; 288 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pemberton C.L.A. A “How-to” guide for the education thesis/dissertation process. Kappa Delta Pi Record. 2012; 48 (2):82–86. [ Google Scholar ]
• Qiu H., Li Q., Li C. How technology facilitates tourism education in COVID-19: Case study of nankai university. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education. 2020 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ritchie J., Lewis J., Nicholls C.M., Ormston R. 4th ed. Sage; London, UK: 2014. Qualitative research practice. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rose-Redwood R., Kitchin R., Apostolopoulou E., Rickards L., Blackman T., Crampton J., Rossi U., Buckley M. Geographies of the COVID-19 pandemic. Dialogues in Human Geography. 2020; 10 (2):97–106. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sanders K., Nguyen P.T., Bouckenooghe D., Rafferty A., Schwarz G. Unraveling the what and how of organizational communication to employees during COVID-19 pandemic: Adopting an attributional lens. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 2020; 56 (3):289–293. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sato S., Kang T.A., Daigo E., Matsuoka H., Harada M. Graduate employability and higher education's contributions to human resource development in sport business before and after COVID-19. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education. 2021; 28 [ Google Scholar ]
• Sverdlik A., Hall N.C., McAlpine L., Hubbard K. The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students' completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies. 2018; 13 (1):361–388. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ting H., Morrison A., Leong Q.L. Editorial - responsibility, responsible tourism and our responses. Journal of Responsible Tourism Management. 2021; 1 (2):1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tremblay S., Castiglione S., Audet L.-A., Desmarais M., Horace M., Peláez S. Conducting qualitative research to respond to COVID-19 challenges: Reflections for the present and beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2021 doi: 10.1177/16094069211009679. Advance online publication. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tuomaala O., Järvelin K., Vakkari P. Evolution of library and information science, 1965–2005: Content analysis of journal articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2014; 65 (7):1446–1462. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang C.J., Ng C.Y., Brook R.H. Response to COVID-19 in Taiwan: Big data analytics, new technology, and proactive testing. JAMA. 2020; 323 (14):1341–1342. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weiner B. Psychology Press; New York: 2006. Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: An attributional approach. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu P., Peng M.Y.P., Anser M.K. Effective learning support towards sustainable student learning and well-being influenced by global pandemic of COVID-19: A comparison between mainland China and Taiwanese students. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yusuf A. Factors influencing post graduate students' choice of research topic in education at Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi-Nigeria. Sumerianz Journal of Education, Linguistics and Literature. 2018; 1 (2):35–40. [ Google Scholar ]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

The dissertation journey during the COVID-19 pandemic: Crisis or opportunity?

Affiliation.

• 1 The International Master's Program of Tourism and Hospitality, National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism, No. 1, Songhe Rd., Xiaogang Dist, Kaohsiung City, 812, Taiwan.
• PMID: 35221798
• PMCID: PMC8858711
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jhlste.2022.100374

Despite dissertation's significance in enhancing the quality of scholarly outputs in tourism and hospitality fields, insufficient research investigates the challenges and disruptions students experience amidst a public health crisis. This study aims to fill the research gaps and integrate attribution and self-efficacy theories to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic influences students' decision-making and behaviours during the dissertation writing process. Qualitative exploration with 15 graduate students was conducted. The results indicate that adjustment of data collection approaches was the most shared external challenge, while students' religious background and desire for publishing COVID related topics were primary internal motivations.

Keywords: Attribution theory; COVID-19; Dissertation writing; Pandemic; Self-efficacy theory.

© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PubMed Disclaimer

The theoretical framework.

Similar articles

• Crisis management research (1985-2020) in the hospitality and tourism industry: A review and research agenda. Wut TM, Xu JB, Wong SM. Wut TM, et al. Tour Manag. 2021 Aug;85:104307. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104307. Epub 2021 Mar 3. Tour Manag. 2021. PMID: 36345489 Free PMC article. Review.
• How did the COVID-19 pandemic influence students' career expectations in the hotel and tourism industry? Lopes MS, Gomes C. Lopes MS, et al. J Hosp Leis Sport Tour Educ. 2023 Jun;32:100436. doi: 10.1016/j.jhlste.2023.100436. Epub 2023 Apr 14. J Hosp Leis Sport Tour Educ. 2023. PMID: 37124877 Free PMC article.
• How does COVID-19 differ from previous crises? A comparative study of health-related crisis research in the tourism and hospitality context. Park E, Kim WH, Kim SB. Park E, et al. Int J Hosp Manag. 2022 May;103:103199. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103199. Epub 2022 Mar 7. Int J Hosp Manag. 2022. PMID: 36540129 Free PMC article.
• Factors influencing the publishing efforts of graduate students in nursing. Whitley GG, Oddi LF, Terrell D. Whitley GG, et al. J Nurs Educ. 1998 Apr;37(4):182-5. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-19980401-11. J Nurs Educ. 1998. PMID: 9570420
• Teaching Strategies During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Tailoring Virtual Learning for Public Health and Cancer Health Disparities Education. Moralez EA, Boren RL, Lebel DL, Drennan M, Olvera DR, Thompson B. Moralez EA, et al. Front Public Health. 2022 Apr 29;10:845400. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.845400. eCollection 2022. Front Public Health. 2022. PMID: 35570916 Free PMC article.
• Abood M.H., Alharbi B.H., Mhaidat F., Gazo A.M. The relationship between personality traits, academic self-efficacy and academic adaptation among university students in Jordan. International Journal of Higher Education. 2020;9(3):120–128.
• Abraham V., Bremser K., Carreno M., Crowley-Cyr L., Moreno M. Exploring the consequences of COVID-19 on tourist behaviors: Perceived travel risk, animosity and intentions to travel. Tourism Review. 2020;74(2):701–717.
• Alam G.M., Parvin M. Can online higher education be an active agent for change? Comparison of academic success and job-readiness before and during COVID-19. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2021;172 - PMC - PubMed
• Alvarado C., Garcia L., Gilliam N., Minckler S., Samay C. Pandemic pivots: The impact of a global health crisis on the dissertation in practice. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice. 2021;6(2):5–10.
• Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review. 1977;84(2) 191-125. - PubMed

Related information

Linkout - more resources, full text sources.

• Elsevier Science
• Europe PubMed Central
• PubMed Central
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER COLUMN
• 25 June 2020

Five ways to tackle PhD research anxieties triggered by COVID-19 lockdowns

• Paul Ashton 0 &
• Linamaria Pintor-Escobar 1

Paul Ashton is the head of biology and professor of botany at Edge Hill University in Ormskirk, UK.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Linamaria Pintor-Escobar is a second-year PhD student, studying antibiotic discovery in Actinomycetes bacteria at Edge Hill University in Ormskirk, UK.

Among researchers, PhD students are perhaps suffering the most from coronavirus lockdown restrictions put in place around the world. Interruptions caused by the pandemic are producing a cohort of worried research students who are concerned about the completion and quality of their work.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01898-1

This is an article from the Nature Careers Community, a place for Nature readers to share their professional experiences and advice. Guest posts are encouraged .

Related Articles

Why I’ve removed journal titles from the papers on my CV

Career Column 09 AUG 24

Why we quit: how ‘toxic management’ and pandemic pressures fuelled disillusionment in higher education

Career News 08 AUG 24

Scientists are falling victim to deepfake AI video scams — here’s how to fight back

Career Feature 07 AUG 24

Hybrid conferences should be the norm — optimize them so everyone benefits

Editorial 06 AUG 24

Slow productivity worked for Marie Curie — here’s why you should adopt it, too

Career Feature 05 AUG 24

Long COVID lung damage linked to immune system response

News 18 JUL 24

Vaccines save lives: how can uptake be increased?

Editorial 09 JUL 24

Spike deep mutational scanning helps predict success of SARS-CoV-2 clades

Article 03 JUL 24

Recruitment of Talent Positions at Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University

Call for top experts and scholars in the field of science and technology.

Shenyang, Liaoning, China

Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University

The Recruitment of Fuyao University of Science and Technology

This recruitment of Fuyao University Technologyof Science andUcovers 7 departments including the 6 Schools and the Faculty of Fundamental Disciplines.

Fuzhou, Fujian (CN)

Fuzhou FuYao Institute for Advanced Study

Educational Consultant

You will build and maintain strong relationships with local representatives, key distributors, schools, Ministries of Education, etc.

Riyadh - hybrid working model

Springer Nature Ltd

Senior Marketing Manager – Journal Awareness

Job Title: Senior Marketing Manager – Journal Awareness Location(s): London, UK - Hybrid Working Model Closing date: 25th August 2024             A...

London (Central), London (Greater) (GB)

Faculty Positions& Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Optical and Electronic Information, HUST

Job Opportunities: Leading talents, young talents, overseas outstanding young scholars, postdoctoral researchers.

Wuhan, Hubei, China

School of Optical and Electronic Information, Huazhong University of Science and Technology

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Graduate students locked down? PhD students’ satisfaction with supervision during the first and second COVID-19 lockdown in Belgium

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Writing – original draft

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Research Group TOR, Sociology Department, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

Roles Data curation, Investigation, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Software, Writing – review & editing

Roles Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

• Theun Pieter van Tienoven, 
• Anaïs Glorieux, 
• Joeri Minnen, 
• Petrus te Braak, 
• Bram Spruyt

• Published: May 23, 2022
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923
• Reader Comments

Supervisor support is crucial for the successful and timely completion of the PhD and the largest contributor to PhD students’ overall job satisfaction. The COVID-19 pandemic affected PhD students’ life substantially through delayed experiments, missed timelines, running out of funding, change to online team- and supervisor meetings, mandatory working from home, and social confinement.

This contribution considers PhD students’ satisfaction scores to reflect the extent to which PhD students felt supported by their supervisor during the COVID-19 pandemic so far and aims to investigate to what extent did PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support changed over time.

It uses two longitudinal two cohorts of wave 4 to 5 of the PhD Survey at a Belgian university. These cohorts are representative of two different ways the COVID-19 pandemic might have impacted doctoral research. Cohort 1 (n = 345) includes a pre-COVID measurement (April-May 2019) and a measurement immediately after the start of the abrupt lockdown in April-May 2020. Cohort 2 (n = 349) includes the measurement at the onset of the pandemic in 2020 and after a year with continuously changing containment policies (April-May 2021). The composite measure of satisfaction with supervisor support is based on six items with high internal consistency.

No significant net effect of time was revealed. Instead within subject interactions with time showed that in cohort 1, PhD students at the start of their PhD trajectory and PhD students with family responsibilities reported lower supervisor satisfaction scores over time. In cohort 2, PhD students not pursuing academic careers reported lower satisfaction scores over time.

In times of crises, special attention needs to be paid to PhD students who are extra susceptible to uncertainties because of their junior status or personal situation, and especially those PhD students for whom doctoral research is not a trajectory to position themselves in academia.

Citation: van Tienoven TP, Glorieux A, Minnen J, te Braak P, Spruyt B (2022) Graduate students locked down? PhD students’ satisfaction with supervision during the first and second COVID-19 lockdown in Belgium. PLoS ONE 17(5): e0268923. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923

Editor: Carlos Alberto Zúniga-González, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Nicaragua Leon, NICARAGUA

Received: February 2, 2022; Accepted: May 10, 2022; Published: May 23, 2022

Copyright: © 2022 van Tienoven et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Raw data cannot be shared publicly because of the institution's privacy regulations. Data code necessary to replicate results are available from the Vrije Universiteit Brussel's Institutional Data Access (contact via [email protected] ) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

At the time the SARS-CoV-19 virus took hold of the world (early 2020), it was not clear how the COVID-19 pandemic would unfold over the years. At the onset there was an abrupt, chaotic, and very strict lockdown. Gradually, fluctuations in infections led to a varying policy of tightening and easing. Like so many others, PhD students are also confronted with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This impact translates into uncertainties about being able to carry out research in the set research period, into the loss and/or digitization of the intellectual and social support of colleagues and supervisors, and into challenges of combining PhD research with impacted responsibilities in family and personal life.

Concerns about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic are mainly vocalized in (bio)medical and sciences disciplines [ 1 – 5 ]. On the one hand, these disciplines rely heavily on experiments in laboratories that are not so easily postponed or on face-to-face medical investigations that could not proceed because of social distancing rules. On the other hand, these disciplines tend to have the academic tradition to write commentaries and letters to editors. Undoubtedly, PhD students in all academic disciplines are in precarious statutes and are faced with the uncertainties and difficulties of the COVID-19 pandemic. Similar, all academic disciplines will have reasons to expect a negative impact on their PhD research. Therefore, a comparison of disciplines and the different type of research that characterizes these disciplines, is recommended.

Regardless of the disciplines, supervisor support is crucial for successful completion of a PhD [ 6 ] and expected to be even more important in the unprecedented research environment created by the COVID-19 pandemic [ 7 , 8 ]. Especially because supervisor support can take away uncertainties and positively contribute to PhD students’ well-being [ 9 , 10 ]. For these reasons, the evaluation of supervisor support by PhD students can be considered an important indicator of how supervisors’ efforts and abilities mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Against that background, this contribution aims to answer the following question: to what extent did the COVID-19 pandemic impact PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support during the abrupt onset and during a year of alternating tightening and easing of restrictions? We will use longitudinal data of two cohorts. Cohort 1 (April-May 2019 –April-May 2020) represents a pre-COVID measurement and a measurement immediately after the start of the abrupt lockdown (March-May 2020). Cohort 2 (April-May 2020 –April-May 2021) represents a measurement at the onset of the pandemic and after a year with continuously changing containment policies. Moreover, our data are conducted university wide, which allows to compare all academic disciplines.

Supervision and satisfaction among PhD students

PhD students are assessed on their thesis, whether after an oral defence, and this process typically takes four years [ 11 ]. During this process, the support of supervisors in terms of expertise, time, and support is essential [ 12 ]. The pedagogical aspect of supervision plays a key role in the successful and timely completion of the PhD trajectory and is considered to be closely related to supervisors’ ideas of the purpose of doing doctoral research [ 11 , 13 ]. Training PhD students to become independent and innovative researchers happens through learning research skills, requirements, and the ability to create new ideas, whereas enabling PhD students to develop as individuals happens through motivating PhD students in frequent meetings and taking feedback on supervisory arrangements [ 13 ].

Supervisory arrangements are said to “make or break” PhD students [ 6 ]. Not surprisingly, then, supervisors are the largest contributor to PhD students’ overall job satisfaction [ 9 ]. The expertise and scholarly ability, as well as the more personal supporting role of the supervisor play an important role here [ 14 , 15 ]. The frequency and quality of the meetings, the encouragement, support, and feedback to publish, and opportunities to attend research seminars all contribute to the satisfaction of PhD students [ 12 , 15 ]. However, ultimately, supervisors’ supportiveness trumps supervisors’ academic qualities as the main contributor to PhD students’ satisfaction [ 9 ].

It is not entirely inconceivable that a higher degree of satisfaction with the support of their supervisor also leads to a higher degree of well-being among PhD students [ 9 ]. All the more so because a large-scale, international study shows that large numbers of PhD students who had experienced depression and/or anxiety disagreed with statements about sufficient support from their supervisors [ 10 ]. Moreover, disagreement about or disruptions in supervisory arrangements cannot be ruled out [ 16 ]. In fact, common disagreements relate to supervisors not being involved in research decisions and PhD students judging supervisors not being up-to-date and providing dubious advice [ 17 ]. Disruptions in the relationship between supervisors and PhD students often relate to the duality in supervision situation because the tutoring relation and the supportive, more personal relation may interact negatively [ 18 ]. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic forced universities to accelerate the implementation of a digital learning environment which implied additional challenges for establishing and maintaining dependency relations [ 19 ]. Digital competences [ 20 ], the quality of the digital leaning environment, and the engagement to this environment [ 21 ] will add to the complexity of supervisor arrangements. A ‘match’ between PhD students and supervisors in both the personal and academic relationship is crucial for completion rates and increased PhD students’ satisfaction [ 22 ].

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

The precariousness of this balance between expected and obtained support from supervisors, between PhD students’ and supervisors’ professional and personal relationships, and the substantial impact this has on the successful completion of PhD research on the one hand and the well-being of PhD students on the other, was further emphasized at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Numerous commentaries and editorial articles exposed the difficulties that PhD students encountered due to the pandemic: delayed experiments, missed timelines, running out of funding, change to online team- and supervisor meetings, mandatory working from home, social confinement (especially for foreign researchers), and the need for a supportive, divers and inclusive research community [ 1 – 5 ]. Following this call for attention to the well-being of scientists and PhD students during the COVID-19 pandemic, several studies followed that began to explore these challenges and threats further [ 7 , 8 , 23 – 28 ]. PhD students’ worries and concerns tend to fall into three categories [ 8 ].

Disruption of and changes in research activities.

The COVID-19 pandemic forces some PhD students to alter their research designs and exposes them to the risk of going in overtime in times when funding becomes more scarce [ 8 ]. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic affects research designs unequally. PhD students that planned electronic data collection or had already collected data might even benefit from the COVID-19 pandemic because it causes people to familiarize with online technology or because it left PhD students with more time to spend on writing their theses [ 23 ]. Regarding the latter element Paula [ 4 ], however, warns that mandatory working from home in a crisis situation that extends beyond the realm of work cannot be equated with a boost in productivity. Indeed PhD students report a decrease in productivity [ 8 ] and an increase in workload [ 23 ].

Personal concerns.

PhD students report not only being worried about the immediate as well as the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their own health, but also on the health of friends and family [ 8 ]. In addition to health concerns, PhD students also report financial concerns. Indeed, research in Australia, for example, finds that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates the financial precarity of PhD students, with many considering quitting their research [ 26 ]. Finally, there are concerns about maintaining social connectedness [ 8 ]. Face-to-face networking with peers facilitates support such as problem solving and personal development [ 29 ]. Additionally, PhD students report meeting with friends and family as a coping strategy for stress [ 30 ].

Career impact.

Research on the career impact of the COVID-19 pandemic shows ambiguous results. Quantitative data from 2 nd and 5 th year PhD students, for example, report that the COVID-19 pandemic, which thoroughly shook up the academic job-market, hardly changes the career aspirations of PhD students [ 25 ]. Contrarily, qualitative data from master students, PhD students, and postdoctoral researchers, report that PhD students are concerned about their competitiveness as a researcher and consider not pursuing a career in academia [ 8 ]. This ambiguity might result from different samples and methodology, but it might also relate to PhD students’ motivation to conduct PhD research. PhD students motivated by a professional quest (i.e., to derive professional advantages in terms of employment prospects or working conditions) or PhD students motivated by a fundamental desire for self-actualization are less likely to have academic career aspirations compared to PhD students motivated by an intellectual quest [ 31 ]. Additionally, this impact might be mediated by the academic discipline since, for example, medical PhD students tend to be much more motivated by career building aspirations than PhD students in sciences [ 32 ].

The impact of the preceding elements might be twofold. On the one hand, these worries and concerns contribute to PhD students’ stress levels, which are usually already high [ 30 ]. On the other hand, PhD students’ might expect additional support from their supervisors as a result from the COVID-19 pandemic. This expected additional support can be grouped in two categories [ 8 ]: understanding and empathy on the one hand and guidance and direction on the other hand. The former deals with understanding for delays, decreased productivity, and moral support to get back on track. The latter deals with the structural support such as adjusting their research plan, flexibility in timelines, and financial support.

Although the status of PhD students is sometimes considered precarious due to financial and time constraints, research reports a chasm in support for PhD students in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic [ 7 ]. One group reports unchanged support–a few even report improved support –and the other group reports worsened support. Surprisingly, these groups do not differ significantly by gender, living situation or year of their PhD trajectory. However, the group that reports worsened support is characterized by significantly larger shares of PhD students that saw a decrease in the frequency of supervision, that did not meet with their supervisor in person, that also witnessed a decrease in supervision via email messages, and that did not receive help from their supervisor to cope with COVID-related restrictions during the pandemic [ 7 ].

The case of PhD students in Belgium

This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on well-being of PhD students in a unique way. We will analyse PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support in two cohorts that are representative of two different ways the COVID-19 pandemic might have impacted doctoral research.

The first cohort concerns PhD students that were conducting doctoral research in April-May 2019 and in April-May 2020. This cohort was confronted very abruptly with a strict lockdown imposed by the Belgian Federal Government, and which reached its height on 18 March 2020 with the complete closure of schools and borders for non-essential travel. Social contacts had to be limited as much as possible and ‘contact bubbles’ were imposed. In no time universities switched to ‘code red’ which lasted until the end of the academic year (mid-July 2020). For many PhD students code red meant mandatory working from home, closure of all on campus facilities, and online contacts with supervisors and colleagues. Additionally, data collections had to be interrupted, postponed, or redesigned, because face-to-face interactions were not possible and laboratory use was scaled down to take into account social distancing regulations. Conferences, workshops, and other courses were cancelled or entirely took place online.

However, although the first lockdown was extremely disruptive for work and family life, with the summer of 2020 and the development of vaccines on the horizon, hope arose that this lockdown was a one-off. From July 2020 onwards, almost all restrictions were eased and the academic year of 2020–2021 started with hope.

