phd defence uk

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

• Log in/Register Register

https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/doing-a-doctorate/completing-your-doctorate/your-viva/your-phd-viva

This page has been reproduced from the Vitae website (www.vitae.ac.uk). Vitae is dedicated to realising the potential of researchers through transforming their professional and career development.

• Vitae members' area

Defending your doctoral thesis: the PhD viva

Format for defending a doctoral thesis.

Every institution will have specific regulations for the thesis defence. In some countries or institutions, the convention is for thesis defences to be public events where you will give a lecture explaining your research, followed by a discussion with a panel of examiners (opponents). Both your examiners and the audience are able to ask questions.

In other countries, including the UK, the oral examination is usually conducted behind closed doors by at least two examiners, usually with at least one being from another institution (external examiner) and an expert in your topic of research. In the UK the supervisor does not participate in the viva, but may be allowed to observe. Sometimes someone from your own institution is appointed as an independent chair. Although it is now becoming more common for the candidate to have an opportunity to give a public lecture in UK institutions, this does not form part of the examination and may or may not be attended by the examiners.

Viva preparation

Take the preparation for your viva seriously and devote a substantial amount of time to it. The viva preparation checklist may be useful to help you prepare.

Your institution may offer courses on viva preparation and there may be opportunities to organise a practice viva. Take advantage of these opportunities: they can be extremely valuable experiences.

Things you may wish to take with you

• your thesis – mildly annotated if you wish
• a list of questions that you might be asked and your planned responses
• any questions that you want to ask your examiners
• additional notes which you have made during your revision
• list of minor corrections that you have come across during your revision.

During the viva

Your study will have strengths and weaknesses: it is essential that you are prepared to discuss both. You could think of any weaknesses as an opportunity to demonstrate your skill at critical appraisal. Examiners will seek to find and discuss weaknesses in all theses. Do not interpret criticism as indication of a possible negative outcome.

Examiners have different personalities, styles and levels of experience. Sometimes a candidate may feel that a challenge is made in a confrontational way. Experienced, effective examiners will not be inappropriately confrontational, but some will. Do not take offence. A relaxed, thoughtful, and non-confrontational response from you will help re-balance the discussion. Having an independent chair can help maintain a constructive environment.

Useful tips for during your viva:

• Ask for clarification of ambiguous questions or ask for the question to be repeated if necessary
• Take time to think before answering
• Be prepared to ask questions and enter into a dialogue with your examiners
• Be prepared to discuss your research in context of other work done in your field
• Be ready to admit if you don't know the answer to a question
• Be prepared to express opinions of your own

You are not expected to have perfect recall of your thesis and everything that you have read and done. If you get flustered, or need to refer to notes your examiners will understand. They have been in your situation themselves!

After your viva

There are several possible outcomes   of a thesis defence. Most commonly, your examiners will recommend to your institution that you are awarded your degree subject to minor corrections, although in some instances they might ask for more substantial work.

Bookmark & Share

• Cranfield University

Taught degrees

• Why study for an MSc at Cranfield?
• Application guide
• Find a course
• Search bursaries
• Fees and funding
• Make a payment

Research degrees

• Why study for a research degree at Cranfield?
• Research opportunities

Apprenticeships

• Apprenticeship programmes
• Apprentices
• MKU Apprenticeships

Professional development

• Professional and technical development
• Level 7 Apprenticeships
• Open Executive Programmes
• Find a programme

Studying at Cranfield

International students.