This turned out to be a vain hope. From October 2020 onwards, the number of cases that tested positive for the SARS-CoV-19 virus started to rise again. The school autumn break was extended until mid-November and new restrictions were put in place. The second cohort represents PhD students that were conducting doctoral research in April-May 2020 and in April-May 2021. After facing a sudden lockdown, this cohort is characterized by an academic year that alternated between ‘code orange’ and ‘code red’ with varying restrictions on the number of days allowed to return to the workplace, the number of colleagues allowed to meet in person or to operate in laboratories, the possibilities to provide onsite, hybrid, or online teaching, and the partial opening of campus life. In other words, the shock effect of the first lockdown turned into a yearlong period of uncertainty, unpredictability, and great stress on the mental resilience of PhD students.

Expectations

Based on the existing literature and the particularities concerning the way the pandemic evolved, we hypothesize that the first lockdown in 2020 has a substantial negative effect on PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support when compared to 2019 ( H1a) . The lockdown of 2020 was unprecedented and both PhD students and supervisors not only had to cope with changes in the modus operandi of supervision and research plans, but also with the challenges of personal situations. We consider the difference between satisfaction scores of 2019 and 2020 to reflect the extent to which PhD students felt supported during these abrupt events. We hypothesize that the second lockdown of 2021 has a less substantial negative effect on PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support when compared to 2020 ( H1b ). Although it remained a year of relaxation and tightening of measures to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, the chaotic nature of the first lockdown will have partly given way to acquiesce in the situation, however disruptive it still has been. As such, we consider the satisfaction scores of 2021 to reflect the extent to which PhD students felt supported during the academic year full of uncertainties.

In addition to the hypothesized shift in PhD students’ satisfaction scores, we expect certain characteristics to have an additional direct or indirect influence on conducting doctoral research and which can therefore be a reason to expect (even) more support from supervisors.

Discipline.

The type of doctoral research and especially, the collection of research data, may vary across disciplines, which, in turn, may have been impacted differently by the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is plausible that PhD students expect (extra) support from supervisors in solving these research related problems and in adapting their research plan and are therefore stricter in their assessment of the support they received from their supervisor. However, we expect little variation between the faculties, precisely because each department has its own problems when doing doctoral research during the COVID-19 pandemic ( H2 ). Additionally, pre-COVID-19 research shows that different elements of supervisory might cancel each other out in an overall satisfaction score. Indeed, PhD students in humanities and social sciences tend to put more value on academic advising and a personal touch, whereas PhD students in biological and physical sciences strongly assess not being used as cheap labour and, together with their peers in social sciences, put more value on career development [ 15 ].

Phase of doctoral research.

PhD students that are in the finalizing phase of their doctoral research are much more likely to know the ins and outs of academia than PhD students that just started. The latter might not only need more intellectual support to get their research started, but also more administrative support to find their way. In the absence of colleagues due to mandatory working from home or alternating days at work, these PhD students might expect (extra) support from supervisors. Similarly, PhD students that are in the executing phase of their doctoral research (i.e., collecting data) face several uncertainties and thus, might also expect (extra) support from supervisors. Although one study does not report differences based on year of research [ 7 ], another study makes notion that PhD students in their post-data collection phase might have less concerns [ 23 ]. Therefore, we hypothesize that the expectancy of (extra) support results in a stricter assessment of satisfaction with this support. In other words, we expect the satisfaction scores of PhD students that are not in the finalizing phase not only to be lower than their peers who are in the finalizing phase of their PhD ( H3a ) but also to decrease more over time ( H3b ).

Career aspirations and motivations.

Motivations to embark on a PhD trajectory vary and relate to different career aspirations [ 31 ], which in turn may be impacted differently by the COVID-19 pandemic [ 8 , 25 ]. We expect that students who are motivated by an intellectual quest and aspire an academic career will be more focused on contributing to the academic community and outperforming their peers. For them, not only is the PhD itself important, but also getting published, visiting conferences, and other activities that will create valuable academic resume. We expect these PhD students to be affected most and thus to expect more support and to assess this support stricter, which will result in a decrease of satisfaction scores over time ( H4 ).

Living situation.

The different living situations of PhD students are impacted differently by the COVID-19 restrictions. PhD students that live alone face the consequences of social isolation due to restrictions that limit social contact, whereas PhD students living with children face the challenging consequence of combining working from home with family life that, mainly due to school closures, was completely withdrawn into the domestic sphere too. Expectations for supervisor support may change depending on the extent to which the family context is affected by the COVID-19 restrictions. In line with earlier findings [ 8 ], we therefore expect the score of satisfaction with supervisor support not only to vary between PhD students in different living situations ( H5a ), but also that the change in score over time is stronger for PhD students that live with children or in other living situations compared to PhD students that live with a partner only ( H5b ).

Nationality.

The social restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as shutting down campus life, the very restrictive conditions under which it is possible to meet with friends or family and the ban on non-essential travel abroad, have an impact on the social supportive network of PhD students. We consider foreign PhD students to be extra vulnerable for these consequences that, in turn, might have repercussions on doing doctoral research and result in the need for (extra) support and understanding from supervisors. In line with earlier expressed concerns [ 3 ], we therefore expect foreign PhD students’ assessment of supervisor support to be stricter and thus lead to a decrease in satisfaction scores over time ( H6 ).

Pre-COVID-19, more female than male PhD students reported higher levels of anxiety and depression [ 30 ] and more stress [ 33 ]. During the COVID-19 pandemic women, and especially women with caregiving responsibilities, start to publish less [ 28 ] and, out of necessity, have to prioritize their time in ways that are unfavorable for their future careers [ 27 ]. Although research did not report a difference in the share of women that reported worsened supervisor support compared to those whose support remained unchanged [ 7 ], we do expect women’s assessment of supervisor support to be stricter and thus lead to a stronger decrease in satisfaction scores over time when compared to their male counterparts ( H7 ).

Data & method

This study relies on data from the PhD Survey of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB). The VUB is located in the Brussels Capital Region, which is both part of the French and Flemish Community of Belgium. The registration of these language communities in the Belgian Constitution in 1970 implied the establishment of so-called cultural communities that are given the power to regulate language use regarding, for example, education. As a result, the VUB has been legally and officially recognised as the Dutch-speaking university in Brussels alongside the French-speaking university since 1970, but both universities have their joint origin in the French speaking Université Libre de Bruxelles that was founded in 1834.

In the academic year 2019–2020 just over 19,000 students were enrolled in 149 study programmes of which one third is taught in English. About 10% of enrolled students are enrolled in PhD programmes. The general admission requirements to conduct doctoral research at the VUB (and any other Flemish university) include possession of a recognized master’s degree, the need of a supervisor, and the need of funding. PhD students in Belgium can rely on different funding opportunities, such as general or themed scholarships from (inter)national funding institutions (e.g., the national research council), research funding from a research project or multiple research projects in the name of the supervisor, or by combining PhD research with a position as teaching assistant.

PhD students enrol in the compulsory Doctoral Training Programme which facilitates PhD students with the possibility to develop their (research) skills through, for example, courses, seminars, workshops, and career coaching. There are three different doctoral schools under which all faculties are divided. The Doctoral School of Natural Sciences and (Bioscience) Engineering (NSE) includes the Faculty of Engineering Sciences and the Faculty of Sciences & Biosciences engineering. The Doctoral School of Human Sciences (DSh) includes the Faculty of Social Sciences & Solvay Business School, the Faculty of Arts & Philosophy, the Faculty of Psychology & Educational Science, and the Faculty of Law & Criminology. The Doctoral School of Life Science and Medicine (LSM) includes the Faculty of Medical Sciences & Pharmacy and the Faculty of Physical education & Physiotherapy.

Doctoral research typically lasts for four years and ends with a successful oral defense of the thesis.

In the empirical part of the study, we rely on data from the PhD Survey. This annual survey is commissioned by the Research, Training & Development Office (RTDO) at the VUB and conducted by the Research Group TOR (Tempus Omnia Revelat) at the same university. The PhD Survey serves as a monitor-instrument to evaluate the support provided to PhD students by RTDO and at the same time monitor aspects of well-being and job satisfaction of PhD students.

A pilot of the PhD Survey among a limited number of faculties took place in the springtime of 2017 (wave 0). Since 2018 onwards, the PhD Survey is being conducted university wide and the 4 th wave has been completed in 2021. The PhD Survey is longitudinal in its design since it aims to follow PhD students throughout their PhD trajectory, which typically lasts four years. Attrition can be attributed to PhD students quitting or successfully finishing their PhD, or non-response to one or more waves. For privacy reasons we have no access to administrative data that would enable to distinguish between these different types of attrition. Influx is natural and based on the number of new PhD students registered at the VUB on the 1 st of January preceding the launch of the next wave. Typically, PhD Students start in October or November, but it is possible to start at any time of the academic year.

The PhD Survey exists of a single online questionnaire that is hosted on the data collection platform MOTUS and accessible through the MOTUS web application [ 34 ]. The PhD Survey generally takes place in the last two weeks of April and the whole month of May. PhD students across all faculties receive an email with login credentials to participate in the survey. Up to two reminders are sent, eight and 20 days after the day of initial invitation. Additionally, the PhD Survey is advertised in the monthly PhD newsletter in the months preceding the PhD Survey and, between reminders, group emails are sent at the faculty level.

Based on the rules of the own institution at the time of PhD Survey waves 0 (2017) to 4 (2021), no advice from the ethics committee is required for an internal survey. Nevertheless, the PhD Survey follows common ethical aspects. PhD students were informed in the emails about the aim of the study, about how data will be used and how feedback can be obtained, and who to contact for further questions and technical support. The emails included information and links about the study’s privacy statement and the general privacy statement of the software platform used to administer the survey. PhD students consented to the survey by clicking on the link in the emails and using their username and password to login to the software platform.

This contribution uses data from wave 2 held in 2019 [ 35 ], wave 3 held in 2020 [ 36 ] and wave 4 held in 2021 [ 37 ]. Response rates are 44.9%, 44.3% and 42.8%, respectively, which is in line with other surveys on PhD students [ 25 ]. We created two cohorts. Cohort 1 exists of all PhD students that responded to both the 2019 and 2020 editions of the PhD Survey (n = 345). This cohort represents a pre-COVID measurement (April-May 2019) and a measurement (April-May 2020) that followed immediately after the start of the abrupt lockdown that lasted from March till May 2020. Cohort 2 comprises all PhD students that responded to both the 2020 and 2021 editions of the PhD Survey (n = 349). This cohort represents a measurement at the onset of the pandemic (April-May 2020) and a measurement (April-May 2021) after a year with continuously changing containment policies. The construction of two cohorts is motivated by the hypothesized difference of impact from the COVID-19 pandemic and sample size maximisation. The first cohort represents PhD students that were abruptly impacted for an intense and short period. The second cohort represents PhD students whose research was impacted by a year of alternating tightening and easing of restrictions.

Although feasible, a three-wave study would only contain 167 PhD students. Moreover, due to privacy regulations, no administrative data on completion of or drop-out from the PhD trajectory is available. This makes it hard to evaluate attrition. Indeed, it cannot be known whether a PhD student is a first-year graduate in 2020 or simply did not respond to the survey of 2019.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923.t001

The main independent variable of interest is time . To assess the net effect of time , the statistical models control for socio-demographic characteristics of the PhD students, as well as objective and subjective characteristics of PhD students’ work environment. Socio-demographic characteristics includes a dummy for female , a dummy for Belgian nationality , and living situation (with partner [reference category], with children, other). Note that the category ‘with children’ includes both PhD students who are a single parent and PhD students that form a two-parent family. The category ‘other’ includes PhD students that live alone, with their parents, or in student houses or other shared housing.

Characteristics of work environment include membership of doctoral school (Doctoral School of Natural Sciences and (Bioscience) Engineering [NSE, reference category], Doctoral School of Human Sciences [DSh], Doctoral School of Life Science and Medicine [LSM]) to measure discipline, a dummy for whether the PhD is in the finalizing phase (self-defined), and a dummy for expected to work in academia . The latter variable is used as a proxy for the more general frame of reference and motivation of PhD students [ 31 ]. PhD students who aim to stay in academia know that they not only have to write an excellent PhD thesis, but also (intellectually) contribute to the academic community by trying to publish several journal articles, present at important conferences, and outperform their peers.

Table 2 provides an overview of the distribution of the socio-demographic and job characteristics for both cohorts.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923.t002

Analysis plan

The analysis proceeds in two steps. First, we provide descriptive statistics of (the changes in) the item scores that measure satisfaction with supervisory support as well as (changes in) the means of the composite measure. The Likert-item scores are considered an ordinal approximation of a continuous variable and therefore presented as means with a minimum of 1 and maximum of 5 [see discussions in 38 , 39 ]. The descriptive analyses are presented for both cohorts separately and tested for statistically significant differences between groups within cohorts using paired-sample t-tests. Given the relatively small sample size, the threshold for statistical significance is set at α = 0.10.

Second, we use one-way repeated measures ANOVA to assess the association between time and satisfaction with supervisory support net of socio-demographic characteristics and job characteristics. Statistical models are presented for both cohorts separately. In these models we first test for between-subject effects. Subsequently, we study the within-subject time effect. Then, we test for within-subject time interaction effects. In the final model we present all relevant between-subject and within-subject effects.

Descriptive results

Table 3 shows the mean scores and standard deviations for the items underlying the composite measure and the score on the composite measure for satisfaction with supervisor support. For cohort 1, the mean scores for stimulation/inspiration to solve research problems/issues by the supervisor, the expertise the supervisor has on the research subject, and the extent to which the supervisor is involved in the research were significantly lower in 2020 during the first lockdown compared to 2019. The other items, albeit not significant, showed a similar tendency towards a decreased satisfaction. As a result, the mean score of the composite measure for satisfaction with supervisor support dropped significantly between 2019 and 2020 from 7.360 in 2019 to 7.171 in 2020. This provisionally confirms H1a .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923.t003

For cohort 2, only the mean scores for the satisfaction with the involvement of the supervisor in PhD research was significantly lower in 2021 compared to 2020. Again, almost all other items, albeit not significant, showed a similar tendency towards decreased satisfaction. The mean score of the composite measure for satisfaction with supervisor support dropped between 2020 and 2021 from 7.752 to 7.634, However, this difference was not statistically significant. This provisionally confirms H1b . We note that the average satisfaction score for 2020 in the first cohort was substantially lower than the average satisfaction score for 2020 in the second cohort. This might be ascribed to attrition caused by a healthy worker effect [ 40 ].

Multivariate results

Table 4 shows the results of the changes in the composite measure of satisfaction with supervisor support for cohort 1 (2019 vs . 2020). The partial η is an indication of the strength of an association and reads like a standardised regression coefficient [ 41 ]. Higher values reflect stronger associations. The Cohen’s d is an indicator of the effect size and expresses how many standard deviations lie between two means. Higher values imply larger effect sizes.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923.t004

Step 1 looks at the between-subject effects in the difference of satisfaction with supervisor support. This difference varied significantly by living situation. The Cohen’s d indicates that the satisfaction with supervisor support decreased substantially for PhD students living with children and for PhD students living with a partner compared to PhD students with other living situations. PhD students that are in the finalizing phase of their PhD research were more satisfied with supervisor support than their peers that are still in the starting or executing phase of their PhD research. Step 2 reports a decrease in supervisor support over time. Step 3 shows that this time-effect was larger for PhD students living with children or with partner and for PhD students that are not in the finalizing phase of their PhD research. The absence of any associations by doctoral schools, sex, and nationality confirms H2 and rejects H6 and H7 for cohort 1. There were no differences in the decrease of score of satisfaction with supervisor support between the doctoral schools, between Belgian and non-Belgian PhD students, and between men and women.

Step 4 presents the final multivariate model. The initial between-subject effects of living situation and being in the finalizing phase of PhD research and main effect for time were no longer significant. This leads us to reject H1a and H3a and H5a . Instead, satisfaction with supervisor scores differed within categories of living situations and phase of PhD research over time. H5b is partially confirmed. PhD students living with children were significantly less satisfied with support from their supervisor. However, it was not the PhD students in other living situations but the PhD students living with a partner that were significantly less satisfied with support from their supervisor. H3b is also confirmed. PhD students that are not in the finalizing phase of their PhD research were significantly less satisfied with support from their supervisor. Keeping constant variations over time within living situation and phase of PhD research led to a highly significant and substantial effect of the expectancy to work in academia. PhD students that expect to work in academia reported a smaller decrease in their satisfaction with supervisor support compared to their peers that do not expect to work in academia or are undecided. This not only rejects H4, but also inverts it.

We applied the same analytical strategy to cohort 2 for the comparison between 2020 and 2021. Only the expectancy to work in academia yielded significant effects (results not shown), which, again, is an inversion of H4 . Like cohort 1, PhD students that do not expect to work in academia reported a significantly lower score of satisfaction with supervisor support ( η = 0.288, p <0.001). Unlike cohort 1, there was also an interaction effect with time ( η = 0.098, p = 0.073) indicating that the decrease in the score of satisfaction with supervisor support was significantly larger for PhD students that do not expect to work in academia compared to their peers who pursue an academic career. All the other hypotheses are rejected.

Fig 1 summarizes the interaction terms with time. For cohort 1, it clearly shows the substantial decrease in the satisfaction score within PhD students living with children, PhD students living with a partner only, and PhD students that are not in the finalizing phase of their PhD research pre-COVID in 2019 and during the lockdown of 2020. For cohort 2, it not only shows the substantial difference between PhD students that expect and do not expect an academic career on this score, but also the substantial decrease on the score of satisfaction with supervisor support over time within PhD students that do not expect an academic career.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268923.g001

PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support is an important indicator of their well-being. It reflects how well they feel supported in doing their doctoral research. This support came under pressure during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 1 – 4 ]. PhD students’ already high stress levels [ 28 ] might increase even further by the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 42 ]. Many PhD students found themselves in situations that might have given rise to increased need of supervisor support. In line with existing research on the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic for PhD students [ 7 , 8 , 23 – 28 ], we found a significant decrease in PhD students’ satisfaction scores with supervisor support over time between 2019 and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 (i.e., cohort 1). However, multivariate analyses showed that this drop was caused by different groups of PhD students, which concurs with research that categorizes PhD students’ worries and concerns in three categories: personal concerns, disruption of research activities, and career impact [ 8 ]. Firstly, personal concerns, measured in this study as a challenging living situation, is most strongly associated with decreasing satisfaction with supervision This is in line with findings that report PhD students’ concern about health of friends and family [ 8 ] and findings about the daily family struggles of the COVID-19 restrictions [ 43 , 44 ]. Indeed, PhD students that live with children reported the largest drop in satisfaction scores. Similarly, PhD students that live with a partner only, also reported a substantial drop in satisfaction scores. This suggests that it is the inflexibility and unpredictability that stems from being responsible for or taking into consideration other family members during a lockdown that causes a mismatch between expected and provided support by supervisors.

Secondly, PhD students that just got started or were gathering data reported a substantial drop in satisfaction scores over time. Satisfaction scores of PhD students in their finalizing phase of their doctoral research remained unchanged. Junior PhD students might have a higher need for support to become acquainted with the research group and meeting colleagues, to kick-off a research agenda, or to change a research plan vis-à-vis data collection method and period. In other words, PhD students’ ignorance and uncertainty seem to play an important role in their assessment of–and consequent decrease in–the satisfaction score. This result suggests that the disruption of research activities due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacted junior PhD students most. Other studied consequences, such as the unproductivity of mandatory telework [ 4 ] and risk of working overtime [ 8 , 23 ] might be equally stratified by PhD students’ seniority.

Thirdly, PhD students that ambition an academic career were not less satisfied with supervisor support measured over a period of COVID-related measures between 2020 and 2021 (i.e., cohort 2). This was unexpected because other studies revealed PhD students’ increased concerns about career impact [ 8 , 25 ], which might give rise to a higher need for support. More worrisome is that PhD students without the ambition to pursue an academic career were much less satisfied with supervisor support over the same period. In other words, it seems that in a year of varying severity of COVID-19 restrictions and its impact on doing doctoral research, PhD students without an ambitious academic frame of reference are experiencing the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic to a greater extent.

The latter finding aligns with the idea that PhD students’ motivation differ and that the resulting expectations cannot be met with a single approach [ 31 ]. Indeed, this study also suggests that PhD students approach their doctoral research from at least two different frames of reference: as a trajectory of formation, learning and self-development versus an unconditional step to position themselves in the academic world. Both approaches require different levels of support from supervisors (and by extension from universities) and it is not inconceivable that the latter type of PhD student is easier to support in crisis situations than the former.

These findings point to policy challenges vis-à-vis PhD students. The results of the analyses of the first cohort clearly show that the COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to reinforce inequality and that a differentiated policy is needed to create and maintain a level playing field. Scholars indeed report on the need for both generalised and specific support running from financial assistance to mental health and pastoral support [ 45 ] and the need to follow up on existing support and/or identifying new forms of support for PhD students would be beneficial [ 46 ]. However, the results of the second cohort reveal much less inequality. This raises the question how stable the results of the first cohort are and whether the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic varies across different phases of the pandemic (and within subgroups). This stresses the importance of cross-sectional or longitudinal follow up on this matter. In this study, the next wave may shed more light on this, but if the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic does indeed vary as the pandemic continues and is contained, it makes it more difficult to implement policies to mitigate the impact hereof.

This contribution is not without its limitations. The COVID-19 restrictions not only directly and indirectly impacted PhD students, but also supervisors themselves. The results clearly point in the direction that for some groups of PhD students, supervisor support during the COVID-19 pandemic was insufficient. It is conceivable that the mismatch between support not only arose from changing expectations from PhD students, but also from work-related challenges, such as online teaching, recording lessons, organizing exams in a safe way, and family- or health-related challenges amongst supervisors. Although supervisors have an important responsibility towards their PhD students, we do not want to underestimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on themselves at any point. Future editions of the PhD Survey would benefit from further contextualization by at least investing the expectations of PhD students and those of their supervisors. Additionally, in its current form, not much is known about attrition of the sample. PhD students that faced a severe impact from the COVID-19 pandemic on their (work-)life and judged the support from their supervisor, and by extension the university, insufficient, might have dropped out between the 2020 and 2021 PhD Survey data collection. Linking future editions with university’s administrative data would provide more information about attrition due to drop-out versus successful completion versus non-response in earlier waves.

PhD students’ satisfaction with supervisor support is an important indicator of their well-being. This study did not show a main effect of time on satisfaction with supervisor support following the unprecedent restrictions at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic between 2019 and 2020 (reject H1a) nor after a year of relaxed and tightened restrictions between 2020 and 2021 (reject H1b). However, substantial interaction effects of time showed a stronger negative impact on satisfaction with supervisor support of the COVID-19 pandemic over time for PhD students who start their doctoral research or conduct or plan data collection (accept H3b) and PhD students in living situations in which they bear multiple responsibilities (accept H5b) between 2019 and 2020, and for PhD students who do not expect a career in academia (accept H4) between 2020 and 2021. No interactions of time were found for doctoral schools (accept H2) indicating that PhD students in all university departments faced COVID-19 related challenges, or for nationality (reject H6) and gender (reject H7). Finally, satisfaction with supervisor score did not vary between PhD students in different phases of their PhD trajectory (reject H3a) or in different living situations (reject H5a) regardless time.

In times of crises, which affects both PhD students and supervisors, special attention needs to be paid to PhD students who are extra susceptible to uncertainties because of their junior status or personal situation, and especially those PhD students for whom doctoral research is a trajectory of formation and self-development instead of a steppingstone to position themselves in academia.

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 24. Glorieux A, van Tienoven TP, te Braak P, Minnen J, Spruyt B. Doing PhD research during the COVID-19 pandemic. First results of the PhD Survey 2021. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2021 Available from: https://torvub.be/torwebdat/publications/t2021_28.pdf .
• 34. MOTUS. MOTUS research platform 2016–2021. Available from: https://www.motusresearch.io/en .
• 35. Glorieux A, te Braak P, Minnen J, Spruyt B. PhD Survey VUB 2019: Technical Report. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2019 Available from: https://torvub.be/torwebdat/publications/t2020_11.pdf .
• 36. Glorieux A, te Braak P, Laurijssen I, Van Deynze F, De Grande H, Minnen J, et al. PhD Survey VUB 2020: Technical Report. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2020 Available from: https://torvub.be/torwebdat/publications/t2021_15.pdf .
• 37. Glorieux A, van Tienoven TP, Spruyt B, te Braak P, Minnen J. PhD Survey VUB 2021: Technical Report. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2021 Available from: https://torvub.be/torwebdat/publications/t2022_10.pdf .
• 41. Ellis PD. The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results: Cambridge University Press; 2010.

Defending My PhD Thesis in the Time of the Coronavirus

Join your society.

If you embrace scientific discovery, truth and integrity, partnership, inclusion, and lifelong curiosity, this is your professional home.

• < Previous

Home > Public Health > IPH_THESES > 766

Public Health Theses

Assessing the prevalence of anemia post covid-19 infection in adult members of a southeastern integrated healthcare system.

Alexander F. Hudgins IV Follow

Author ORCID Identifier

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8980-3330

Date of Award

Degree type, degree name.

Master of Public Health (MPH)

Public Health

First Advisor

Therese Decampo Pigott, PhD

Second Advisor

Jennifer Gander, PhD

INTRODUCTION: Since the SARS-CoV-2 emergence in 2019, the subsequent disease COVID-19 has become a global public health emergency. While substantial research has been done regarding the acute phase of this disease, little is known about the long-term health implications of COVID-19, including the biological mechanisms leading to the development of persistent symptoms following infection known as “long-COVID”. One suggested causal pathway is that the immune response induced by SARS-CoV-2 causes dysregulation of iron homeostasis, hemolysis, and/or erythropoiesis, resulting in abnormally low Hgb levels and insufficient O2 transfer. Developing a better understanding of these mechanisms is key to treating and preventing the long-term health implications linked to COVID-19.

AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of anemia 180-days post-COVID diagnosis and assess potential risk factors including patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospitalization (COVID severity) status.

METHODS: The sample was obtained from KPGA’s CURE Cohort and EMR. Individuals aged ≥18 at COVID-19 diagnosis, alive as of February 2022, and with Hgb labs taken pre- and 180-days post- COVID19 diagnosis ±30-days were included in the study. Anemia was defined as blood hemoglobin (Hgb) levels <12.0g/dL for females and <13.0g/dL for males. Unadjusted univariate and adjusted multivariable logistic regression were used to calculate odds ratios and assess the association between anemia and exposures of interest.

RESULTS: We found the prevalence of anemia at 180-days post-COVID to be 34.1%. Univariate analysis showed that age (≥65) (OR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.97), Black/African American race (OR=2.46, 95% CI: 1.98, 3.05), obesity (OR=1.33 95% CI: 1.08, 1.64), kidney disease (OR=2.48, 95% CI: 1.91, 3.22), diabetes (OR=2.14, 95% CI: 1.72, 2.68), hypertension (OR=1.44, 95% CI: 1.16, 1.78), malignant cancer (OR=1.70, 95% CI: 1.28, 2.27), heart disease (OR=1.55, 95% CI: 1.25, 1.93), hospitalization (COVID-severity) (OR=2.46, 95% CI: 1.89, 3.21), and pre-COVID anemia (OR=13.71, 95% CI: 10.57, 17.77) were significantly associated with post-COVID anemia. The final fitted multivariable logistic regression model showed that Black/African American race (OR=1.74, 95% CI: 1.34, 2.26), diabetes (OR=1.53, 95% CI: 1.14, 2.05), malignant cancer (OR=1.47, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.13), hospitalization (COVID-severity) (OR=1.92, 95% CI: 1.37, 2.70), and pre-COVID anemia (OR=11.58, 95%CI: 8.85, 15.17) were significantly associated with post-COVID anemia. In a sensitivity analysis using our final fitted multivariable logistic regression, hospitalization was treated as an effect modifier. Among individuals not hospitalized for COVID-19, Black/African American race (OR=2.03, 95% CI:1.52, 2.72) was significantly associated with increased risk of having post-COVID anemia.

DISCUSSION: The findings of this study show that individuals diagnosed with diabetes, cancer, and anemia pre-COVID are at increased risk of post-COVID anemia. Additionally, individuals identifying as Black or African American had significantly higher risk of post-COVID anemia, specifically in the outpatient (non-severe COVID-19) population. There was significant overlap with post-COVID anemia risk factors identified in both the adjusted/unadjusted analysis and known risk factors for long-COVID. Future research should look to further examine the causal link between anemic Hgb levels post-COVID infection and the development of long-COVID.

https://doi.org/10.57709/29959212

Recommended Citation

Hudgins, Alexander F. IV, "Assessing the Prevalence of Anemia Post COVID-19 Infection in Adult Members of a Southeastern Integrated Healthcare System." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.57709/29959212

File Upload Confirmation

Since June 28, 2022

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines
• Submit ETD (Thesis/Dissertation)

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

PhD in a Pandemic: Researching and Writing during COVID-19

One year into the pandemic, scholarship has changed significantly. Navigating the complications and limitations of researching and writing during the pandemic has presented a variety of challenges to the undergraduates, graduates, and faculty of the Department of English and Comparative Literature. 

In order to collectively reflect on scholarship during this pandemic, we are reaching out to hear how members of the department have experienced these limitations and hardships. You can read about the experiences of undergraduates writing their theses here . Be on the lookout as well for updates on how faculty have approached their pedagogy during this time. You can also read two features on classes that have found success during the pandemic, Prof. Florence Dore’s songwriting course and Profs. Gaby Calvocoressi and Courtney Rivard’s poetics of gaming courses .

For this article, we spoke with PhD candidate Sean DiLeonardi about what his experience researching and writing through the pandemic has looked like. Our email interview with his experience is below:

What is your current research?

Sean DiLeonardi : I am putting the finishing touches on a dissertation that examines a formal preoccupation with quantifying the unquantifiable, a phenomenon that I argue underwrites the co-emergence of postwar realism and digital media. This project is part of my larger investment in tracing literary production to histories of science, technology, and media.

How has the pandemic changed your research habits?

SD : Overall, I am grateful to have been spared from the more serious effects of a pandemic that has disproportionately affected the most vulnerable communities, often along gendered and racialized lines. For me, as with most others, it has still upended the elements of daily life. While I have always shared caretaking duties with my spouse, the loss of an office space on campus, as well as the other library or coffee house nooks where I used to work, has meant that we have had to expend extra energy schooling and caring for our two kids, while somehow allowing the other to quietly complete their work. Spoiler alert: it never works out.

Relatedly, the loss of access to a physical library has meant that I am reading digital copies of original sources. Besides finding myself on my computer even more frequently than before (just ask my carpal tunnel), I also feel that this has had a negative effect on my thinking process, as I prefer to flip back and forth between marked passages, annotate in the margins, and in general enjoy the thinking that happens away from the computer screen. 

And how has the pandemic changed your writing habits?

SD : In the fall semester, I found the emergency switch to remote education to be incredibly demanding of my time. Like many of my peers, the burden of building and maintaining a course site, recording and editing video lectures, and other new duties on top of our usual workload forced me to make regrettable compromises with my writing schedule. Because I am on the job market, it was enough extra labor to spend my evenings completing job applications. There was rarely much dissertation writing done beyond that. I am fortunate to be on a dissertation completion fellowship this semester, which has enabled me to return to a daily writing schedule.

Where do you see your research going from here?

SD : The most significant question that the pandemic has surfaced regarding the future of my research is whether or not it has a future. The pandemic appears to have severed the final thread on which the academic job market had been dangling. While I remain hopeful, it has yet to be seen if there will be a place for my research in what remains.

Has the pandemic led to any surprising positive outcomes for your work?

SD : Identifying a silver lining in all this has been difficult. Truthfully, the pandemic has forced me into a place of acceptance that is actually better not only for my research, but also for my mental health and the stability of my family. Prior to Covid-19, I met the normal pressures of academia and its diminishing options for viable employment with an unhealthy belief that success would find me if I worked hard enough, published often enough, and remained dedicated to the profession. The pandemic has not only obliterated the tenure-track options in my field; it has helped me do away with this personal commitment to a profession that was not committed to me in return. I still believe in my research and the contributions I have made to my discipline; but moving forward, I am more willing and open to consider options beyond the traditional tenure-track line to establish an outlet for my research. For example, this summer I will serve as Junior Fellow at the Library of Congress, where I will have the opportunity to curate a collection called “Arithmetic, Numeracy, Imagination.” I strangely owe this fabulous opportunity to the fact that the fellowship will be available remotely, due to the pandemic, but also to the fact that I have learned to think creatively about places where my skills and expertise will be appreciated. The summer fellowship may even be the start of an alternate path for me and my research, one that I was unable to imagine before. 

The COVID-19 Outbreak Public Evaluation (COPE) Initiative: Assessment of Attitudes and Behaviours about Mitigation of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission and of Mental and Behavioural Health During the Great Pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019

Principal supervisor, additional supervisor 1, year of award, department, school or centre, additional institution or organisation, campus location, degree type, usage metrics.

• Infectious diseases
• Health care administration
• People with disability
• Biostatistics
• Family care
• Health and community services
• Epidemiology not elsewhere classified
• Welfare, insurance, disability and social security law
• Health promotion
• Preventative health care
• Public health not elsewhere classified
• Respiratory diseases
• Public policy
• Psychopharmacology
• Psychophysiology
• Australian government and politics
• Psychological methodology, design and analysis
• Community psychology
• Social psychology
• Psychiatry (incl. psychotherapy)
• Mental health services
• Historical studies not elsewhere classified

York Graduate Research School

Covid impact statement

An optional impact statement to explain to your examiners how your project/thesis has changed as a consequence of Covid-19 restrictions.

Many PGRs will have had to adapt their research project, sometimes significantly, in response to Covid-19 restrictions and this may be a cause of concern. Be reassured that adapting research projects in the light of unforeseen circumstances is a normal part of research and you will not be disadvantaged for doing so, as long as you are still able to meet the criteria for the relevant award ( section 2 of the Policy on Research Degrees ).

If you believe the pandemic is having or has had a significant negative impact on your personal circumstances (for example, led to ill-health or a challenging domestic situation) you should request a  leave of absence  or  extension  on those grounds. As always, you can seek independent advice from the Graduate Student's Association advice team.

Challenges and context

If you started on or before 31 March 2021 and will submit from December 2020 onwards, you will have the option of submitting a short impact statement to give contextual information about the effect of the Covid-19 restrictions on your research project/thesis. Submitted statements will be shared by PGR Administration with your examiners, who may explore the statement in an oral examination.

The statement enables you to explain challenges, for example:

• difficulty or delay in collecting or analysing data due to the closure of/restrictions on laboratories/other specialist facilities/expertise, curtailed/cancelled fieldwork due to travel restrictions or social distancing measures
• reduced data in one or more theis chapters, and/or thesis chapters that are shorter and/or not as closely linked as might be expected

You can also explain how the planned (i.e. pre-Covid-19 restrictions) research would have fitted into the thesis’ narrative and the steps you took to address the challenges arising from the Covid-19 restrictions, in terms of adjusting the scope, design or phasing of their research project/thesis, for example:

• one or more changes of research topic
• a change in emphasis from empirical to theoretical research
• a change of research location (fieldwork, archive, etc)
• a change a method (e.g. running experiments remotely rather than in person, using simulation, moving from in-person data collection to online data collection, analysing existing data sets)
• altering the timing of, or substituting, one or more experiments.

Submit an impact statement

You should complete the impact statement just before you submit your thesis for examination. Please upload the completed impact statement (as a PDF file) with your thesis.

[email protected] +44 (0)1904 325962 Student Hub, Information Centre Basement, Market Square

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Phd-supervisors experiences during and after the covid-19 pandemic: a case study.

• 1 Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
• 2 Department of Educational Studies in Teacher Education, Faculty of Education, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Hamar, Norway
• 3 Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
• 4 Faculty of Arts and Physical Education, Volda University College, Volda, Norway

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the education sector, and this case study examined nearly three hundred PhD supervisors in Norway. The study was driven by the urgent need to better understand the professional, social, and existential conditions faced by doctoral supervisors during extended societal shutdowns. This explorative case study builds on a former study among PhD candidates and investigates the experiences of doctoral supervisors when remote work, digital teaching, and digital supervision suddenly replaced physical presence in the workplace, largely between March 12, 2020, and autumn 2022, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: A mixed-methods research approach, incorporating formative dialog research and case study design, was employed to bridge the conceptual and contextual understanding of this phenomenon. The primary data sources were a survey ( N = 298, 53.7% women, 46.3% men, response rate 80.54%) and semi-structured interviews (with nine PhD supervisors). Supplementary data collection was based on formative dialog research. It included field dialog (four PhD supervision seminars), open survey responses ( n = 1,438), one focus group ( n = 5), an additional survey ( n = 85), and document analysis of PhD policy documents and doctoral supervision seminar evaluations ( n = 7). The survey data, interview data, focus group data, and supplementary data focus also retrospectively on the first year of the pandemic and were collected from August 2022 until October 2023.

Results: The findings from the explorative case study revealed that the PhD supervisors faced numerous challenges during the pandemic, both professionally and personally. For PhD supervisors who extensively worked from home over a long period, the situation created new conditions that affected their job performance. These altered conditions hindered their research capacity, their ability to follow up with their PhD candidates, and their capacity to fulfill other job responsibilities. Although the PhD supervisors received some support during the pandemic, it seems that the incremental measures provided were insufficient.

Discussion: The case study results indicate that it is more important than ever to understand the gap between the formulation, transformation, and realization arenas when distinguishing between incremental, semi-structural changes and fundamental changes in PhD regulations and guidelines brought on by societal crises. This highlights the need for better crisis preparedness at the doctoral level in the years to come.

1 Introduction

Effective doctoral supervision is crucial for guiding PhD candidates through the complexities of their research, ensuring academic rigor and the successful completion of their dissertations ( Bastalich, 2017 ; Wichmann-Hansen, 2021 ; Kálmán et al., 2022 ). The role of PhD supervisors during the pandemic and their impact on educational quality at various levels has been an under-researched area both nationally and internationally ( Börgeson et al., 2021 ; Krumsvik et al., 2022 ). Supervisors who have varying experiences and work under diverse conditions are key players in the transformation arena where central policies are applied at the institutional level. Their interaction with PhD-candidates, whether in-person or remotely, shapes partly the quality of PhD-programs and candidates’ learning experiences. The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced the education sector in numerous ways, and this case study examined nearly three hundred PhD-supervisors in Norway with a Mixed Method Research design and different methods and data. The impetus for the study was the urgent need for a better knowledge base to understand the professional, social, and existential conditions for doctoral supervisors when society is shut down for an extended period. This explorative case study builds on our former study among PhD-candidates ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) and investigates the experiences of doctoral supervisors when remote work, digital teaching, and digital supervision suddenly replaced physical presence in the workplace (to varying extents).

First, the introduction contextualizes the study; second, the methodology is described; third, the main part presents the results from the survey part of the study; fourth, the data from the interviews and Supplementary data are presented; fifth, the discussion and conclusion are presented.

International policy documents underline the importance of PhD-supervision [ European University Association (EUA), 2010 , 2015 ] and, in Norway, it is crucial to view PhD supervision considering the specific frame factors for the PhD’s and some general trends of changed frame factors in doctoral education over the last 10 years ( Krumsvik, 2016a , 2017 ). It is therefore important to examine such frame factors in light of PhD-supervisors’ experiences during the pandemic, but the current state of knowledge is still limited around this topic. However, “The United Kingdom Research Supervision Survey Report 2021″ found that among the 3,500 PhD supervisors in the United Kingdom, 65% felt that supervisory responsibilities have increased during the pandemic, 32% agreed that “concerns over supervision have kept me awake at night over the last 12 months” and 31% agreed that “supervising doctoral candidates makes me feel anxious over the last 12 months” ( UK Council for Graduate Education, 2021 ). With these abovementioned issues in mind, this doctoral supervision study builds on our previous research on doctoral-level education ( Krumsvik and Jones, 2016 ; Krumsvik and Røkenes, 2016 ; Krumsvik et al., 2016a , b , 2019 , 2021 ; Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) and aims to examine the experiences of PhD supervisors in Norway during the pandemic to answer the research questions below:

1. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic impeded the PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the micro-level, and how do they perceive this situation?

2. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the meso-level, and how do they perceive this situation?

3. How do the PhD-supervisors experience the more general aspects of their supervision role during and after the pandemic?

1.1 The Norwegian context

To contextualize the research questions to the Norwegian context, one must remember that doctoral candidates in Norway are not students per se but are employees (on a 3–4 years contract) and more regarded as colleagues than students, and in this sense, the roles are more equal than in traditional supervisory relationships at a lower level (supervisor-student). Both by having PhD fellows being considered highly competent adult employees with state employment contracts, where they receive regular salaries, and have regular offices, they are initially part of the work community found within academia with its routines, duties, and rights. Another contextual aspect is that Norwegian PhD-candidates defend their theses relatively late in their careers. The average age for a candidate’s defense is between 37 and 38 years and higher for many candidates within the humanities and social sciences. In comparison, the median age across OECD countries is 29 ( Sarrico, 2022 , p. 1304). Table 1 provides a generalized comparison of doctoral education across Nordic countries, the UK, and the US ( Andres et al., 2015 ; Burner et al., 2020 ). While such broad overviews might exaggerate differences, they provide a framework for understanding doctoral education on a spectrum. This spectrum ranges from countries with significant government influence, where PhD candidates are employed (e.g., Nordic countries), to countries with moderate government influence, where PhD candidates are not employed (e.g., the UK), and finally to countries with minimal government influence, where PhD candidates are also not employed (e.g., the US). Despite these variations, the global trend indicates that doctoral education is becoming increasingly dependent on external funding ( Bengtsen, 2023 , p. 45).

Table 1 . Overview of the Nordic PhD model in comparison to UK and US models.