• Life at Cranfield
• Life at Shrivenham
• Careers and Employability Service
• IT services
• View our prospectus

Choose Cranfield

• Who we work with
• Entrepreneurship
• Networking opportunities
• Access our facilities
• Business facilities and support services

Develop your people

• Short courses and executive development
• Customised programmes
• Recruit our students

Develop your technology and products

• Access funding
• Knowledge Transfer Partnerships
• Work with our students
• License our technology
• Business incubation
• Cranfield spin-out and start-up companies

Our research publications and data

• Case studies
• Research projects
• Research and Innovation
• Sustainability at Cranfield
• Hydrogen Gateway
• Research Excellence Framework
• Access our world class facilities
• Current research projects
• Cranfield Doctoral Network
• Applying for a research degree
• Entry requirements

Engage with us

• Industry collaboration
• Find an expert

Research and Innovation Office

• Open research
• Fellowships
• Energy and Sustainability
• Manufacturing and Materials
• Transport Systems

Defence and Security

• Environment and Agrifood
• Cranfield School of Management
• Centres and institutes
• Academic disciplines
• Virtual Experience

International activity and reach

• Partnerships
• European Partnership Programme
• Global impact
• Information for your region
• Visas and immigration
• Life on campus
• Pre-sessional English for Academic Purposes
• Rankings and awards
• Community and public engagement
• History and heritage

Governance and policies

• University management
• Council and Senate
• Corporate responsibility
• Environmental credentials
• Staff and students
• Work at Cranfield
• School of Management

PhDs in Defence and Security: Leadership, Management and Governance

The Centre for Defence Management and Leadership  (CDML) is a specialised research and teaching unit, comprising experienced and dedicated researchers. It has developed a world class reputation in defence and security studies, and is lauded for the rigour, originality, international perspective and policy relevance of its doctoral programme.

The Centre has delivered short training and long degree-bearing courses in over 100 countries. Students are typically employed in central government, defence industry and the Armed Forces, and their doctoral studies resonate with their professional activities, including, for example, defence engagement, conflict resolution, gender studies, humanitarian and relief operations, international conflict and security law, defence budgeting and public finance. PhD candidates are required to attend an initial one-week induction programme. Thereafter, regular progress reviews are undertaken to ensure students receive continuous advice and guidance. Cranfield is well-known for providing close and supportive supervision, and students will be allocated primary and associate supervisors to offer mentorship across the entire period of doctoral registration.

Research thematics

Doctoral research programmes are offered in a broad array of defence and security leadership, law and management fields. Candidates are invited to submit research proposals that fit into any of the following broad subject areas:

Potential supervisors

Interested applicants are encouraged to consult with Centre academics regarding interest in supervising particular research projects. It is advisable that contact is made prior to formal submission of an application. Please see below for academic names, respective e-mail addresses, broad disciplinary fields and also URL links for access to their teaching, research and publication details.

Leadership and Management

• Bryan Watters      [email protected]
• Iftikhar Zaidi      [email protected]
• Robby Allen      [email protected]
• Dennis Vincent     [email protected]

International Law

• David Turns  (Visiting Fellow)    [email protected]

Policy, Strategy and Governance

• Ron Matthews  (Visiting Professor)    [email protected]
• Dr Lloyd Parsons       [email protected]
• Dr Caroline Micklewright      [email protected]

Economic and Financial Management

• Irfan Ansari      [email protected]

Research Students

Find out more about our current research students and their areas of research .

Mode of study

Students can register for a three-year full-time PhD programme, and may be based at either Cranfield Defence and Security, Shrivenham or in their home country

Part-time registration is also available. The study period extends to six years, though it is possible for students to submit their doctoral thesis for examination from the three-year point. Candidates will not be based at Shrivenham and may undertake their doctoral studies while in full-time employment at any location in the United Kingdom or overseas.

Annual fees

How to apply.

CDML is one of seven focused Centres that form part of the Cranfield Defence and Security (CDS) Faculty. It is located on the edge of England’s beautiful Cotswold region, just an hour West of London. The application process is uncomplicated, having the following requirements:

• Completion of an online application form
• A clear and concise research aim/problem/question
• Reference to the original contribution to knowledge
• Brief identification of the seminal literature in the chosen field
• Explanation of the research methodology for data collection
• Emphasis on the research programme’s policy relevance
• Compliance with the minimum entry requirements: a 2.1 first degree and/or master’s qualification, along with at least five years relevant professional experience

For further application information, please access more details about applying for a research degree.