In addition, women defend their theses on average 2 years later than men. Taking into account that the average age for first-time mothers in Norway is now 30.1 years, there is a lot that needs to happen within a few years, and this may sometimes affect the feasibility of their PhD-projects. This can, e.g., be related to the gender differences in Norway about parental leave days during the pandemic which is much higher for women than for men at the universities ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) 1 . Another contextual factor that distinguishes doctoral supervision from other supervision (at lower levels) is that over 90% of the doctoral theses in Norway are article-based theses ( Krumsvik, 2016b ; Mason and Merga, 2018 ; Solli and Nygaard, 2022 ), which implies 3–4 published articles and an extended summary or synopsis (a “kappe” in Norwegian, ranging between 50 and 90 pages). This means that the PhD-candidates receive “supervision” and feedback from approximately 8–10 referees in scientific journals on their articles, in addition to feedback from their PhD supervisors. Because of this, many PhD-supervisors are co-authoring their doctoral candidates’ publications. A final contextual aspect is the recent studies indicating a decrease in doctoral disputations nationwide in Norway over the past two years ( Steine and Sarpebakken, 2023 ) – probably as a consequence of the pandemic. In a survey, Ramberg and Wendt (2023 , p. 22) found that about 60 percent of PhD candidates and 50 percent of postdoctoral candidates ( N = 300) were delayed during the autumn of 2022. The study showed that illness or leave, often due to caregiving responsibilities during the pandemic, was the most common reason for delays among PhD candidates and postdoctoral candidates, particularly impacting women more than men. Following illness, reduced access to supervisors, empirical data, research facilities, and external partners were significant factors contributing to delays in their research activities. Nearly a third of delayed candidates reported reduced access to supervisors, and about a fifth faced issues with external partner access, highlighting the critical role of these resources in completing research projects. When it comes to the PhD-supervisors, more specifically, the supervision differs from other types of supervision in that a formal PhD agreement is signed with a binding supervisor contract that lasts for 3–4 years (the PhD period) and is signed by both the supervisor and the candidate. The supervisor also has an overarching responsibility to avoid delays and ensure that the PhD program can be completed within the standard time frame. Supervisors are primarily responsible for guiding doctoral candidates on the specific, content-related aspects of their projects. This includes helping candidates identify the knowledge frontier in their field, position their study within the research field, develop clear and consistent research questions, choose appropriate scientific and methodological approaches, and provide expert guidance in discussing results and addressing ethical issues related to the thesis. This obviously places relatively high competence requirements on the supervisors, both in terms of their academic and research skills, and in relation to the doctoral supervision itself, as poor or inadequate supervision at this level can expose the candidate to a certain “drop-out risk” in the project.

Maintaining education quality during the COVID-19 pandemic has been challenging due to the widespread shift to digital teaching, supervision, and remote work. Many university teachers were unaccustomed to the online, digital learning environment, working with PhD candidates remotely for extended periods. Some taught in hybrid settings, with some PhD candidates quarantined at home while others attended in-person classes. Additionally, others navigated ordinary learning contexts with COVID-19 precautions like masks and social distancing. This situation altered frame factors, adding complexity to the discussion of education quality.

Considering this, the case study seeks to understand if, and potentially how, external factors in pedagogical contexts over which institutions, academics, and teachers have no direct control play out. Lindensjö and Lundgren (2014) find that such external factors might have a significant impact on the outcomes of educational training, teaching, and supervision. Therefore, it is crucial to contextualize the pandemic experiences among PhD supervisors with respect to these factors, as they imply national and institutional frames for their PhD supervision. Though there exist several quantitative, survey-based studies on the impact of COVID-19 on PhD supervision (e.g., Pyhältö et al., 2023 ; Löfström et al., 2024 ), there is still a lack of in-depth qualitative understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on the supervisory relationship. The studies of Löfström et al. (2024) and Pyhältö et al. (2023) indicated that supervisors faced significant challenges in identifying when PhD candidates needed assistance and providing adequate support for their well-being during the shift to remote supervision. Supporting the progress and wellbeing of full-time candidates, who were more adversely affected by the pandemic than their part-time peers, became increasingly difficult. The increase in email communications could overwhelm supervisors, exceeding manageable levels and complicating their ability to offer timely and effective feedback. The lack of spontaneous, informal conversation, previously facilitated by in-person meetings, further hindered their ability to monitor and support the candidates effectively. These challenges were particularly pronounced for supervisors in scientific fields requiring lab work and practical training, which were severely disrupted by the pandemic, and supporting the progress and wellbeing of full-time candidates, who were more adversely affected by the pandemic than their part-time peers, became increasingly difficult. Furthermore, supervisors reported that their PhD candidates’ lack of a scholarly community and inadequate supervision were significant challenges. This reflects the supervisors’ view that the availability of a supportive research environment and adequate supervision are critical for candidates’ success ( Pyhältö et al., 2023 ). The study by Pyhältö et al. (2023) also found that supervisors generally estimated the impact on candidates’ progress and well-being to be more negative than the candidates themselves did, which may imply that supervisors have a broader perspective on the long-term consequences of disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic. Research prior to the pandemic ( Pyhältö et al., 2012 ) has shown that apart from the importance of having clear and long-term financing, proper research facilities, and sufficient time to pursue a PhD, supervisors also stress the significance of PhD candidates’ motivation, self-regulation, efficacy, and engagement as essential personal regulators for success in the PhD process.

1.2 Theoretical framework

This case study is exploratory and intrinsic ( Stake, 1995 , 2006 ), utilizing an abductive approach to theory with frame factor theory as our theoretical framework ( Lundgren, 1999 ; Lindensjö and Lundgren, 2014 ). Frame factor theory suggests that society’s influence on education manifests through a target system, an administrative system, and a legal system. This theory, used in educational sciences and pedagogy, acts as a lens for planning and analysis, positing that external factors, beyond the control of institutions and educators, significantly affect educational outcomes. We will further explain the contextual application of frame factor theory in this case study below.

Previous research highlights a gap in (doctoral) education between the formalization and realization arenas in frame factor theory ( Lindensjö and Lundgren, 2014 ; Krumsvik et al., 2019 ). Linde (2012) introduces a transformation arena between these two, explaining the difficulty of implementing measures in complex organizations like universities. There is rarely a straightforward relationship between central decisions (formulation arena or macro-level) and their implementation (realization arena or micro-level). Policy documents require interpretation and application by faculty leaders, PhD program leaders, supervisors, and PhD candidates (transformation arena or meso-level) ( Linde, 2012 ).

Given this context, a main focus of this case study was to evaluate how Norwegian PhD supervisors managed changed frame factors and education quality during the pandemic. The Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (NOKUT) defines education quality as “the quality of teaching classes, other learning facilities, and students’ learning outcomes in terms of knowledge, skills, and general competence” ( Skodvin, 2013 , p. 2). It is important to differentiate between educational quality, study quality, and teaching quality.

Education quality is a broad concept encompassing everything from the subject/study program level to the government’s education policy. In contrast, study quality is narrower, referring specifically to the educational institution ( Skodvin, 2013 , p. 3). Teaching quality goes further to the micro-level, focusing on course quality, teacher effectiveness, and PhD supervision. This study examined how PhD supervisors experienced COVID-19 restrictions at the micro- and meso-levels, considering two of the three levels. Figure 1 illustrates the analytical lenses in this mixed methods research (MMR) and formative dialog research case study:

Figure 1 . The analytical focus in the case study ( Krumsvik et al., 2019 ) is based on the frame factor theory ( Linde, 2012 ; Lindensjö and Lundgren, 2014 ).

2 Methodology

To understand and corroborate conditions faced by doctoral supervisors related to COVID-19 extended societal shutdowns, both in breadth and in depth, we employed a mixed-methods research design, combining quantitative data to show the strength of associations and qualitative data to explore their nature ( Johnson et al., 2007 ; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2017 ). We utilized a three-stage design, QUAL-QUANT-QUAL (qualitative-driven sequential design, Schoonenboom and Johnson, 2017 ), making it a qualitative-dominant mixed-methods study ( Johnson et al., 2007 , p. 124). Using mixed methods research allowed us to explore the complex research problem more comprehensively compared to using either quantitative or qualitative data alone. Though the approach is less common in case studies ( Tight, 2016 , p. 380), the mixed methods are increasingly used (e.g., Ertesvåg et al., 2021 ; Hall and Mansfield, 2023 ; Peters and Fàbregues, 2023 ). Advocates of such approaches consider mixed methods to “complement and extend one another and thus lead to better descriptions, clearer explanations and an enhanced understanding of phenomena, research aims and questions” ( Ertesvåg et al., 2021 , p. 655).

Specifically, an exploratory, sequential mixed-methods design was used to address the research questions ( Fetters et al., 2013 ; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2017 ). This design involves collecting and analyzing qualitative data first (QUAL), using those findings to guide the quantitative data collection and analysis in the second phase (QUANT), and then using the quantitative results to inform further qualitative data collection and analysis in the third phase (QUAL). This method integrates through building, where results from one phase inform the next.

We conducted a cumulative data collection and analysis process ( Creswell and Guetterman, 2021 ), basing survey questions on previously collected data from field dialogues, online observations, seminar evaluations, and document analysis. The questionnaire consisted of a general demographic questions (e.g., gender, educational background and what field(s) the supervisor supervised in), in addition to a range of multiple response items addressing four key themes: (1) important factors to complete a PhD, (2) supervisor challenges, (3) working from home experiences, and (4) perceived need for future competences as supervisors. Finally the questionnaire contained a range of statements measured on a Likert-scale from 1 to 5 where 3 was neutral (e.g., to what extent do you feel that your PhD-candidate(s) are on track with their doctoral project?). The qualitative interview guide ( Kvale and Brinkmann, 2015 ) was developed from the prior quantitative data (survey), and the focus group guide was based on earlier survey and qualitative interview data (see Figure 2 below). We integrated research questions, methods, interpretation, and reporting at various points, using narratives where qualitative and quantitative results are presented in different sections of the same article through the contiguous approach ( Fetters et al., 2013 ). This article primarily examines the coherence between qualitative and quantitative findings based on confirmation , expansion , or discordance ( Fetters et al., 2013 ). The approach used in the study is similar to Hall and Mansfield (2023) and the coherence is derived from joint displays using visual means.

Figure 2 . The research process. The yellow arrows show the main data sources, and the blue arrows show the Supplementary data in this article. In addition, we have conducted focus group interviews and an extra survey, which will be published in another article (since they mainly focus on academic writing with the large language models).

As a consequence of the mixed-methods design, this study combines two approaches in case study research. The first, proposed by Stake (1995 , 2006) and Merriam (2009) and Merriam and Tisdell (2016) , is situated in a social constructivist paradigm, and is attached to the qualitative part (connected to the second part of each research question). The second, based on Eisenhardt (1989) , Flyvbjerg (2011) , and Yin (2012) , approaches the case study from a post-positivist perspective ( Hyett et al., 2014 , p. 1) (connected to the first part of each research question). This intrinsic case study ( Stake, 1995 ) aims to focus on ecological validity:

“Ecological validity is the degree of correspondence between the research conditions and the phenomenon being studied as it occurs naturally or outside of the research setting” ( Gehrke, 2018 , p. 563). Informant selection was based on a purposeful method ( Maxwell, 2013 ), in which we recruited PhD supervisors from Norway.

Next, all interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis ( Braun and Clarke 2019 , 2021 ) where themes were constructed and presented in this paper (see section 4). In addition, we also conducted a sentiment analysis ( Dake and Gyimah, 2023 ) of the nine interviews (see Supplementary file ).

To answer the research question, we combined formative dialog research ( Baklien, 2004 ) and case study research ( Stake, 2006 ). Data collection consisted of fieldwork (see Supplementary file ), a survey N = 298, 53.7% women, 46.3% men, response rate 80.54%, nine semi-structured interviews (with PhD supervisors), and one focus group ( N = 5). Supplementary data consisted of an additional survey ( N = 85), PhD-policy document analysis ( N = 6), field dialogues (4 PhD supervision seminars), open survey data (1,438 responses), seminar observations ( N = 4), and reviews of relevant documents such as evaluations of doctoral supervisor seminars. We also used policy documents and regulations concerning PhD education in Norway as supplementary sources.

We focused on how PhD supervisors experienced changing frame factors, such as university lockdowns, remote work, digital teaching, digital supervision, doctoral progression, and others, with an emphasis on illuminating the micro-level (course and teaching level) from the PhD supervisors’ perspective. This focus is twofold: the program’s structure and quality directly affected the PhD- supervisors during the pandemic. The second is simply that they conducted several evaluations about matters related to the structure and quality compared with the others. However, PhD- candidates’ opinions are also important, and their views are also interwoven because some of them have been present during field dialogs and participated in the PhD-supervision seminars.

When focusing on how PhD-supervisors experience their supervision, PhD’s research progression, psychosocial aspects, their nearest superior, and the main focus are on illuminating the meso-level (institutional and program level).

2.1 Cumulative research process

In our case study, we brought the experiences and our study among PhD’s ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) from the period March 12, 2020, to November 30, 2021, into our design of this study. We executed an excessive cumulative data collection process (including a part during the pandemic) and analysis, especially from August 2022 – October 2023. The relatively long time period allowed the researchers to test their interpretations along the way and detect contrary evidence, e.g., reach saturation during the coding and analysis of the qualitative data ( Creswell and Guetterman, 2021 ).

3.1 Quantitative part (survey)

Above and below are the results of the quantitative part of the study, based on the survey data. This analysis is tentative and covers only the survey results. The interview data and Supplementary data will be presented later in the paper. Two hundred and forty respondents completed the survey ( N = 298, 80.54% response rate). The academic backgrounds of the supervisors were diverse, with the three largest groups coming from natural sciences, humanities, education and teacher training. The largest group of supervisors (41.75%) supervised PhD candidates in education and teacher training (see Table 2 ).

Table 2 . Distribution of supervisors by academic background and PhD supervision in various fields.

A narrow majority (58.08%) of the supervisors had submitted an article-based dissertation (see more in attachment 5 in the Supplementary file ), in the Supplementary file meaning that approximately four out of ten supervisors have not “hands on” experience with article-based thesis as their thesis in their own doctoral degree. A large majority (81.67%) had supervised PhD candidates before and after the pandemic, while 11.67% had only supervised during and after. 41.27% of the supervisors stated that the coronavirus pandemic (from March 12, 2020 - January 2022) had impeded their candidate(s) progress in their doctoral project. 21.12% agreed (to a large or very large extent) that the PhDs’ publication process of articles to scientific journals has been delayed because of the journal’s peer review process during the pandemic (i.e., journal processing times seemed to increase due to several factors including a lack of available peer reviewers because of heavy workloads, health issues, more teaching, etc.).

3.1.1 Challenges in supervision

Results in Table 3 indicate that the most commonly reported challenges faced by supervisors during the pandemic were balancing work and family life and working from home, each affecting more than a third of the supervisors. Psycho-social aspects, such as loneliness, also emerged as a notable challenge. The cancelation of conference participation and stays abroad were significant issues, reflecting the broader impact on professional development opportunities. Concerns about supervision quality were also prominent. Some supervisors reported no challenges, highlighting a degree of variability in experiences. Other challenges included delays in the peer review process for journals, difficulties with publishing, and issues related to research ethics, though these were less commonly reported.

Table 3 . Challenges faced by supervisors during the pandemic in terms of supervision.

3.1.2 Challenges in working from home

Results in Table 4 indicated that supervisors faced multiple challenges while working from home during the pandemic. The most common issue was having little contact with colleagues, which affected more than six in ten supervisors. Supervisors also frequently reported having little contact with their PhD candidates. Distractions from others at home were another prevalent challenge. Many supervisors experienced an increased workload due to digital teaching from home, and lacking office equipment, such as desks and office chairs, was also commonly reported. Psycho-social aspects, such as loneliness, were significant issues as well. The lack of space and increased home responsibilities, such as childcare, were notable challenges. A smaller number of supervisors reported having no challenges at all. Other less commonly reported issues included limited access to library services and poor internet access.

Table 4 . Challenges faced by supervisors during the pandemic working from home.

3.1.3 Factors PhD candidates need to complete their doctorate

We find that there is a high degree of consistency between what supervisors ( Table 5 ) and PhD candidates ( Table 6 ) consider to be the most important factors for completing the doctorate. In particular, it is persistence, resilience, and the ability to work independently are the most important factors, in addition to supervision and co-writing with supervisors.

Table 5 . Most important factors in completing a PhD as reported by PhD supervisors.

Table 6 . Most important factors in completing a PhD as reported by PhD Candidates.

Thus, there is considerable agreement between what the supervisors and the PhD candidates report, which may indicate that within the academic tradition, the doctoral journey is primarily seen as an individual endeavor (feat of strength) where the supervisor is the closest supporter.

3.1.4 Appreciation of supervision

The supervisors mostly agreed that both they and the PhD candidates value supervision. 89.91% responded they agree or strongly agree to this question for themselves, and 92.47% responded they agree or strongly agree on behalf of the PhD candidates. In comparison, 61.25% responded similarly to whether the department values supervision, while 24.17% were neutral, and 14.59% responded they disagree or strongly disagree. This may suggest that the supervisory relationship is primarily between the PhD candidate and the supervisor, with less firm ties to the institution.

When it comes to what extent the supervisors think that their institution has been accommodating regarding compensating the loss of progress due to the coronavirus pandemic for their own PhDs, 27.2% stated that this had been done to a small extent or very small extent and 29.39% stated that this had been done to a large extent or very large extent. 30.1% agreed (large extent and very large extent) that supervisory responsibilities have increased during the pandemic. 13.3% expressed (to a large or very large extent) that supervising doctoral candidates makes them feel anxious’ over the last 24 months” (pandemic), but the majority (64.3%) experienced this to a small and very small extent. 9.3% expressed (to a large and a very large extent) that concerns over doctoral supervision have kept them awake at night over the last 24 months (pandemic), but the majority (69.3%) experienced this to a small and very small extent. 56.1% of the supervisors have not discussed any challenges with the progress of their doctoral candidate(s) project due to the coronavirus pandemic with the department’s human resources manager/head.

When asked how many hours they have enshrined in their working plan per semester as the main supervisor per PhD candidate, supervisors state this varies from zero to above 80 h, but for the majority, it is between 20 and 40 h per semester (40.46%). 23.1% state they do not think that their PhD-candidate(s) are on track with their doctoral project, while 50.2% state that their PhD-candidate(s) are on track with their doctoral project. Some PhDs publish their articles in their thesis based on pre-collected data (e.g., as a part of bigger projects), while others publish their articles in their thesis based on data collections done by themselves. 58.77% of the supervisors think this affects the completion time for the last group of PhDs (large and very large extent). 53.4% of the supervisors have been co-authoring their doctoral candidates’ publications.

3.1.5 What competencies supervisors need

As seen from Table 7 , nearly half of the supervisors believed they needed more pedagogical and methodological competence related to supervision. Additionally, about one-third felt they lacked knowledge about formal aspects, such as guidelines, related to the PhD program. The supervisors reported that the guidelines for the doctoral program were somewhat clear, particularly those for article-based dissertations. This perceived clarity was positively correlated ( r = 0.23, p = 0.002) with the extent to which the institution offered “continuing professional development” (CPD), and 39.88% of the supervisors stated that their institution did not provide supervisors with CPD. Thus, while many supervisors recognized the need for enhanced pedagogical and methodological skills, as well as a better understanding of formal guidelines, the availability of CPD programs was associated with clearer doctoral program guidelines. This suggests that increasing access to professional development opportunities could improve supervisors’ competence and clarity regarding program requirements, ultimately benefiting the supervision process.

Table 7 . Competencies PhD supervisors believe they need to increase.

3.1.6 Female academics with children

About four out of ten supervisors (41.07%) agreed (to a large or very large extent) that female PhDs with children seem to have more home responsibilities than men (e.g., for childcare, household, homeschooling, own children in quarantines, etc.) during the pandemic. About three out of ten (27.77%) agreed (to a large or very large extent) that female PhDs’ (with own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that women seem to have more home responsibilities (e.g., for childcare, household, homeschooling, own children in quarantine, etc.) during the pandemic. About two out of ten (23.64%) agreed (to a large or very large extent) that female supervisors’ (with their own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that women seem to have more home responsibilities (e.g., for childcare, household, homeschooling, own children in quarantine, etc.) during the pandemic.

Cronbach’s alpha ( α = 0.87) indicated a high level of consistency among three statements concerning the increased home responsibilities faced by female researchers with children compared to their male counterparts during the pandemic. These statements highlighted that female researchers with children appeared to bear more responsibilities at home, such as childcare, household tasks, and homeschooling, and as a result, their submission rates to scientific journals had been adversely affected by COVID-19. The average response (mea n = 3.18, standard deviatio n = 0.88) indicated that the supervisors were generally neutral toward these statements. However, closer inspection revealed that female supervisors (mea n = 3.29, standard deviatio n = 0.92) agreed with these statements more than male supervisors (mea n = 3.03, standard deviatio n = 0.79), a difference that was statistically significant ( p = 0.017) but with a small effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.30). There was a positive correlation ( r = 0.23, p = 0.002) between whether the PhD candidate had considered quitting the PhD program and the three statements, which suggests that supervisors who reported that PhD candidates had considered quitting also agreed more with the statements. Conversely, a negative correlation ( r = −0.21, p = 0.002) was found between considering quitting the PhD program and the belief that the institution made sufficient efforts to compensate for the lack of progress during the pandemic, indicating that better institutional support might have reduced the likelihood of candidates considering quitting.