Centre for Defence Management and Leadership

Download Research Yearbook

Researching Security Network

A network of young researchers working on issues of security, violence, and organised crime.

Defending your PhD thesis in… the United Kingdom

Verena Brähler , one of our Researching Security Fellows, is sharing with us her experience of defending her PhD thesis in the United Kingdom.

September 2014

Thesis defence procedure in the United Kingdom

Contrary to most other countries in Europe, the PhD thesis defence in the United Kingdom is not a formality. The thesis defence in the UK is called viva voce (“with the living voice”). It is an oral examination with two examiners and may require a substantial amount of preparation. Usually you will have one internal examiner from your university and one external examiner. Unless you request otherwise, your supervisor(s) will not be present during the examination and neither will be any members of the public. That is quite nice actually because the examiners will focus on discussing the most important aspects of your thesis, rather than asking tough questions “to entertain the audience”. The examination can take between two and four hours and these are the most common outcomes:

• Pass: I personally do not know anyone who has passed the viva straight away but, theoretically speaking, it is possible.
• Pass with minor corrections: This is the most common outcome. You get 3 months to make minor amendments to your thesis, based on what was discussed during the viva.
• Major corrections: This seems to happen to very few people. It means that you get another 18 months to make substantial changes to your thesis.
• Fail: Theoretically speaking, there is a possibility that you can fail but I have never heard of anyone who did.

Preparation

Given these different outcomes, it is smart to prepare for the viva. In my case, I submitted my thesis in March 2014 and had six weeks to prepare for the viva in the beginning of May. At the time, I was already working in Vienna and doing an internship with UNODC. I used the two weekends prior to my viva to read the whole thesis again (you wouldn’t believe how many typos I still found) and think about how I would answer the following questions:

• What is original about your thesis? What sets your work apart from others?
• What are the strongest/weakest parts of your work?
• What were the crucial research decisions that you made? How did you resolve any issues which arose in the course of your research?
• How did you tackle the ethical implications of your work?
• Who is your audience?
• What is the agreed methodology in your discipline?
• Do you anticipate publishing the material? And, if so, what aspects?
• What researchers would be interested in your work?
• What are the theoretical underpinnings to your work?
• Who would be most likely to agree/disagree with your findings?
• How long do you expect your work to remain innovative? Do your contributions have a limited timescale?
• Do you think that your recommendations are feasible?

One the day

My examination was in London. On the day, I felt pretty calm and well prepared. I always thought that I am a bit better in speaking than in writing, so I felt confident but not exactly über-enthusiastic. When I walked into the room, my two examiners welcomed me and started the viva by asking two ice-breaker questions:

• How did you come to research this topic?
• Do you have any plans to publish some of the materials?

Then in the following 40 minutes, the examiners went straight into criticising my main argument (“oligopoly of security providers in Rio de Janeiro”) and it was quite challenging to defend my research choices. The rest of the viva continued in a similar format. One of the professors would give a “mini-lecture” on a certain aspect of my thesis and I then had the opportunity to defend myself and explain my arguments. The whole process was quite exhausting but I also enjoyed it because it showed that these two very distinguished and well-known professors had read and analysed my whole thesis (a good 290 pages) in a lot of depth.

After the examination, I had to leave the room quickly so that the professors could decide on the outcome of the viva. When I was asked back into the room, they told me that I had passed with minor corrections and explained the changes I needed to make over the next three months. I was very happy with this result and felt relieved. We called my supervisor and together we had a glass of champagne and then went for dinner.

After defending the thesis

On the next morning, I had to go immediately back to Vienna to continue with my work at UNODC. The next day at work I felt that I must be one of the smartest and dumbest interns my department ever had. Smart because I had just passed my PhD viva and dumb because here I was, 28 years old and doing an unpaid internship. Two weeks later, I received the official report by the examiners. It was quite a lot of pages so I panicked a bit and then not looked at it again for the next two months while finishing the internship.