3.2 Qualitative part (interview data and other types of qualitative data)

We conducted a cumulative data collection process where the qualitative interview guide questions were built upon previously collected quantitative data (survey). Based on a snowballing sample ( Patton, 2015 ), we recruited nine doctoral supervisors from the humanities, social-, and educational sciences with diverse experience and approaches to supervising PhD candidates during the pandemic. Using semi-structured interviews ( Brinkmann, 2022 ), each supervisor was interviewed online using Zoom with interviews lasting from 30 to 60 min. All interviews were conducted in Norwegian and later transcribed verbatim. We followed Braun and Clarke’s, (2019 , 2021) approach to reflexive thematic analysis to analyse the interview data. The themes constructed from the analysis of the interview data focus issues, such as “The Impact of the Pandemic on Supervision,” “Home Office Experience,” Workload and Employer Support,” “PhD Candidate Preparation for Article-Based Theses,” “Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses,” and “Guidelines and Structuring the PhD Process.”

3.2.1 Analyzing the interview with Kyle

Introduction: Kyle, aged 47, specializes in professional ethics. He completed his doctoral degree through a monographic thesis and is relatively new to supervising PhD candidates, currently guiding three, two of whom he is the main supervisor.

Impact of the Pandemic : Kyle wore two hats during the pandemic: as a PhD supervisor and as a leader of a doctoral program. He noted that the pandemic did not significantly impact his supervisees due to well-planned data collection that adapted to digital formats when necessary. His role as the program leader gave him broader insights into how other candidates fared, with some experiencing difficulties in recruiting interviewees and needing to adjust their research plans accordingly.

PhD Supervision During the Pandemic : Kyle’s supervision was largely unaffected by the pandemic as most of it was conducted digitally, catering to students located in different parts of the country. He emphasized the importance of maintaining frequent contact, especially when usual social and professional gatherings were suspended. The pivot to online platforms like Zoom and increased digital communication tools helped maintain the continuity and quality of supervision.

Home Office Experience : Working from home was generally positive for Kyle, who appreciated the reduced distractions and the ability to maintain productivity with a well-equipped home office. However, he missed informal interactions with colleagues, which were hard to replicate through digital means.

Workload and Employer Support : Kyle experienced a slight increase in workload as more effort was required to monitor and support students remotely. His interactions with his Head of Department/direct manager were supportive, helping him navigate the challenges of remote supervision.

PhD Candidate Preparation for Article-Based Theses : Kyle observed that many PhD candidates were unprepared for the intricacies of article writing, including the lengthy processes of submission and peer review. He attributed this to their educational background, which primarily focused on monographic work at the bachelor’s and master’s levels.

Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses : Although Kyle has not written a synopsis (‘kappe’, i.e., a synthesis chapter for article-based theses) himself, he feels prepared due to his involvement in supervisor training programs that include synopsis writing. He believes in collaborative supervision where co-supervisors with more experience in specific areas can complement his guidance.

Guidelines and Structuring the PhD Process : Kyle praised the clarity of guidelines regarding the synopsis writing at his program, highlighting proactive efforts to discuss and understand these guidelines among candidates and supervisors. He supports the idea of starting the synopsis early in the PhD journey, allowing candidates to develop a clear perspective on how their articles will integrate into their larger thesis narrative.

Summary: Kyle’s approach to PhD supervision during the pandemic was proactive and adapted to the challenges of remote interactions. He emphasizes the importance of clear guidelines, structured support from the academic program, and the benefits of collaborative supervision. His perspective offers valuable insights into managing PhD supervision under crisis conditions and highlights areas for potential improvement in preparing candidates for the demands of article-based theses.

3.2.2 Analyzing the interview with Sally

Introduction: Sally, aged 46, is experienced in the field of educational sciences and professional research, having supervised 15 PhD candidates to completion. She conducted her doctoral research through an article-based thesis.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates : Sally observed that the pandemic had a limited impact on most of her PhD candidates, except for 2–3 individuals who experienced delays, partially due to the pandemic. Disputations were delayed for some candidates who preferred physical attendance, affecting their completion timeline.

Adaptations in Supervision Methods: The pandemic made Sally diversify her supervision methods, including more frequent digital meetings with Zoom or Teams and asynchronous communications like email. She shifted from paper-based to digital comments on drafts, which enhanced the efficiency and immediacy of feedback. This change is something she intends to continue using beyond the pandemic.

Home Office Experience: Sally found working from home manageable and returned to the office as soon as feasible, particularly because she needed to balance work with family responsibilities. The transition to the home office did not significantly disrupt her supervision activities, though it introduced minor challenges like occasional distractions from family.

Increased Workload During the Pandemic: Sally reported a slight increase in her workload during the pandemic due to a need for more frequent communication to ensure the continuity and quality of supervision. This was compounded by the timing of her candidates being in critical phases of their thesis work.

Support from Employer: She felt that the focus of her institution’s support during the pandemic was more on ensuring that PhD candidates were well-supported rather than directly supporting the supervisors themselves.

Preparedness of PhD Candidates: Sally noted that while the PhD candidates were generally well-prepared academically, they often lacked specific training in writing article-based theses, a significant adjustment from writing monographic theses typical at the bachelor’s and master’s levels.

Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses: Sally felt confident in her ability to supervise article-based theses despite recognizing the ongoing need to adapt and learn, particularly in managing the synthesis chapter or “kappen.”

Clarity of Guidelines for the Synopsis: She found the guidelines for writing the synopsis at her institution clear and involved in educational efforts to help candidates understand these guidelines better. However, she questioned whether standardization would improve understanding or unnecessarily restrict academic freedom.

Timing for Writing the Synopsis: Reflecting on her experience and current practices, Sally advocated for thinking about the synopsis early in the doctoral process but cautioned against producing extensive texts prematurely. She emphasized the importance of adapting the scope of the synopsis as the research evolves.

Use of Doctoral Committees’ Guidelines: Sally observed that adherence to guidelines varies depending on whether committee members are national or international, with international members often impressed by the candidate’s ability to publish in high-ranking journals.

Overall, Sally’s experiences and insights provide a nuanced view of PhD supervision during the pandemic, highlighting flexibility, adaptation, and the importance of maintaining high standards of communication and support. Her approach demonstrates a balance between structured guidance and allowing academic independence, aiming to foster resilience and adaptability among her PhD candidates.

3.2.3 Analyzing the interview with Gabbie

Introduction: Gabbie, aged 54, specializes in school and teacher education. She has supervised two PhD candidates to completion and is currently guiding four others. Her doctoral thesis was article-based.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates : Gabbie observed varied impacts of the pandemic on her PhD candidates. While two of her students were minimally affected, one faced significant challenges in data collection due to difficulties in recruiting informants. This disparity seems to have been influenced by the candidates’ approaches or perhaps their personal rapport with potential informants.

Changes in Supervision Practices: The pandemic shifted Gabbie’s supervision to entirely online formats using Zoom, Teams, or phone apps. While she was accustomed to digital interaction, the lack of informal, face-to-face interactions led to a more formal and structured supervision style. The spontaneous “corridor conversations” that often enhance relational aspects of supervision were missing, which she felt detracted from the personal connection in the supervisor-supervisee relationship.

Home Office Experience: Gabbie had a positive experience working from home, finding it efficient and beneficial due to eliminating commute times and the conducive environment at home for focused work. Her family setup supported this arrangement well, allowing her to balance work and home life effectively during the pandemic.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Her workload in terms of PhD supervision remained roughly the same, though the nature of interactions changed. Instead of impromptu office drop-ins, there were more scheduled meetings, primarily online via Zoom or Teams, which required a different kind of preparation and possibly led to more structured discussions.

Support from Employer: Gabbie noted a lack of specific support for supervisors from her employer during the pandemic; the focus was more on ensuring that she, like other staff, was generally coping with the pandemic’s challenges. There was an emphasis on looking out for the PhD candidates’ well-being, translating into a directive for supervisors to maintain close contact and support.

Preparedness of PhD Candidates for Article-Based Theses: Similar to Kyle and Sally, Gabbie agreed with the survey findings that many candidates are not well-prepared for writing article-based theses. She attributes this to their academic background, which primarily focuses on monograph writing. She advocates for collaborative writing for the first article to help familiarize candidates with the process of scholarly writing and peer review.

Evaluation of Own Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses: She feels confident in her supervisory skills but acknowledges that continuous learning and discussion with peers are essential for handling complex or unfamiliar issues that arise during supervision. Gabbie appreciates the collaborative nature of the supervisory teams at her institution, which helps in managing any gaps in her experience or knowledge.

Clarity of Guidelines for the Synopsis: Gabbie finds the guidelines for writing the synopsis to be somewhat unclear and open to interpretation, suggesting that more explicit guidelines could help, especially for those new to supervising or external committee members who evaluate the theses.

When to Start Writing the Synopsis : She recommends that PhD candidates consider the synopsis throughout their doctoral journey but compile it towards the end. Gabbie advises keeping a file of potential content for the synopsis from the start of the doctoral process, which can include discarded sections from articles or ideas that do not fit into the articles but are valuable for the overarching thesis narrative.

Overall, Gabbie’s experience reflects a pragmatic and flexible approach to PhD supervision. She adapts to the demands of the pandemic while trying to maintain the quality of academic mentorship. Her strategies for managing remote supervision and her positive attitude toward the enforced changes highlight a successful adaptation to the challenges posed by the pandemic.

3.2.4 Analyzing the interview with Henrik

Introduction: Henrik, aged 46, specializes in school and educational research. He has successfully guided three PhD candidates as a primary supervisor and is supervising four more. His doctoral thesis was a monograph.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Henrik noted that the pandemic affected his PhD candidates differently based on the nature of their research. Those engaged in classroom interventions faced significant challenges due to pandemic-related restrictions, particularly in accessing schools and conducting fieldwork. Conversely, candidates focused on desk-based research, such as literature reviews, experienced fewer disruptions. One of his candidates, involved in empirical research, had to receive an eight-month extension due to difficulties in data collection, exacerbated by strikes in the secondary education sector.

Changes in Supervision Practices: The transition to online supervision did not significantly affect Henrik, as he was already accustomed to conducting supervision via video conferencing tools like Teams and Zoom. However, he missed the informal, face-to-face interactions that often enrich the supervisory relationship. He noted that the absence of casual corridor conversations led to a more formal and structured online interaction.

Home Office Experience: Henrik found the exclusive home office setup challenging and detrimental to his well-being. He prefers a balance between working at the office and from home. The lack of physical interaction with colleagues and the continuous remote work environment negatively impacted his mental health, requiring him to seek professional health support.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Henrik reported that his workload related to PhD supervision did not increase significantly during the pandemic. However, other responsibilities became more demanding, and the overall context of working from home without the usual workplace interactions made certain tasks more difficult.

Support from Employer: There was no specific support provided by his employer concerning his role as a PhD supervisor during the pandemic. Support efforts were more generalized and not tailored to the unique challenges faced by supervisors.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: Henrik was particularly concerned about the mental health of his candidates, noting that the isolation and disruption caused by the pandemic were significant stressors. He proactively discussed these issues with his candidates, acknowledging the challenges faced by those with families and those who were isolated without a support network.

Personal Health Concerns: The pandemic had a substantial impact on Henrik’s mental health, highlighting the importance of considering the well-being of supervisors along with their candidates during such crises.

Effect on Completion Times: Henrik observed that the pandemic inevitably led to delays in the completion times of his PhD candidates, with some requiring extensions. He noted a disparity in how extensions were granted, suggesting a need for more consistent criteria.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Henrik believes that most PhD candidates are not well-prepared to write article-based theses, as their previous academic training typically does not include writing journal articles. He spends significant time discussing the publication process with his candidates to demystify it and help them understand the expectations of journal editors and peer reviewers.

Overall Reflection: Henrik’s experience reflects the diverse impacts of the pandemic on different types of research activities and highlights the importance of flexibility and support in PhD supervision. His proactive approach to discussing mental health and the structural changes in supervision practices illustrate adaptive strategies that can be beneficial in navigating future disruptions in academic settings.

3.2.5 Analyzing the interview with Luna

Introduction: Luna, aged 55, specializes in English as an Additional Language didactics. She completed her doctoral degree with an article-based thesis and has supervised a total of 11 PhD candidates, two of whom have completed their dissertations under her primary supervision.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates : Luna discussed the varying impacts of the pandemic on her supervisees. One candidate, who was already far along in her research when the pandemic hit, was less affected in terms of supervision but faced uncertainty and stress related to her digital dissertation defense using Zoom. For two new candidates who started during the pandemic, the experience was particularly challenging. They struggled with integrating into the academic community and adapting to remote work, significantly affecting their progress and emotional well-being.

Changes in Supervision Practices : The pandemic required Luna to adapt her supervision methods, emphasizing digital communication tools and frequent check-ins via Teams, Zoom, or phone apps. She noted that these changes allowed for maintaining close communication but shifted many supervision interactions to support coping with the emotional and logistical challenges posed by the pandemic.

Home Office Experience: Luna had a positive experience working from home, which was facilitated by having enough space and a family structure that supported a conducive work environment. She did not face significant challenges balancing work and family life, which helped maintain her productivity and well-being.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: While her direct supervision workload remained stable, Luna’s role as a researcher education coordinator significantly increased her overall responsibilities. She was deeply involved in supporting a broader range of PhD candidates beyond her direct supervisees, which included mediating between candidates and their supervisors and helping navigate the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Support from Employer: Luna felt well-supported by her employer, particularly in terms of responsiveness to her needs and concerns as she navigated her roles during the pandemic. This support was crucial in managing the increased demands on her time and ensuring the well-being of the candidates for whom she was responsible.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: Luna expressed significant concern for the mental well-being of her candidates, noting that the pandemic exacerbated feelings of isolation and stress. She was particularly worried about those who could not integrate into the academic community or faced severe disruptions in their personal lives.

Personal Health Concerns: Despite managing her workload and maintaining her health, Luna acknowledged the intense pressures of her role during the pandemic, which were compounded by the high demands of her coordinator position.

Effect on Completion Times: Luna observed that the pandemic delayed completion times for many PhD candidates, with extensions being necessary but variably granted. She emphasized the importance of transparent and equitable handling of extension requests to ensure fairness.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Luna believes that PhD candidates are generally underprepared for writing article-based theses, attributing this to the educational focus on monographic rather than article-based work before the PhD level. She highlighted the importance of guidance in academic writing and understanding publication processes as essential components of PhD education.

Overall Reflection: Luna’s experience during the pandemic underscores the critical role of adaptability in supervision, the importance of mental health support for PhD candidates, and the need for clear communication and guidelines in managing extended impacts on doctoral education. Her proactive approach to addressing these challenges reflects a comprehensive and empathetic supervision style aimed at supporting candidates through unprecedented times.

3.2.6 Analyzing the interview with Lydia

Introduction: Lydia, aged 52, specializes in educational research, focusing on professional development, assessment, and teacher education. She completed her doctoral degree through a monographic thesis and has supervised three PhD candidates to completion, with six currently under her guidance.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Lydia noted that the pandemic affected the progress of her PhD candidates, especially those with young children or those who started their projects around the onset of the pandemic. The challenges of remote work and caring for family members led to minor delays in their research timelines.

Changes in Supervision Practices: For candidates who had already started their projects, Lydia managed to continue effective supervision by meeting them on campus when possible. However, starting a supervisory relationship entirely online via Zoom or Teams with new candidates presented difficulties, particularly in building rapport and trust.

Home Office Experience: Lydia found working from home to be somewhat liberating and enjoyed the quiet environment, which contrasted with the often-hectic campus life. Her home setup, which included adult family members who managed their responsibilities independently, provided a conducive environment for work without significant distractions.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: While the actual supervision tasks did not significantly increase in time, Lydia spent more effort on providing emotional support to her candidates. Discussions often veered from academic topics to personal well-being, reflecting the heightened anxieties and social isolation experienced by the candidates.

Support from Employer : Lydia expressed disappointment with her institution’s lack of direct support during the pandemic. The focus remained on expecting faculty to adapt and manage without specific interventions aimed at easing the transition to remote supervision or addressing the unique challenges posed by the pandemic.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: She was particularly concerned about the psychological well-being of her candidates, as many were navigating difficult life stages compounded by the pandemic. Lydia felt a strong responsibility to reassure them and help them maintain confidence in their ability to progress in their research.

Personal Health Concerns: Lydia did not report significant concerns about her own health, feeling relatively privileged and well-adapted to the circumstances. She maintained a positive outlook, supported by stable family dynamics and the ability to engage in outdoor activities, which helped preserve her mental well-being.

Effect on Completion Times: Acknowledging the inevitable delays caused by the pandemic, Lydia noted that extensions were likely necessary for most PhD candidates during this period. She appreciated that post-pandemic policies allowed for extensions to address disruptions, especially those related to family responsibilities.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Despite not having written a synopsis herself, Lydia observed that candidates often lack preparedness for writing article-based theses, a gap she attributes to the traditional focus on monographic work at earlier academic stages. She advocates for enhanced training and support for candidates transitioning to this format.

Overall Reflection: Lydia’s reflections reveal a nuanced understanding of the challenges faced by PhD candidates and supervisors during the pandemic. Her approach highlights the importance of flexibility, emotional support, and the need for institutions to provide clearer guidelines and more robust support systems to adapt to such unprecedented circumstances effectively. Her experience underscores the critical role of empathy and adaptability in academic leadership during crises.

3.2.7 Analyzing the interview with Michelle

Introduction: Michelle, 41, specializes in educational science, teacher education, and language didactics. She has previously supervised five PhD students to completion and is currently the main and co-supervisor for ten PhD candidates.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Michelle reported varied impacts of the pandemic on her PhD candidates. Those who were in the final stages of their research before the pandemic began experienced minimal disruptions, benefiting from the shift to remote work which allowed them more focused time for writing. However, candidates in earlier stages of their projects or those with young children faced significant challenges due to reduced childcare hours and the need to juggle multiple responsibilities.

Changes in Supervision Practices: The pandemic greatly affected Michelle’s ability to provide regular supervision. With the demands of her own childcare responsibilities and the limitations of remote work, the frequency and quality of her interactions with her PhD candidates suffered. Supervision sessions were delayed, and Michelle had to adjust her practices, often conducting meetings via phone, online with Zoom or Teams, or in socially distanced outdoor settings.

Home Office Experience: Michelle found working from home to be extremely challenging, particularly due to the presence of young children and the constant interruptions that blurred the lines between work and home life. She experienced a persistent sense of being unable to adequately meet all her responsibilities as a supervisor and a parent.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic : Her workload related to PhD supervision became more demanding due to the difficulties in maintaining regular and effective communication. Michelle had to find creative ways to support her students, which often meant extended work hours and adapting to less conventional interaction methods.

Support from Employer: Michelle expressed significant disappointment with the lack of support from her employer during the pandemic. She felt that the institutions did not provide clear guidelines or additional support for managing the unique challenges brought on by the pandemic, leaving supervisors to manage as best they could under difficult circumstances.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: Michelle was particularly concerned about the psychological well-being of her candidates, noting that the isolation and disruptions affected different groups in varied ways. She observed that while parents were stressed and overextended, single young men often felt isolated and unproductive, which sometimes led to detrimental lifestyle changes.

Personal Health Concerns: Michelle mentioned that, like many in academia, she was accustomed to working excessively and did not have time to focus on her own health due to the demands of the pandemic situation.

Effect on Completion Times: Michelle anticipated that the pandemic would likely extend the completion times for many PhD candidates due to delays in data collection and the general disruption of academic schedules. She noted that while some extensions were granted, many were not, which added to the stress and uncertainty for the candidates.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Michelle believes that PhD candidates are generally not well-prepared to write article-based theses, which is often not addressed until during the PhD program itself. She emphasized the importance of structuring doctoral education to prepare better candidates for the realities of academic publishing and the peer review process.

Overall Reflection: Michelle’s experience during the pandemic highlights the complex challenges faced by PhD supervisors. Her insights underscore the need for better institutional support and clearer guidelines to navigate such unprecedented situations. Her commitment to adapting her supervisory practices despite personal and professional challenges demonstrates her dedication to her role and the success of her students.

3.2.8 Analyzing the interview with Ollie

Introduction: Ollie, aged 55, specializes in educational science and has completed his doctoral degree with a monograph. He has guided one PhD candidate to completion and is currently supervising three, with one about to defend their thesis.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Ollie noted significant disruptions for his PhD candidates due to the pandemic. One candidate was fortunate to have completed major data collection just before lockdowns, which somewhat insulated their progress. However, others struggled as their research depended heavily on data collection in schools, which became nearly impossible due to access restrictions and subsequent strikes affecting the school system.

Changes in Supervision Practices: While the physical data collection was hindered, Ollie found digital supervision effective, especially for discussing and editing texts. He appreciated the direct focus on the text that digital platforms such as Teams or Zoom facilitated, contrasting with the sometimes-awkward setups of physical meetings. Nonetheless, the lack of access to schools for his candidates meant there was less content to supervise, which altered the dynamics of his guidance.

Home Office Experience: Ollie had a relatively positive experience working from home, appreciating the convenience and reduced commute time. He noted that being at home allowed for a more relaxed dress code and flexible work hours, although he acknowledged a potential for decreased social interaction and the blurring of work-life boundaries.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Ollie’s workload in terms of PhD supervision remained largely the same, but the nature of the supervision changed. He spent more time helping candidates pivot their projects to adapt to the new realities, which included more discussions and finding alternative approaches to research obstacles.

Support from Employer: Ollie felt that there was a lack of specific support for PhD supervisors from his employer during the pandemic. The focus seemed to be more on undergraduate and master’s students, with little attention paid to the challenges faced by PhD candidates and their supervisors.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: He was concerned about the delays and the psychological impact on his students, noting the challenges of maintaining motivation and morale under such uncertain and stressful conditions.

Personal Health Concerns: Ollie was proactive about maintaining his physical health during the pandemic, investing in ergonomic furniture to ensure comfort while working from home. He did not express concerns about his psychological health, suggesting a pragmatic approach to dealing with the pandemic’s challenges.

Effect on Completion Times: He anticipated that the pandemic would significantly delay his PhD candidates’ completion times, mainly due to disrupted data collection processes. Ollie stressed the importance of data quality and how difficulties in data collection could impact the overall quality of doctoral research and subsequent publication opportunities.

Overall Reflection: Ollie’s insights reflect a nuanced understanding of the diverse challenges posed by the pandemic to doctoral education. His adaptation to online supervision using videoconferencing platforms such as Zoom or Teams highlights the potential benefits of digital platforms for focused academic work, even as he recognizes the significant disruptions to traditional research pathways. His experience underscores the need for institutions to provide more robust support systems for doctoral candidates and supervisors, ensuring that doctoral training quality and integrity are maintained even in adverse circumstances.

3.2.9 Analyzing the interview with Tyler

Introduction: Tyler, aged 60, specializes in the philosophy of science, organization, and educational leadership. He completed his doctorate with a monograph and has guided two PhD candidates to completion, with four currently under his supervision.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: The pandemic significantly disrupted the plans of Tyler’s PhD candidates, particularly affecting those involved in international collaborations and empirical research. One candidate missed a crucial research stay in Italy, impacting their opportunity to engage with an international academic community. Another had to revise their empirical approach due to restricted access to schools, which was a common issue during the pandemic.

Changes in Supervision Practices: Tyler’s supervision was heavily affected by the pandemic, with all interactions moving to digital platforms, including Teams and Zoom. This shift resulted in less frequent and less personal guidance, which he felt was less effective than the planned intensive seminars abroad. Like Ollie, however, Tyler noted some benefits to digital supervision using videoconferencing platforms, such as the ability to engage with text during sessions directly.

Home Office Experience: Initially, Tyler took on additional teaching responsibilities to compensate for colleagues struggling with digital formats, which increased his workload. Over time, he found a rhythm of working from home and even appreciated the focused time that allowed him to complete a book. He alternated working from home and the office, leveraging the strengths of both environments to maintain productivity.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Tyler’s workload in terms of PhD supervision did not increase significantly. Digital Teams or Zoom meetings tended to be shorter and more focused, which somewhat compensated for the increased preparatory work required for effective digital instruction.

Support from Employer: Tyler expressed frustration with his institution’s management during the pandemic, particularly concerning doctoral courses and the increased bureaucratic oversight that he felt stifled academic freedom. He noted a lack of focus on the needs of PhD supervisors and candidates compared to other groups within the university.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: While not overly concerned about the mental and physical health of his candidates, Tyler was worried about the practical aspects of their research, especially those needing to conduct fieldwork, which was severely impacted by the pandemic restrictions.

Personal Health Concerns: Tyler did not express particular concerns about his health; however, he took proactive measures to ensure a comfortable working environment by investing in ergonomic office equipment.

Effect on Completion Times: Tyler anticipated that the pandemic would extend the completion times for his PhD candidates, especially due to disruptions in data collection and the broader impact on academic research activities.

Overall Reflection: Tyler’s experiences reflect the complex challenges faced by academic supervisors during the pandemic, balancing the shift to digital platforms with maintaining academic rigor and support for their candidates. His story highlights the need for institutions to provide better support and flexibility for supervisors and PhD candidates during crises, ensuring that academic standards and well-being are maintained. Tyler’s ability to adapt and find personal benefits during the pandemic, such as completing a book, also underscores the potential for finding opportunities in the face of challenges.

3.2.10 Comprehensive analysis of the Main findings across nine interviews of doctoral supervisors in Norway

3.2.10.1 overview.

This analysis integrates the findings from interviews with nine doctoral supervisors in Norway, structured by the interview guide (based on the main findings from the survey) and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s (2021) approach to reflexive thematic analysis. The analysis focuses on how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the progression of PhD candidates and the corresponding changes in supervision practices.

Main Themes Identified:

1. Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Progression:

• Disruptions in Data Collection : Most supervisors reported significant disruptions in their candidates’ ability to collect data, especially those requiring access to external facilities like schools or international institutions. This was primarily due to lockdowns and restrictions imposed to curb the spread of the virus. As one supervisor noted: “One of my candidates had to delay their project significantly due to the inability to collect data as schools were not accessible.” (Ollie)

• Adaptations in Research Plans : Many candidates had to alter their research methodologies or adjust their empirical scopes to suit the new constraints, highlighting the flexibility required under crisis conditions. However, one of the supervisors mentioned that: “It affected them very differently. I had three candidates before the pandemic, and two of them were barely affected. However, the third struggled significantly with data collection due to difficulties in recruiting informants.” (Gabbie)

2. Changes in Supervision Practices:

• Shift to Digital Supervision : All supervisors transitioned to online platforms for conducting supervision, such as Zoom, Teams, or phone apps (e.g., Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp). While some found digital tools effective for sharing and reviewing written work, others felt the lack of physical presence reduced the quality of interaction and guidance they could provide. As one supervisor noted: “Digital supervision worked very well because it allowed sharing and discussing texts more effectively than in-person meetings. This actually enhanced the focus on the text during sessions” (Ollie).

• Increased Need for Emotional Support : Supervisors noted an increased need to support the psychological well-being of their candidates, as many struggled with isolation and stress due to the pandemic. As one supervisor noted: “I was particularly attentive to the mental health of my candidates, especially those without local family support. Regular check-ins were crucial during this period” (Gabbie).

3. Work Environment and Work-Life Balance:

• Home Office Challenges : Responses about working from home were mixed; some supervisors appreciated the flexibility and reduced commute times, while others struggled with distractions and the blending of personal and professional spaces. As one supervisor mentioned: “I actually enjoyed working from home as it provided a peaceful environment, but I missed the informal interactions with colleagues.” (Lydia)

• Institutional Support : There was a notable lack of targeted support for supervisors from their institutions. This often left supervisors and their candidates feeling overlooked in broader university responses to the pandemic. As one supervisor noted: “There was no specific support for me as a PhD supervisor during the pandemic. The general support was the same as for all staff members” (Lydia).

4. Professional Development and Academic Output:

• Delays in Academic Milestones : The pandemic delayed key academic milestones, including thesis submissions and defenses, primarily due to halted data collection and extended research timelines.

• Publication Challenges : The disruption also impacted candidates’ abilities to publish their research, a crucial component of their academic careers, due to delays and changes in their research projects.

Integration of Findings with Saldaña’s Coding Framework and Interview Guide:

• Using Saldaña’s coding method allowed for identifying recurring challenges and adaptations among the supervisors’ experiences. The thematic analysis revealed a consistent need for increased flexibility in research planning and supervision methods.

• The interview guide helped maintain a focus on how the pandemic specifically impacted various aspects of PhD supervision and candidate progression. It ensured that all relevant areas, such as changes in work routines, supervision adjustments, and overall impacts on PhD timelines, were systematically explored.

Comprehensive Assessment : The interviews collectively underscore the resilience and adaptability required by PhD candidates and their supervisors during the pandemic. They highlight several areas for improvement:

• Enhanced Institutional Support : Institutions clearly need to provide more structured support tailored to the needs of PhD candidates and supervisors during crises.

• Flexibility in Research and Supervision Plans : Adapting research plans and supervision methods to accommodate unexpected disruptions is crucial for maintaining the integrity and continuity of PhD education.

• Focus on Mental Health : The increased emotional and psychological support needed by candidates suggests that institutions should integrate mental health resources more fully into their doctoral training programs.

• Preparedness and Training : The experience has shown the importance of preparing PhD candidates for unexpected changes in their research environment, including training in digital tools and remote research methodologies.

In conclusion, the pandemic has not only disrupted traditional PhD education paths but also provided insights into how flexibility, digital preparedness, and institutional support can be enhanced to better prepare for future crises. These insights are vital for shaping resilient and adaptive academic environments that can withstand global challenges while supporting doctoral candidates’ academic and personal well-being.

From the analysis of the nine interviews, a few aspects stood out as particularly notable, offering deeper insights (expansion) into the unique challenges and responses within the context of PhD supervision during the pandemic:

1. Resilience and Innovation in Supervision:

• Some supervisors noted that despite the significant challenges, the shift to digital platforms allowed them to explore new forms of engagement with texts and supervision methods. For example, one supervisor highlighted the effectiveness of digital tools for collaborative work on documents, suggesting that these might even surpass traditional face-to-face interactions in certain aspects. This adaptation was a positive takeaway that some found surprising and worth integrating into their post-pandemic practices.

2. Diverse Impacts on Different Research Types:

• The differential impact of the pandemic on empirical versus theoretical research was striking. Supervisors of candidates who needed to conduct fieldwork, especially in schools or abroad, faced severe disruptions. As one supervisor noted: “We had to adjust research plans significantly, shifting to alternative data sources and methods where possible.” (Kyle). In contrast, those whose work was more theoretical or could be conducted remotely experienced fewer setbacks. This variance highlighted certain types of research vulnerability to external disruptions, which was a notable point of concern.

3. Underestimation of Emotional Challenges:

• Another well known, but still important aspect was the depth of emotional and psychological impacts on PhD candidates as noted by their supervisors. The extent to which these challenges affected the candidates’ productivity and well-being was significant and perhaps underappreciated by the institutions themselves. This underscores a critical area for future academic support systems to address more robustly.

4. Lack of Institutional Support:

• The widespread sentiment of insufficient institutional support was particularly striking. Several supervisors felt that there was a lack of targeted strategies to support PhD supervision during the pandemic. This lack of support was not just in terms of transitioning to online modes but also in addressing the specific needs of PhD candidates and their projects during such a disruptive period.

5. The Positive Impact of Forced Adaptation:

• Interestingly, some supervisors pointed out that the forced adaptation to new circumstances led to unexpected benefits, such as enhanced focus and productivity in certain cases, and even opportunities for personal and professional growth, such as writing a book or developing new teaching methods. These outcomes, while not universal, were surprising positives that emerged from a generally challenging time.

The sentiment analysis of the 9 interviews (see attachment 4 in the Supplementary file ) showed some individual variations, but that resilience and adaptability among doctoral supervisors during the pandemic were quite common. Supervisors recognized the challenges but overall maintained a positive and proactive stance, focusing on solutions and effective management of their supervisory roles. The objective nature of their responses indicates a practical approach to dealing with the pandemic’s impact, emphasizing the importance of communication, adaptation to remote supervision, and institutional support.

These insights not only highlight the varied experiences of PhD supervisors during the pandemic but also suggest areas for improvement in how institutions support doctoral education in times of crisis. The resilience and innovative approaches developed during this period could inform future policies and practices to better support PhD candidates and supervisors alike.

3.2.11 Integrated analysis: the main findings from the interviews and the open survey responses

To integrate and analyze the findings from the interviews (see attachment 1) and the 1,483 open survey responses (see attachment 2) from the survey among 293 doctoral supervisors, we can draw on several key themes and concerns that emerge consistently across these data sources. This approach will help us understand the broader implications of the insights gathered from different perspectives within the same study.

1. Adaptation to Digital Tools and Platforms:

• Interviews : The interviews highlighted how supervisors adapted to using digital tools for communication and supervision. This was generally seen as effective but lacking in certain qualitative aspects, particularly in building deeper relationships and managing more nuanced discussions.

• Open Survey Responses : The survey also reflected a reliance on digital tools, with many supervisors recognizing their utility in maintaining continuity. However, there was also an acknowledgment of the challenges in fully replicating face-to-face interactions.

2. Ethical and Practical Concerns with Digital Supervision:

• Interviews : Concerns were raised about the relational and ethical implications of the lack of physical presence and interaction, and the extensive use of digital tools in academic settings during the pandemic.

• Open Survey Responses : Similar concerns were noted, with supervisors emphasizing the importance of ensuring academic integrity and the genuine intellectual development of PhD candidates.

3. Impact of the Pandemic on Supervisory Practices:

• Interviews : The pandemic’s impact was a significant theme, affecting the logistical aspects of supervision and the mental well-being of both supervisors and their candidates.

• Open Survey Responses : Responses indicated varied impacts of the pandemic, with some supervisors noting increased stress and difficulty in maintaining research productivity and supervisory quality.

4. Institutional Support and Professional Development:

• Interviews : There was a noted lack of sufficient institutional support for adapting to new modes of supervision and research during the pandemic.

• Open Survey Responses : This theme was echoed in the survey responses, with mixed reports about the availability and effectiveness of continuing professional development (CPD) related to research supervision. Some respondents felt unsupported, particularly in navigating the challenges posed by remote supervision and digital tools.

5. Preparedness of PhD Candidates:

• Interviews : Discussions highlighted concerns about the varying levels of preparedness among PhD candidates, especially in writing the synopsis and adapting to new research methodologies that include digital tools and remote data collection.

• Open Survey Responses : Supervisors expressed a range of experiences regarding candidate preparedness. While some noted their candidates were well-equipped, others pointed out significant gaps, especially in writing the synopsis and article-based theses and handling the referee process, the timeline and complex research independently.

6. Valuation of Supervision:

• Interviews : Supervisors discussed feeling that their efforts were not adequately valued by institutions, with a need for greater recognition and support for their roles.

• Open Survey Responses : This sentiment was reinforced by survey data, where some supervisors felt that their contributions to doctoral training were undervalued by their institutions, particularly when compared to other academic duties.

7. Suggestions for Institutional Changes:

• Interviews : There were calls for institutions to adapt more proactively to the changing landscape of doctoral education, including better training for using digital tools and more robust support systems for both supervisors and candidates.

• Open Survey Responses : Supervisors suggested various improvements, such as more structured professional development opportunities, better guidelines for remote supervision, and enhanced support for mental health and well-being.

3.2.12 Summary

The integrated analysis across interviews and open survey responses suggests a complex landscape of doctoral supervision during and potentially beyond the pandemic era. Key themes highlight both challenges and potential areas for policy and practice enhancements:

• Digital Adaptation and Ethical Concerns : While digital tools have provided necessary solutions for continuity in supervision, they bring up ethical concerns that institutions need to address more thoroughly, particularly concerning academic integrity and the quality of student learning.

• Support and Development Needs : There is a clear need for institutions to offer more targeted support and development opportunities for supervisors, addressing both the technical aspects of digital supervision and the broader pedagogical skills required in a changing academic environment.

• Recognition and Valuation of Supervision : Supervisors feel that their work is not sufficiently valued, suggesting that institutions should reevaluate how they recognize and support supervisory roles within the academic career framework.

• Candidate Preparedness : There is variability in how prepared PhD candidates are for the demands of modern doctoral research, indicating the need for more robust preparatory programs and entry assessments.

• These insights call for a strategic reassessment of doctoral training programs, supervisory support mechanisms, and institutional policies to better align with the evolving needs of both supervisors and their candidates.

4 Limitations and future research

The present study provides in-depths insights into PhD supervision during the pandemic; however, the study also has several limitations apart from inherited limitations of self-reports and interview data. Firstly, the findings might be context-specific to the educational setting in Norway. The unique characteristics of the Norwegian educational system, cultural aspects, and institutional structures may not be entirely generalizable to other countries. However, the globalization of doctoral education, with increasing international collaborations, international publishing, and standardization of academic practices, might mitigate this issue to some extent, making the findings relevant beyond the Norwegian context. Secondly, the study lacks data on PhD supervisors’ experiences prior to the pandemic. This absence of baseline data means we cannot directly compare the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Nonetheless, the experiences reported in this study correspond well with prior research on academic supervision ( Pyhältö et al., 2012 , 2023 ; Löfström et al., 2024 ), indicating that the challenges and adaptations observed are not entirely unprecedented, even if intensified by the pandemic context.

Future research should aim to explore the long-lasting impacts of COVID-19 on doctoral education. It is necessary to investigate whether the changes observed in supervisory practices during the pandemic are fleeting or have led to a permanent shift in how supervision is approached. Specifically, studies should examine if new models of remote supervision, increased flexibility, and the use of digital tools will continue to be integrated into doctoral education post-pandemic, or if traditional methods will resume dominance. This is of special interest in cases where PhD supervisors and PhD candidates are located at different institutions. By addressing these questions, future research can contribute to a deeper understanding of the pandemic’s legacy on doctoral education.

5 Conclusion

In this article we examined the experiences of PhD supervisors in Norway during the pandemic to answer the research questions:

1. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic impeded the PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the micro- level, and how do they perceive this situation?

2. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the meso- level, and how do they perceive this situation?

We conducted a cumulative data collection process and analysis, where survey questions were based on previously collected field dialog data, online observation data, seminar evaluation data, and document analysis data. The qualitative interview guide questions were built upon previously collected quantitative data (survey), and the Supplementary data was based on previously collected quantitative data (survey) and qualitative interview data.

The coherence between qualitative and quantitative findings is mainly examined based on confirmation , expansion , or discordance in this article ( Fetters et al., 2013 ).

The findings from the explorative case study revealed that the PhD supervisors faced numerous challenges during the pandemic, both professionally and personally. They found digital supervision with their PhD fellows via platforms like Teams and Zoom to be convenient and efficient but occasionally lacking in quality. They also encountered difficulties in addressing the psychosocial aspects of their PhD candidates’ experiences and faced various research-related challenges with their PhD-candidates during the pandemic. For PhD supervisors who extensively worked from home over a long period, the situation created new conditions that affected their job performance. These altered conditions hindered their research capacity, their ability to follow up with their PhD candidates and their capacity to fulfill other job responsibilities. Although the PhD supervisors received support during the pandemic, it seems that the incremental measures provided were insufficient. The PhD regulations were established before the pandemic under normal conditions and for normal circumstances. However, it appears that no significant adjustments have been made to accommodate the extraordinary pandemic conditions, which have altered some aspects of their professional roles as academics and PhD supervisors. This was particularly critical for PhD supervisors with young children, especially female supervisors, who had to deal with lockdowns, social distancing, remote work, homeschooling, quarantine for themselves and their children, and COVID-19 illness, since the data showed that they seemed to have more home responsibilities than men during the pandemic. We also found that some supervisors thought that female PhDs’ (with own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that women seem to have more home responsibilities. In addition, the supervisors thought that female supervisors (with own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that female supervisors seem also to have more home responsibilities (e.g., for childcare, household etc.).

This slow-motion disaster lasted up to 20 months and can be perceived as an “external intervention” or a naturalistic experiment which was impossible to predict for universities and society. The case study results indicate that it is more important than ever to plan for the unforeseen in order to be better prepared for the next societal crisis. Therefore, it is important to be vigilant and understand the gap between the formulation, transformation, and realization arenas when it comes to the distinction between incremental, semi-structural changes and fundamental changes in PhD regulations and guidelines brought on by societal crises. Although some support from employers has been offered, the overall PhD guidelines, regulations, and supervision norms remained unchanged in the transformation arena (meso- level) during the pandemic. On a general level, this highlights the need for better crisis preparedness at the doctoral level in the years to come.

A common finding related to RQ1 and RQ2 and across the different data sources was that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted some of the PhD supervisors in different ways on both micro- and meso-levels, and some of them perceive this long-lasting pandemic challenging and difficult, while others have experienced this to a lesser degree. This reveals a confirmation across the quantitative and qualitative data in the study. Also, these findings mostly confirmed and expanded on the understanding of the impact of the pandemic on PhD candidates ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ), with some minor discordance.

More specifically, the PhD supervisors in the study were somewhat satisfied with the educational quality regarding digital teaching but experienced various supervision, research-related and psycho-social challenges. Although some of the supervisors received support during the pandemic, it seems like the majority did not receive sufficient support and their workload increased significantly during the pandemic. This is due to the high complexity of frame factors that have changed the underlying premises for doctoral education during the pandemic, affecting both the PhD- supervision and the PhD candidates’ feasibility on several levels. The regulations for PhD scholarships and PhD regulations, implemented before the pandemic in 2018, were designed under normal educational and social conditions and may not fully address the challenges faced during the pandemic. Therefore, this study shows that to reduce this gap and strengthen the feasibility of the PhDs and the frame factors for PhD-supervision, the institutions must significantly enhance their preparedness to effectively manage demanding situations at both micro- and meso-levels, ensuring they are fully equipped to address future societal crises of a similar nature.