Upon my return to London, I immediately started working on the corrections and it took me a good three weeks. I must say it was quite difficult because after a few months of working outside academia, it felt like a huge step backwards to work on the thesis again. I also felt under a lot of pressure to find a job and sometimes I felt that the thesis corrections were getting in the way of my job applications (or the other way around?). All in all, I must admit though that the thesis has been hugely improved by doing the minor corrections and I am grateful that I was forced to go through this rite of passage.

Useful information

For those preparing for the viva, I would recommend to watch these videos by Imperial College London which explain the examination process quite nicely. And if I can just give you one piece of advice: write your thesis as best as possible before you submit it! Little inconsistencies in your arguments, a weak theoretical framework or unfeasible policy recommendations may backfire at you during the viva. From my own experience, I can say that making changes to the thesis after the examination is a lot harder than before, simply because your mind will already be in another world.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• PhD Viva Voces – A Complete Guide
• Doing a PhD
• A PhD viva involves defending your thesis in an oral examination with at least two examiners.
• The aim of a PhD viva is to confirm that the work is your own , that you have a deep understanding of your project and, overall, that you are a competent researcher .
• There are no standard durations, but they usually range from one to three hours, with most lasting approximately two hours .
• There are six outcomes of a PhD viva: (1) pass without corrections (2) pass subject to minor corrections, (3) pass subject to major corrections, (4) downgrade to MPhil with no amendments, (5) downgrade to MPhil subject to amendments, (6) immediate fail.
• Almost all students who sit their viva pass it, with the most common outcome being ‘(2) – pass subject to minor corrections’.

What Is a PhD Viva?

A viva voce , more commonly referred to as ‘viva’, is an oral examination conducted at the end of your PhD and is essentially the final hurdle on the path to a doctorate. It is the period in which a student’s knowledge and work are evaluated by independent examiners.

In order to assess the student and their work around their research question, a viva sets out to determine:

• you understand the ideas and theories that you have put forward,
• you can answer questions about elements of your work that the examiners have questions about,
• you understand the broader research in your field and how your work contributes to this,
• you are aware of the limitations of your work and understand how it can be developed further,
• your work makes an original contribution, is your own and has not been plagiarised.

Note: A viva is a compulsory procedure for all PhD students, with the only exception being when a PhD is obtained through publication as opposed to the conventional route of study.

Who Will Attend a Viva?

In the UK, at least two examiners must take part in all vivas. Although you could have more than two examiners, most will not in an attempt to facilitate a smoother questioning process.

One of the two examiners will be internal, i.e. from your university, and the other will be external, i.e. from another university. Regardless, both will be knowledgeable in your research field and have read your thesis beforehand.

In addition to your two examiners, two other people may be present. The first is a chairperson. This is an individual who will be responsible for monitoring the interview and for ensuring proper conduct is followed at all times. The need for an external chairperson will vary between universities, as one of the examiners can also take on this role. The second is your supervisor, whose attendance is decided upon by you in agreement with your examiners. If your supervisor attends, they are prohibited from asking questions or from influencing the outcome of the viva.

To avoid any misunderstandings, we have summarised the above in a table:

Note: In some countries, such as in the United States, a viva is known as a ‘PhD defense’ and is performed publicly in front of a panel or board of examiners and an open audience. In these situations, the student presents their work in the form of a lecture and then faces questions from the examiners and audience which almost acts as a critical appraisal.

How Long Does a Viva Last?

Since all universities have different guidelines , and since all PhDs are unique, there are no standard durations. Typically, however, the duration ranges from one to three hours, with most lasting approximately two hours.

Your examiners will also influence the duration of your viva as some will favour a lengthy discussion, while others may not. Usually, your university will consult your examiners in advance and notify you of the likely duration closer to the day of your viva.

What Happens During a Viva?

Regardless of the subject area, all PhD vivas follow the same examination process format as below.

Introductions

You will introduce yourselves to each other, with the internal examiner normally introducing the external examiner. If an external chairperson is present, they too are introduced; otherwise, this role will be assumed by one of the examiners.