When it comes to RQ3 we find both confirmation, expansion, and discordance across the quantitative and qualitative data. We find confirmation across the quantitative and qualitative data when it comes to the variability in preparedness of PhD candidates for writing the article-based thesis. Article-based theses present unique challenges compared to traditional monograph-based dissertations, particularly in terms of integration and the breadth of skills required. One of the primary challenges with article-based theses is integrating articles that may cover slightly different aspects of a research topic into a coherent overall thesis. This integration is critical, it requires a high level of academic writing skills and ability to secure the coherence of the synopsis. Candidates often come into PhD programs with varying levels of experience in academic writing and publication. The survey and interviews, as well as Supplementary data , indicate that many candidates are not well-prepared for writing article-based theses, highlighting a need for more targeted training in academic writing and publishing early in the doctoral process. The need for robust supervisory support is acutely felt in guiding article-based theses, where candidates must navigate the complexities of publishing in peer-reviewed journals alongside synthesizing their research in the synopsis. This implies that PhD-candidates both are taking a doctoral degree in the Norwegian context and at the same time are publishing articles for the international research context, which can be challenging.

We find expansion when it comes to the need to have guidelines for the synopsis. Supervisors reported significant variation in the guidelines for the synopsis across institutions, both in the qualitative and quantitative part, which can lead to confusion and inconsistency in expectations for candidates and supervisors. Some respondents found these guidelines sufficient, while others find them unclear or obscure, complicating their task of effectively guiding PhD candidates. Clear, comprehensible guidelines are essential for ensuring that the synopsis effectively synthesizes the research in a manner that meets academic standards ( Wollenschläger et al., 2016 ).

And we find some discordance regarding variability in candidate preparedness where both strands of the data indicated a significant variability in how prepared PhD candidates are when they enroll in doctoral programs. Candidates’ preparedness often depends on their previous educational experiences, which can vary widely regarding exposure to research methods, academic writing, and critical thinking skills. The variability in preparedness suggests a need for more robust preparatory programs to equip all incoming doctoral candidates with the necessary skills and knowledge to succeed in their research endeavors. Implementing comprehensive entry assessments could help identify specific areas where candidates might need additional support, allowing programs to tailor preparatory courses or early doctoral training to address these gaps.

These findings collectively point to a need for doctoral programs to clarify guidelines, particularly for the synopsis in article-based theses, to enhance support for supervisory roles, and to develop preparatory programs that address the broad variability in candidate preparedness. This is also based on research on the need for rubrics ( Wollenschläger et al., 2016 ), which shows that transparency around requirements and guidelines is important for students learning. By tackling these issues, institutions can better prepare PhD candidates for the demands of modern doctoral research, ultimately leading to more consistent and successful outcomes in doctoral education. And despite that only 20 (8.3%) of the supervisors agreed or strongly agreed that they were supervising a PhD candidate who had considered quitting the PhD program during the pandemic, it is important to be vigilant around the (complex) reasons that causes this, since this is in many ways a drastic decision, first of all for the candidate themselves, but also for the supervisors, as well as for the society in general who has invested almost 5 million Norwegian kroner in each PhD-scholarship. Dropping out can partly be related to the observed findings that many PhD candidates were unprepared for the intricacies of article writing, including the lengthy processes of submission and peer review, attached to their educational background, which primarily focused on monographic work at the bachelor’s and master’s levels. This also implies that while PhD’s are perceived, assessed and evaluated as student/candidates when they are completing assignments in a doctoral program, there might be a quite new situation for them when they submit their articles to scientific journals with blind review, where they are evaluated as other researchers (and not only as students/candidates). Such findings (and similar findings) seem to go “under the radar” in doctoral programs in Norway and by taking into account such “tacit knowledge” we might be better prepared to bridge the formulation arena and realization arena within doctoral education in the years to come. This development also demands a vigilance within doctoral education of the importance of theory development within doctoral education since international research shows that doctoral supervision is under-theorized and lacks a solid knowledge base ( Halse and Malfroy, 2010 ; Halse, 2011 ) where also eclectic use of theories ( Dalland et al., 2023 ) can improve this area.

Author note

GPT-4o ( OpenAI, 2024 ) was employed in this article to translate interview findings to English after a general thematic analysis conducted in Norwegian and as one of several validity communities for the open survey responses. The GPT-4’s output was manually examined, edited, and reviewed by the authors. The sentiment analysis of the 9 interviews was done by the first author and by using the GPT-4o. Then it was carried out a validation of this sentiment analysis by SurveyMonkey ( SurveyMonkey, 2024 ), Claude ( Anthropic, 2024 ) and Gemini Advanced ( Google, 2024 ).

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

RK: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. FR: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. ØSk: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. LJ: Conceptualization, Data curation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. SS: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. ØSa: Data curation, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. KH: Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all doctoral supervisors for their responses to the surveys and for participating in interviews and focus groups on this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1436521/full#supplementary-material

1. ^ Some of the Norwegian statistic from universities shows the following: about parental leave (day’s work) (women 69%, men 31%), sick children (day’s work) (women 69%, men 31%), self-certified sick leave (day’s work) (women 65%, men 35%) and doctor-certified sick leave (day’s work) (women 72%, men 28%) during one of the year in the pandemic ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ).

Andres, L., Bengtsen, S. S. E., Gallego Castaño, L., Crossouard, B., Keefer, J. M., and Pyhältö, K. (2015). Drivers and interpretations of doctoral education today: National Comparisons. Frontline Learn. Res. 3, 5–22. doi: 10.14786/flr.v3i3.177

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Anthropic. (2024). Claude 3. Large Language Model (version 14. March 2024) . San Francisco. Available at: https://claude.ai/new

Google Scholar

Baklien, B. (2004). Følgeforskning. Sosiologi i Dag 34, 49–66.

Bastalich, W. (2017). Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature. Stud. High. Educ. 42, 1145–1157. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1079702

Bengtsen, S. S. E. (2023). “Doctoral education in-the-world: (dis)connections between research and society” in From splendid isolation to global engagement . eds. B. Wolf, T. Schmohl, L. Buhin-Krenek, and M. Stricker (WBV Media), 43–55.

Börgeson, E., Sotak, M., Kraft, J., Bagunu, G., Biörserud, C., and Lange, S. (2021). Challenges in PhD education due to COVID-19- disrupted supervision or business as usual: a cross-sectional survey of Swedish biomedical sciences graduate students. BMC Med. Educ. 21:294. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02727-3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., and Terry, G. (2019). “Thematic analysis” in Handbook of research methods in health social sciences . ed. P. Liamputtong (Singapore: Springer), 843–860.

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: a practical guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health , 11, 589–597. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Brinkmann, S. (2022). Qualitative Interviewing: Conversational Knowledge Through Research Interviews (2 ed.) . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Burner, T., Bjerkholt, E., Gaathaug, A. V., Kleiven, S., and Ljoså, T. M. (2020). Doctorateness across higher education Institutionsin Norway. Uniped 43, 3–18. doi: 10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2020-01-02

Creswell, J. W., and Guetterman, T. C. (2021). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research . 6th Edn. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.

Creswell, J. W., and Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research . 3rd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dake, D. K., and Gyimah, E. (2023). Using sentiment analysis to evaluate qualitative students’ responses. Educ. Inf. Technol. 28, 4629–4647. doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11349-1

Dalland, C. P., Blikstad-Balas, M., and Svenkerud, S. (2023). Eklektisk bruk av teori i doktorgradsavhandlinger innen utdanningsforskning. Acta Didactica Norden 17, 1–24. doi: 10.5617/adno.9837

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review , 14, 532–550. doi: 10.2307/258557

Ertesvåg, S. K., Sammons, P., and Blossing, U. (2021). Integrating data in a complex mixed-methods classroom interaction study. Br. Educ. Res. J. 47, 654–673. doi: 10.1002/berj.3678

European University Association (EUA) (2010). “Salzburg II” in Recommendations. European universities’ achievements since 2005 in implementing the Salzburg principles (Brussels: European University Association (EUA)).

European University Association (EUA) (2015). Annual Report 2015 . Brussels: European University Association (EUA).

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., and Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health Serv. Res. 48, 2134–2156. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). “Case study” in The SAGE handbook of qualitative research . eds. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. 4th ed (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage), 301–316.

Hall, J., and Mansfield, L. (2023). The benefits and complexities of integrating mixed method findings using the pillar integration process: a workplace health intervention case study. J. Mixed Methods Res. doi: 10.1177/15586898231196287

Gehrke, P. (2018). “Ecological validity” in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation . Ed. B. Frey. (Thousand Oaks: Sage), 563–565.

Google. (2024). Gemini Advanced. Large Language Model (version 20 May 2024) . Menlo Park, California. Available at: https://gemini.google.com/advanced?hl=no

Halse, C. (2011). ‘Becoming a supervisor’: the impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning. Stud. High. Educ. 36, 557–570. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.594593

Halse, C., and Malfroy, J. (2010). Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Stud. High. Educ. 35, 79–92. doi: 10.1080/03075070902906798

Hyett, N., Kenny, A., and Dickson-Swift, V. (2014). Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Health Well Being 9:23606. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v9.23606

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., and Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1, 112–133. doi: 10.1177/1558689806298224

Kálmán, O., Horváth, L., Kardos, D., Kozma, B., Feyisa, M. B., and Rónay, Z. (2022). Review of benefits and challenges of co-supervision in doctoral education. Eur. J. Educ. 57, 452–468. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12518

Krumsvik, R. J. (2016a). Noen betraktninger om forskningsveiledning PhD- nivå (some considerations about supervision at the doctoral level). In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD- avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 125–148). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

Krumsvik, R. J. (2016b). The synopsis of article-based theses. In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD- avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 93–123). Fagbokforlaget.

Krumsvik, R. J. (2017). Trenerene i den akademiske maraton (The trainers in the academic marathon). Utdanningsforskning (Educational Research) , Oslo: The Educational Association. 1–3.

Krumsvik, R. J., and Jones, L. Ø. (2016). Hvorfor dropper “kronjuvelen” ut? (why do the “crown jewels” drop out?). Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening 12, 1022–1024.

Krumsvik, R. J., Jones, L. Ø., Leer-Salvesen, K., Høydal, K. L., and Røkenes, F. M. (2019). Face-to-face and remote teaching in a doctoraleducation course: using flipped classroom, formative assessment and remoteteaching to increase the teaching quality of a literature reviewcourse. Uniped 42, 194–214. doi: 10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2019-02-07

Krumsvik, R. J., Mæland, B., and Solstad, S. H. (2021). “Doctoral education in Norway and inter-institutional collaboration within doctoral education” in The future of doctoral research . eds. A. Lee and R. Bongaardt. 1st ed. (New York, NY: Routledge), 110–119.

Krumsvik, R. J., Øfstegaard, M., and Jones, L. Ø. (2016a). Retningslinjer og vurderingskriterier for artikkelbasert PhD. Uniped 39, 78–93. doi: 10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2016-01-07

Krumsvik, R. J., Øfstegaard, M., and Jones, L. Ø. (2016b). Retningslinjer og vurderingskriterier for artikkelbasert PhD-avhandling (guidelines and assessment criteria for article-based doctoral thesis). In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD-avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 78–93). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 39.

Krumsvik, R. J., and Røkenes, F. M. (2016). Literature review in the PhD thesis. In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD-avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 51–91). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

Krumsvik, R. J., Skaar, Ø. O., Røkenes, F. M., Solstad, S. H., and Høydal, K. L. (2022). Experiences of WNGER II PhD. fellows during the COVID-19 pandemic – a case study. Front. Educ. 7:860828. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.860828

Kvale, S., and Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing . 3rd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Linde, G. (2012). Det ska ni veta! En introduktion till läroplansteori (3rd Edn.). Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Lindensjö, B., and Lundgren, U. P. (2014). Utbildningsreformer och politisk styrning . Stockholm: HLS Förlag.

Löfström, E., Tikkanen, L., Anttila, H., and Pyhältö, K. (2024). Supervisors’ experiences of doctoral supervision in times of change. Stud. Grad. Postdoctoral Educ. 15, 34–48. doi: 10.1108/SGPE-01-2023-0004

Lundgren, U. P. (1999). Ramfaktorteori och praktisk utbildningsplanering. Pedagogisk Forskning 4, 31–41.

Mason, S., and Merga, M. (2018). Integrating publications in the social science doctoral thesis by publication. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 37, 1454–1471. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2018.1498461

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach . 3rd Edn Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation . Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., and Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation . 4th Edn. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT (May 20204 version) [Large language model]. San Fransisco, LA Available at: https://chat.openai.com/chat

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practic . Sage.

Peters, M., and Fàbregues, S. (2023). Missed opportunities in mixed methods EdTech research? Visual joint display development as an analytical strategy for achieving integration in mixed methods studies. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. , 1–21. doi: 10.1007/s11423-023-10234-z

Pyhältö, K., Tikkanen, L., and Anttila, H. (2023). Is there a fit between PhD candidates’ and their supervisors’ perceptions on the impact of COVID-19 on doctoral education? Stud. Grad. Postdoct. Educ. 14, 134–150. doi: 10.1108/SGPE-05-2022-0035

Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J., and Keskinen, J. (2012). Exploring the fit between doctoral students’ and supervisors’ perceptions of resources and challenges Vis-à-Vis the doctoral journey. Int. J. Dr. Stud. 7, 395–414. doi: 10.28945/1745

Ramberg, I., and Wendt, K. K. (2023). Forskerhverdag under koronapandemien: Resultater fra en panelundersøkelse av norske forskere 2022 (Oslo: NIFU Working Note 9). Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/11250/3069589

Sarrico, C. S. (2022). The expansion of doctoral education and the changing nature and purpose of the doctorate. High. Educ. 84, 1299–1315. doi: 10.1007/s10734-022-00946-1

Schoonenboom, J., and Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie 69, 107–131. doi: 10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1

Skodvin, O. J. (2013). “NOKUT og kvalitet i IKT-støttet høyere utdanning” in Ulike forståelser av kvalitet i norsk, fleksibel høyere utdanning . eds. T. Fossland, K. R. Ramberg, and E. Gjerdrum (Tromsø: Norgesuniversitetet).

Solli, K., and Nygaard, L. P. (2022). ‘Same But Different? Identifying Writing Challenges Specific to the PhD by Publication’, in Landscapes and Narratives of PhD by Publication . Eds. K. Solli and L. P. Nygaard Cham: Springer. 13–30.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis . New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Steine, S., and Sarpebakken, B. (2023). Færre doktorgrader innenfor matematikk og naturvitenskap i 2022 . Oslo: Statistics Norway.

SurveyMonkey. (2024). SurveyMonkey . San Mateo. Available at: https://surveymonkey.com

Tight, M. (2016). “Case study research” in The BERA/Sage handbook of educational research . eds. D. Wyse, N. Selwyn, E. Smith, and L. Suter (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications), 376–394.

UK Council for Graduate Education (2021). The UK research supervision survey report 2021 . London: UK Council for Graduate Education.

Wichmann-Hansen, G. (2021). DUT Guide on Supervision. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift . 16, 1–13. doi: 10.7146/dut.v16i31.127292

Wollenschläger, M., Hattie, J., Machts, N., Möller, J., and Harms, U. (2016). What makes rubrics effective in teacher-feedback? Transparency of learning goals is not enough. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 44–45, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.11.003

Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research . 3rd Edn: Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Keywords: PhD-supervisors, experiences, COVID-19, supervision, PhD-fellows, frame factors

Citation: Krumsvik RJ, Røkenes FM, Skaar &O, Jones L, Solstad SH, Salhus & and Høydal KL (2024) PhD-supervisors experiences during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a case study. Front. Educ . 9:1436521. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1436521

Received: 22 May 2024; Accepted: 15 July 2024; Published: 09 August 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Krumsvik, Røkenes, Skaar, Jones, Solstad, Salhus and Høydal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Rune J. Krumsvik, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Institute for Stem Cell & Regenerative Medicine

Pursuing a phd in a pandemic, the calm before the storm.

Uncertainty is a fact of life for just about any PhD student, especially in the hectic final year of a thesis project. So much can change and so much is unknown. Data shifts. Funding is fickle. The right postdoc job could require relocation to a faraway city. It’s all part of the territory for a young scientist.

Nisa Williams was beginning the final stretch of her PhD project when her mentor suddenly left the University of Washington for an opportunity on the east coast. Fortunately, Williams, a bioengineering student, found a welcoming lab where she could continue her work on cutting-edge tissue engineering methods. Crisis averted.

“That was in January,” says Williams. “Before things really got strange.”

For more than 100 years, scientists hoping to understand how the human heart grows and functions have relied on two-dimensional platforms. While these models have led to decades of insights, they do not adequately mimic the conditions that exist in our bodies. Williams is part of a movement to change that by developing more sophisticated three-dimensional representations of the heart.

“Our hypothesis is that if you give cells a home that closely resembles their natural environment, it’s more likely that natural events will occur.”

Tissue Origami

To watch nature unfold, Williams, now based in the Murry Lab in the Institute for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine (ISCRM), creates manmade environments in which cardiac cells feel at home enough to behave as they would in an actual heart, not unlike designing natural zoo habitats that make animals feel at home enough to behave as they would in the wild.

In the course of testing her hypothesis, Williams has developed a type of technique that is sometimes referred to as tissue origami. Layers of cells are stacked onto flexible scaffolds, which Williams then forms into heart-ventricle shapes that attempt to recapitulate the helical architecture of the growing heart. Electrical cues are then used to signal the cells to contract and rearrange themselves as they respond to their new 3D environment.

Williams explains one application for this technique. “I make tiny ventricles in a dish that are about the size of a mouse ventricle. Using our 3D model, I can measure the force those cells are capable of generating to pump blood around the body.”

The ability to study the heart in such detail is exciting.

Particularly tantalizing, adds Williams, are the possible insights into how these heart cells remodel themselves. The 3D models potentially enable her to observe the in-between steps in cardiac development, to see how the cells fold and turn in a way that gives the heart its structure and function. “The cells remodeling themselves is what allows the heart to twist and wring, like a coiled-up towel, which gives it more force. And nobody has been able to understand how this architecture develops in embryos or how to recreate it. So to see it happen is pretty cool.”

The 3D tissue engineering technology central to Williams’s research offers scientists a game-changing tool to explore fundamental questions about the means by which complex structures like the heart, brain, and other organs develop, what causes problems in those tissues, and how to treat diseases. No surprise then, that Williams was eager to complete her thesis and make a lasting contribution to the field of biomedical research.

That’s when COVID-19 hit home.

Nothing To Do But Get it Done

By late January, Williams had settled into the Murry Lab. She was letting her cells lead her in new directions, publishing reviews and research papers, and drawing on the diverse expertise of the engineers, pathologists, and biologists who were just steps away when she was stuck or needed a sounding board for a new idea.

Three months later, her cells are still folding, twisting, and turning in their homey human-engineered environments, and a proof-of-concept paper is due out in May. Everything else, of course, has changed as ISCRM researchers join much of the world by limiting time in the lab to slow the spread of COVID-19.

Williams was granted permission to continue working from her bench in the solitude of a fifth floor lab on UW Medicine’s South Lake Union campus.  “Really, there’s nothing to do but get it done,” says Williams, searching for a silver lining.  “The downside is there are no more in-person meetings, which are really important when you’re talking about data – or if you’re a visual person and like to draw to explain what you’re trying to say.”

Physical distancing is not a challenge when there are hardly any people around. Still, the reality of pursuing a PhD in a pandemic weighs on Williams. “If I hadn’t been graduating, I would shut my experiments down. Because even though there are only a few of us here, we all know it’s out there. The anxiety is real. It makes it stressful.”

For Williams, the loss of community cuts deep, too.  “In the old days, I’d pass one of my committee members or my P.I. in the hallway and just ask a question if something was on my mind. That doesn’t happen anymore.  My data has been changing in really interesting ways and I wish I could just bounce ideas off people who have expertise. Now we email, set up a Zoom, and do the best we can. It’s not bad. It’s just different.”

In the midst of all the uncertainty, there is at least one piece of the puzzle in place for Williams. After graduating, she will be joining Sana Biotechnology, where she will apply her tissue engineering expertise to a promising effort to develop a stem cell-based treatment for heart disease.

In the meantime, Williams remains grateful to be a part of a supportive research community. “It’s become very apparent to me through all this how much ISCRM takes care of its people. When I needed a workspace, they found one. When I need access to one of the cores, there is someone there to help. And the message from everyone is the same. ‘We’re still here. Even though we’re not physically here, you can still lean on us.’ I’m so thankful for that.”

UT Electronic Theses and Dissertations

Permanent URI for this collection https://hdl.handle.net/2152/11

This collection contains University of Texas at Austin electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs). The collection includes ETDs primarily from 2001 to the present. Some pre-2001 theses and dissertations have been digitized and added to this collection, but those are uncommon. The library catalog is the most comprehensive list of UT Austin theses and dissertations.

Since 2010, the Office of Graduate Studies at UT Austin has required all theses and dissertations to be made publicly available in Texas ScholarWorks; however, authors are able to request an embargo of up to seven years. Embargoed ETDs will not show up in this collection. Most of the ETDs in this collection are freely accessible to all users, but some pre-2010 works require a current UT EID at point of use. Please see the FAQs for more information. If you have a question about the availability of a specific ETD, please contact [email protected].

Some items in this collection may contain offensive images or text. The University of Texas Libraries is committed to maintaining an accurate and authentic scholarly and historic record. An authentic record is essential for understanding our past and informing the present. In order to preserve the authenticity of the historical record we will not honor requests to redact content, correct errors, or otherwise remove content, except in cases where there are legal concerns (e.g. potential copyright infringement, inclusion of HIPAA/FERPA protected information or Social Security Numbers) or evidence of a clear and imminent threat to personal safety or well-being.