Procedure Explained

After the introductions, the appointed chair will explain the viva process. Although it should already be known to everyone, it will be repeated to ensure the viva remains on track during the forthcoming discussion.

Warm-Up Questions

The examiners will then begin the questioning process. This usually starts with a few simple opening questions, such as asking you to summarise your PhD thesis and what motivated you to carry out the research project.

In-Depth Questions

The viva questions will then naturally increase in difficulty as the examiners go further into the details of your thesis. These may include questions such as “What was the most critical decision you made when determining your research methodology ?”, “Do your findings agree with the current published work?” and “How do your findings impact existing theories or literature? ”. In addition to asking open-ended questions, they will also ask specific questions about the methodology, results and analysis on which your thesis is based.

Closing the Viva

Once the examiners are satisfied that they have thoroughly evaluated your knowledge and thesis, they will invite you to ask any questions you may have, and then bring the oral examination to a close.

What Happens After the Viva?

Once your viva has officially ended, your examiners will ask you to leave the room so that they can discuss your performance. Once a mutual agreement has been reached, which can take anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour, you will be invited back inside and informed of your outcome.

PhD Viva Outcomes

There are six possible outcomes to a viva:

• Immediate award of degree: A rare recommendation – congratulations, you are one of the few people who completely satisfied your examiners the first time around. You do not have to do anything further at this point.
• Minor amendments required: The most common recommendation – you obtain a pass on the condition that you make a number of minor amendments to your thesis, such as clarifying certain points and correcting grammatical errors. The time you have to make these changes depends on the number of them, but is usually one to six months.
• Major amendments required: A somewhat uncommon recommendation – you are requested to make major amendments to your thesis, ranging from further research to collecting more data or rewriting entire sections. Again, the time you have to complete this will depend on the number of changes required, but will usually be six months to one year. You will be awarded your degree once your amended thesis has been reviewed and accepted.
• Immediate award of MPhil: An uncommon recommendation – your examiners believe your thesis does not meet the standard for a doctoral degree but meets the standard for an MPhil (Master of Philosophy), a lower Master’s degree.
• Amendments required for MPhil: A rare recommendation – your examiners believe your thesis does not meet the standard for a doctoral degree, but with several amendments will meet the standard for an MPhil.
• Immediate fail: A very rare recommendation – you are given an immediate fail without the ability to resubmit and without entitlement to an MPhil.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

What Is the Pass Rate for Vivas?

Based on an  analysis of 26,076 PhD students  who took their viva exam between 2006 and 2017, the PhD viva pass rate in the UK is 96%; of those who passed, about 80% were required to make minor amendments to their thesis. The reason for this high pass rate is that supervisors will only put their students forward for a viva once they confidently believe they are ready for it. As a result, most candidates who sit a viva are already well-versed in their PhD topic before they even start preparing for the exam.

How Do I Arrange a Viva?

Your viva will be arranged either by the examiners or by the chairperson. The viva will be arranged at least one to two months after you have submitted your thesis and will arrange a viva date and venue that is suitable for all participants.

Can I Choose My Examiners?

At most universities, you and your supervisor will choose the internal and external examiners yourselves. This is because the examiners must have extensive knowledge of the thesis topic in order to be able to examine you and, as the author of the thesis in question, who else could better determine who they might be than you and your supervisor. The internal examiner is usually quite easy to find given they will be from your institution, but the external examiner may end up being your second or third preference depending on availability.

Can I Take Notes Into a Viva?

A viva is about testing your competence, not your memory. As such, you are allowed to take notes and other supporting material in with you. However, keep in mind that your examiners will not be overly impressed if you constantly have to refer to your notes to answer each question. Because of this, many students prefer to take an annotated copy of their thesis, with important points already highlighted and key chapters marked with post-it notes.

In addition to an annotated copy of a thesis, some students also take:

• a list of questions they would like to ask the examiners,
• notes that were created during their preparation,
• a list of minor corrections they have already identified from their viva prep work.

How Do I Prepare for a PhD Viva?