This policy is in keeping with the  American Library Association code of ethics  to resist efforts to censor library resources, and the  Society of American Archivists code of ethics  that states "archivists may not willfully alter, manipulate, or destroy data or records to conceal facts or distort evidence."

Recent Submissions

• No Thumbnail Available Item Instant gratification: a decline in our attention and a rise in digital disinformation ( 2024-05 ) Mokry, Natalie ; Lankes, R. David, 1970- Show more With the advent of the Internet, social media, and other digital technologies, our attention spans have evolved. Many of us are no longer able to concentrate on a singular task, like reading a book, as we once were. We are constantly being bombarded with an influx of information daily, and must not only navigate this expansive information landscape, but learn to recognize disinformation within it. This report explores the connection between our attention spans, deep reading, and disinformation through examining the ways in which our shortened attention has hindered our deep reading abilities and made us more susceptible to disinformation tactics. The goal of this project is to explore the ways in which these factors are connected, and to suggest proposed solutions for information professionals in both the library and user experience design sectors specifically, to better address the issues around attention, reading, and disinformation. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Selectivity enhancement for toluene vapor by applying a cavitand layer in organic field-effect transistor sensors ( 2005-05-21 ) Jeong, Yeon Taek ; Dodabalapur, Ananth, 1963- Show more Organic semiconductor films are granular and contain a lot of grain boundaries. Due to these structural characteristics, organic field-effect transistors (OFET's) are sensitive to organic vapor analytes. Of commonly adopted organic semiconductors, CuPc (copper phthalocyanine) devices show suitable characteristics for organic sensing. A layer of solution-cast cavitand designated 4T5QX is thought to enhance the selectivity for aromatic vapors when it is applied to organic semiconductor surface as a receptor. Toluene vapor was used as the aromatic analyte to measure the sensitivity enhancement of cavitand-covered CuPc devices. A cavitand solution of concentration 4.5x10⁻³ mol/L was drop-cast over the CuPc devices. All devices exhibited higher response rate when they were covered with a layer of cavitand 4T5QX Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Evaluating the impact of streetscape investments in Round Rock, TX on public perceptions and experiences of downtown ( 2024-05 ) Shaffer, Laura ; Sletto, Bjørn ; Paterson, Robert Show more This professional report investigates the impact of streetscape investments on public perceptions and experiences of downtown Round Rock, TX, with a focus on enhancing walkability. Against the backdrop of shifting preferences towards mixed-use walkable neighborhoods, the study examines the motivations behind Round Rock's downtown revitalization efforts and evaluates their effectiveness amidst rapid population growth and extreme heat challenges. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach including pedestrian counts and observations, verbal surveys, and interviews with city officials, the research explores how pedestrians navigate, perceive, and experience downtown interventions. Findings aim to inform future streetscape investments and promote sustainable urban development in the context of Texas downtowns. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Understanding user experience for our future 35: a methodological framework ( 2024-05 ) Tahir, Kashmala ; Zhang, Ming, 1963- April 22- Show more The City of Austin (CoA) has received federal funding through the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program to construct caps and stitches along different parts of its main interstate highway, I-35. The project intends to reduce the negative impacts of the highway expansion project by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). Before beginning construction, the city should assess the travel user experience of its residents, especially of residents and businesses located near the proposed cap locations. This study lays out a methodological framework for a user experience assessment survey that can be used by CoA. The framework places the future users of the caps and stitches at the center of its research process through the application of a user experience (UX) framework for its methodology. The proposed framework is based on an analysis of existing studies that use the UX framework and case study evaluation of two major highway cap projects in Dallas and Boston. Both the case study evaluations, and the proposed framework first highlight the background, map the stakeholders, and discuss the UX tools that are compatible with the methodological framework. This proposed framework for CoA uses quantitative and qualitative surveys for data collection, followed by the construction of user personas in the analysis stage to understand the user experience of different user groups. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Big cities, affordable homes: starter home production in U.S. urban areas ( 2024-05 ) Pilger, Seth ; Wegmann, Jake ; Elizabeth Mueller Show more This Professional Report considers the current state of affordable starter home development in high-demand U.S. urban areas, seeking to better understand the current barriers in place, and questioning potential solutions to increase production. In this report, an assessment of previous existing literature identifies the barriers in not only affordable starter home development, but affordable single-family home development in an urban context. This report identifies the culprits in rising residential land prices, construction costs, delayed development approval, restrictive zoning policies, and protectionist homeowners. This report employs the use of two case study communities in the Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown MSA and San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA which offer affordable starter homes, in an attempt to discern potential lessons for local and state government. An additional analysis is conducted evaluating contributing factors to starter home affordability outside of home list price, including municipal service access, local amenities, transportation expense, and impact fee rates. This report finds that a reduced lot and home size, as well as cheap residential land, were the most significant contributing factors in producing affordable starter homes in both communities. Recommendations for local government to increase starter home production informed by both case studies and existing literature include reducing minimum lot size, reducing home square footage, promoting infill housing development, and implementing greater workforce training programs in the construction and skilled trade industries. This report also recommends increasing the role of state government in land-use planning and housing development. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Design and load testing of a full-scale Texas bridge deck utilizing embedded wire trusses for partial depth precast overhangs ( 2024-05 ) Galvin, Christian Bodie ; Oguzhan Bayrak ; ​Ferche, Anca-Cristina Show more The purpose of this research project was to investigate and evaluate the serviceability of partial depth precast overhangs for Texas bridge decks utilizing embedded wire lattice trusses. Current bridge deck overhangs constructed in Texas are formed cast in place through the use of overhang brackets and temporary formwork, this precast overhang solution aims to relieve the need for said brackets and temporary formwork. The first interior Precast Concrete Panel (PCP) is connected to the precast overhang through the use of partial-depth wire lattice trusses. The wire trusses continuously span over the facia girder while being embedded into the first interior PCP and precast overhang. The wire truss provides the required counter moment for screed and construction loading before the cast in place (CIP) layer of concrete is cast. This thesis outlines the full-scale deck designed, fabricated, and tested in the lab to evaluate the serviceability of partial depth precast overhangs utilizing embedded wire lattice trusses. The proposed precast overhang solution presented in this thesis is believed to reduce the cost of construction and expedite Texas bridge deck construction. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Exploring multiple perspectives to mitigate cognitive biases through an integrated interface to language models ( 2024-05 ) Wong, Yian ; Lease, Matthew A. ; Li, Junyi Jessy Show more In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable abilities in generating human-like text and supporting decision-making processes. However, their use is often limited by inherent biases and a lack of diversity in presented perspectives. This work introduces a novel system designed to mitigate these issues by leveraging the capabilities of LLMs to simulate a multi-perspective debate format, aimed at providing a balanced view on controversial topics. The proposed system employs a unique integrated interface that facilitates dynamic interactions between multiple AI-generated personas, each representing distinct viewpoints. These personas engage in structured debates, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of a topic that counteracts the cognitive biases typically associated with single-perspective information retrieval systems. The system incorporates advanced prompt engineering techniques and retrieval-augmented generation to ensure the accuracy and relevance of the information presented. Additionally, the interface is designed with user engagement in mind, featuring interactive elements that allow users to manipulate the debate dynamics and contribute to the discussion. This thesis evaluates the system’s effectiveness in enhancing users' understanding of complex issues and its potential in reducing bias in decision support systems. By simulating diverse viewpoints, the system potentially fosters more critical and informed engagement with topics, thus supporting better decision-making. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Multiple signet rings and seals in Bronze Age Aegean funerary contexts: objects as embodiment and ritual traces ( 2024-05 ) Sugioka, Hana ; Papalexandrou, Athanasios Christou, 1965- ; Gulizio, Joann Show more In the Bronze Age Aegean, glyptic objects like signet rings and seals amass the largest corpus of iconography with over 10,000 extant objects. Previous attempts to understand Aegean glyptic have either attempted to decipher the enigmatic iconography or emphasize their role in administrative systems as individual identifiers. This thesis complicates these previous treatments of the material by examining instances of multiple signet rings and seals in funerary contexts with case studies from Sellopoulo, Vapheio, and Pylos. The traditional interpretation of this phenomenon presents the deceased as a ‘collector’ of prestigious objects which is a vastly anachronistic notion for understanding this period. Instead, this thesis proposes that assemblages of multiple signet rings and sealstones in funerary contexts are the result of the ritualized bestowal of these objects by relatives, dependents, and close associates of the deceased as a form of ritual lament. Through the microanalysis of these miniature objects, I demonstrate that the signet rings and sealstones comprising these assemblages are likely the results of different commissions. Although some of these objects share iconographic themes, I argue that subtle differences in their material, stylistic, and technical aspects demonstrate their individuality above all else and likely reflects multiple owners rather than a singular ‘collector.’ This material approach to signet rings and sealstones is then supplemented by anthropological theories of embodiment and inalienability which explore how certain objects may possess a piece of one’s identity or serve as an extension of one’s body. I then reconstruct the emotional and sensorial impact that depositing these objects in the tomb with the deceased would have had on the mourners as a form of ritual lament and remembrance. With these complementary approaches, multiple signet rings and sealstones in the tomb become more than the vestiges of the deceased’s status, but the material traces of delicate power negotiations during the turbulent socio-political period of LH II–IIIA1. Show more
• No Thumbnail Available Item Bibliotherapy for bereaved youth: using literature to process grief and understand loss ( 2024-05 ) Cockett, Megan ; Lankes, R. David, 1970- ; Barbara Jansen Show more “The use of books created under the guidance of a subject expert to address a therapeutic need or boost wellness in any active or passive way,” also known as bibliotherapy, can be used in public libraries to encourage general wellbeing and health. One of the largest detriments to childhood health in the United States is childhood loss – 1 in 12 children will lose a parent or sibling by the age of eighteen. By applying developmental bibliotherapy practice to young people who have experienced loss, their loss can be better supported and processed by the young person. This paper will discuss potential ways to integrate bibliotherapy into youth programming at public libraries, and how to include both children and families in that process. This paper also includes a list of books, divided by age group and type, to help youth and families with bereavement and loss. Show more

• 1 (current)

Department of Communication

College of humanities, main navigation, graduate students.

Graduate Student Directory

Dallin Adams, PhD

Colleen Armstrong, PhD

Gia Almuaili, PhD

Daniel Chavez-Yenter, PhD

Sammy Fernandes, MS

Elizabeth Giorgi, PhD

Nico Hernandez, MA

Aly Hill, PhD

Elise Homan, PhD

Tanzia Khan, PhD

Yiqing Ran, PhD

Dallin Adams PhD

Profile | [email protected]

BA Mass Communications, Brigham Young University

MA Mass Communications, Brigham Young University

• Digital Media
• Advertising

Profile | [email protected]

BS, Strategic Communication, CU Boulder MA Strategic Communication Design, CU Boulder

Jessie Chaplain, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

MA Communication Studies, University of Georgia

BS Communication Studies, Appalachian State

Daniel Chavez-Yenter, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

BS History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science & Spanish, Michigan State University

MPH Health Behavior & Health Education, University of Michigan

• H ealth Communication and Public Health Integration
• Latinx, African-American, and Minority Populations
• Innovative Health Technologies
• Health Equity

BA, Broadcast Journalism, Cal State Northridge

Jeremy Freed, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

BA English, History, and Asian Studies, University of Utah

MA Asian Studies, University of Utah

• Gaming subcultural communicaiton
• UI communication affordances
• Culture and Power
• International TA Program

Elizabeth Giorgi, Ph.D.

[email protected]

BS Journalism, Boston University

MFA Creative Writing and Environment, Iowa State University

• Science Communication

Nico Hernandez, M.A.

Profile | [email protected]

BA Communication, University of Texas at El Paso

MA Communication, University of Texas at El Paso

• Critical Rhetoric
• Environmental Communication
• Critical Rhetorical Field Methods
• Science and Technology Studies

BS, Political Science and Communication, University of Utah

MA, Political Communication, The Johns Hopkins University

MA, Caleb Okereke

BS, Journalism and Mass Communication, Cavendish University Uganda  

Elise Homan, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

MS Communication Studies, University of Pittsburgh

BS English, Grove City College

Abby Jones, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

BA Theater, University of Georgia

BA Entertainment and Media Studies, University of Georgia

MA Media Studies, University of Texas at Austin

Euni Kim, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

MS Communication, University of Utah

BA California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

• Asian American Studies
• Critical/Cultural Studies
• Media and Film

Yi Liao, PhD

[email protected]

BA English, Qingdao University

M.S. Communication, University of Utah

Environmental, Science, and Health

Kourtney Maison, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

MA Communication, Ball State University

BFA Speech, Theatre and Comm, Kansas Wesleyan University

Caleb Okereke, MA

BS, Journalism and Mass Communication, Cavendish University Uganda

Lulu Olaniyan, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

BS Biology, Baylor University

MA, Communication and Rhetorical Studies, Syracuse University

• Critical Cultural Studies

Camille Owens, PhD

BA, Public Relations, Brigham Young University

MA, Mass Communication, Brigham Young University

Ellie Pelayo, PhD

BA, Human Communication Studies, Cal State Fullerton

MA, Human Communication Studies, Cal State Fullerton

Profile | [email protected]

BA, Speech Communication and Rhetoric, University of Colorado Denver

MA, Communication and Rhetorical studies, Syracuse University  

Grace Rogers, M.A.

Profile | [email protected]

BA Communication Studies, Temple University

• Asian American Media

Kinny Torre, PhD

BA, Legal Studies, Western Washington University

MS, Communication Studies, University of North Texas

Olivia Webster, MA

BA, Communication Studies, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities

Mariah Wellman, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

MS Jouranlism,  University of Iowa

BS, Journalism and Mass Communication, Iowa State University

• Cultural Studies

Seungwoo Yeom, Ph.D.

Profile | [email protected]

MA Journalism, PR, and New Media, Baylor University

BA Communication, Hankuk University

• Race and Gender Identity and Ethnicity

Colleen Armstrong, Ph.D.

[email protected]

B.A. General Humanities, Trent University

M.A. Communication Studies, University of North Carolina Charlotte

Indigenous environmental conflict

Gabby Garza, Ph.D.

[email protected]

B.A. Communication, Texas State University

M.A. Communication, Texas State University

Environmental and Health Communication

Tanzia Khan, Ph.D.

[email protected]

M.A. Communication, Washington State University

Environmental, Science, and Health, Digital Media

Marissa Medina , Ph.D.

[email protected]

B.A. Journalism, Advertising, and Media Studies, University of Wisconsin  

M.A. Communication, University of Wisconsin

Critical Cultural Studies, Rhetoric

Damon Lawson , Ph.D.

[email protected]

B.A. Communication Studies, Concordia University

M.A. Communication, San Diego State University  

• See us on facebook
• See us on twitter
• See us on youtube
• See us on linkedin
• See us on instagram

Azalia Martínez Jaimes and Kristy Red-Horse, PhD

Developmental biology student Azalia Martínez Jaimes and her adviser, professor of biology and Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator Kristy Red-Horse, have been named fellows of the 2024 cohort of HHMI’s Gilliam Fellows Program. The program recognizes student-adviser pairs for their outstanding research and their commitments to advancing equity and inclusion in science. The pair will receive $53,000 of annual funding for up to three years to support Martínez Jaimes’s dissertation research, focused on illuminating key mechanisms of artery maturation in coronary artery development during adolescence, and using those insights to enhance new vessels built in response to heart attacks occurring in adulthood for the purpose of improving heart function and ultimately, survival outcomes.

About Stanford Medicine

Stanford Medicine is an integrated academic health system comprising the Stanford School of Medicine and adult and pediatric health care delivery systems. Together, they harness the full potential of biomedicine through collaborative research, education and clinical care for patients. For more information, please visit http://mednews.stanford.edu .

Thomas Maani successfully defended his PhD Dissertation

Thomas Maani successfully defended his PhD Dissertation on July 17, 2024, and officially deposited his dissertation on July 24, 2024. 

Thomas is advised by Dr. John W. Sutherland, Head of the Environmental and Ecological Engineering Department. Originally from Kampala, Uganda, Thomas earned his bachelor's degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Dar es Salaam in Tanzania and a master’s degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University of Toledo in Ohio. Following his master’s, he joined the Laboratory for Sustainable Manufacturing (LSM) to pursue his PhD.

His PhD research investigated the material flows, environmental impacts, and economics associated with critical materials used in electric vehicles (EVs) with a special emphasis on circular economy principles. When Thomas joined LSM, he worked on a 3-year project funded by the Ford Motor Company whose goal was to develop decision support tools and identify technologies that will help evaluate and pursue EoL value recovery and closed loop recycling/reuse strategies for rare earth permanent magnets (REPM) in electric vehicles (EVs). Circularizing these REPMs through reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling will help mitigate the supply risks for these magnets while simultaneously lessening the solid waste burden associated with end-of-life (EoL) EVs. Upon the successful completion of the 3-year Ford project in the summer of 2022, Thomas embarked on an internship at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). While there, he contributed to a project aimed at enhancing their Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy in Technologies (GREET) model. Recognizing his exceptional contributions, Thomas was granted $93,000 to further his research endeavors in critical materials analysis for electric vehicles in partnership with ANL, a collaboration that extended throughout the duration of his PhD studies.

During his Ph.D. program, Dr. Maani has authored or co-authored 9 papers published in prestigious journals and conference proceedings. He was awarded the 2024 Outstanding Research Award by the College of Engineering at Purdue. Additionally, he is a recipient of the Environmental Research and Education Foundation (EREF) scholarship, which recognizes excellence in doctoral research and education in waste management.

Dr. Maani’s dissertation titled “Sustainability Analysis of Critical Materials in Electric Vehicles with Emphasis on Circular Economy Principles” evaluated the demand for critical materials in the U.S. transportation sector under various scenarios, focusing on both light-duty vehicles (LDVs) and medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (MHDVs). Additionally, the potential for value recovery of critical materials from electric vehicles was assessed, followed by an analysis to determine the most effective methods for achieving this recovery.

• Stanford University
• Thursday, August 15

PhD Dissertation Defense: Pranav Vyas

• Bioengineering

Thursday, August 15, 2024 2pm PT

In person and online

AllenX 101X 330 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA 94305 View map

This event is open to: Everyone

Request disability accommodations and access info

• Share PhD Dissertation Defense: Pranav Vyas on Facebook
• Share PhD Dissertation Defense: Pranav Vyas on Twitter
• Share PhD Dissertation Defense: Pranav Vyas on LinkedIn

Event Details:

Title : Lattices across scales: Algorithmic construction of topologically complex Holothurian biomineral lattices via cellular syncytia and Hyperuniform networks in Ophiuroid communities in Arctic benthic environments

Abstract : Living systems exhibit remarkable ability to construct complex structures through interactions between agents across scales. Through my work, I have explored this idea in two distinct contexts – one at the cell-tissue scale and the other at the ecological scale.

In the first part of the talk, I will delve into the beautiful world of miniature (~100 µm length scale) skeletal structures in sea cucumbers (Holothuroidea) called ossicles that exhibit intricate and diverse morphologies both across species and even within individuals. Through our work, we establish juvenile stage  Apostichopus parvimensis  as a new model system to study biomineralization and morphogenesis of lattice like ossicles and simultaneously explore the cellular physiological context. We demonstrate, how cytoskeleton enabled intra-cellular transport within a syncytium of cells, enables growth of ossicles from small (1-2 µm) seeds into complex topologies within tightly wrapped membrane bound spaces. Constructing a topological description of ossicle geometries from 3D micro-CT (computational tomography) data reveals the hidden growth history and conserved patterns across ossicle types. Using coupled reaction-advection-diffusion equations we model the tip growth process as a coordination between passive diffusion and active transport within the syncytium. Finally, using reduced order models of conserved transport on self-closing branching networks, we highlight the hidden universality in the growth process of distinct ossicles. The system presented serves as a unique example of "cellular masonry" merging top-down cellular physiology and classical branching morphogenesis with bottom-up non-equilibrium mineralization processes at the interface of living and non-living matter.

In the second part, I will take you on a journey to the Arctic where we discovered extensive coverage of brittle stars (Ophiuroidea) on the sea floor using a remotely operated vehicle during our expedition in the Chukchi sea. The contiguous distribution of  Ophiura sarsii  populations, connected through arm-to-arm contacts, leads to the formation of extensive disordered lattices spanning tens to hundreds of kilometers. By analyzing benthic imaging data of a subset of these networks, and utilizing statistical approaches, we discovered suppression of density fluctuations at large length scales, indicating hyperuniformity. Through comparisons with fossil data of ophiuroid communities and laboratory experiments with miniature brittle stars  Amphipolis squamata , we propose evolutionary and ecological explanations for the same. Our work highlights the role of optimal community assemblies in brittle stars and the fragile nature of benthic ecosystems.

Location : AllenX 101X, 330 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA 94305

https://maps.app.goo.gl/cP8c6QfgRt6KPiMR8

Location tip: The Paul G. Allen Center for Integrated Systems Annex is located at 330 Jane Stanford way. It is located at the corner of Jane Stanford way and Via Ortega, and is an extension of the Paul G. Allen Center.

Please contact  Madelyn Bernstein  for the Zoom link

Your browser does not support iframes.