There are several ways to prepare for a PhD viva, one of the most effective being a mock viva voce examination . This allows you to familiarise yourself with the type of viva questions you will be asked and identify any weak areas you need to improve. They also give you the opportunity to practise without the pressure, giving you more time to think about your answers which will help to make sure that you know your thesis inside out. However, a mock viva exam is just one of many methods available to you – some of the other viva preparation methods can be found on our “ How to Prepare for a PhD Viva ” page.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

• About the LSE Impact Blog
• Comments Policy
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts
• Subscribe to the Impact Blog
• Write for us
• LSE comment

Eva Lantsoght

November 30th, 2021, defending a phd thesis is an emotional moment candidates and supervisors should be prepared for.

4 comments | 55 shares

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

The PhD defence, or viva, is significant academic rite of passage, which as well as marking the culmination of years of study, can also be a highly charged emotional moment.   Drawing on years of collecting accounts of PhD defences on her blog and her recent book (Planning and Passing Your PhD Defence, co-authored with Olga Degtyareva),  Eva Lantsoght , discusses how both PhD students and supervisors can benefit from a more engaged understanding of the emotions underlying the PhD defence. 

In the days leading up to my doctoral defence, I had a recurring nightmare about my supervisor forgetting to show up for my defence. I was well-prepared, and since I was defending in the Netherlands, my thesis was already printed and approved. Failing was virtually impossible. Why then, was I nervous about my doctoral defence to the point of having recurring nightmares?

After eventually passing my doctoral defence, I decided to collect stories about the doctoral defence (or viva, depending on the country) around the world for my blog. I was originally fascinated by the differences between defence formats (such as the sword newly minted doctors receive in Finland and the medal in Chile ). Over time, however, I started to see that below the superficial differences, all types of defence show similarities. One is that there is always an emotional dimension to the defence. My worries before my defence were hardly an isolated case. Many doctoral candidates report strong emotions around thesis submission, in the weeks leading up to the defence, during the event, and even afterwards, when the post-defence blues may kick in.

Typically, discussions on the doctoral defence centre around the scholarly dimension. A defence is often viewed solely as an academic event marking and evaluating the end of a research project

Typically, discussions on the doctoral defence centre around the scholarly dimension. A defence is often viewed solely as an academic event marking and evaluating the end of a research project. However, in our recent book Planning and Passing Your PhD Defence , which I co-wrote with Olga Degtyareva, we have paid special attention to the emotional dimension of the defence (of course, in addition to the scholarly dimension preparing for answering questions, and other traditional aspects related to the doctoral defence). This was in part because, we strongly felt that we shouldn’t consider the defence as a regular examination, where a standard set of criteria are used to assess a student. Besides its function as an examination, the defence is also a rite of passage, a confirmation, a celebration, and the culmination of years of independent research work. Emotions are murky and difficult to factor in for assessment. The emotions involved in the doctoral defence make it a unique event: for the candidate, the examiners (or committee members), and for the supervisor. Being aware of these emotions, and bringing them to light, is important to understanding the defence better and the role it plays in a research career.

In my work on the doctoral defence, I found (to my surprise) that the major differences between defence formats did not influence the candidates’ perception much . On the other hand, I did find important differences in the emotions felt by candidates related to the defence, as a function of socio-demographic aspects, notably gender. Women doctoral candidates experience more negative feelings before the defence, and if they had a negative experience during the defence, the negative impact on their perception as a researcher could often be long-lasting. Being aware of how different groups experience the emotions related to the defence differently is important, especially for supervisors and examiners, and can be empowering for candidates. Besides simply being aware of the emotional dimension, it can also enable the small changes that can help settle things when emotions run high: taking a short break, offering water, getting up to open a window, or moving to another topic of the thesis.

While each PhD candidate, each research study, and each PhD trajectory are unique, there are some common emotions that deserve to be mentioned. First of all, in the weeks or days leading up to thesis submission, candidates often feel that the work is not enough, worthless, or otherwise insufficient, and these feelings can contribute to perfectionism. Other candidates may be so tired of the thesis that every small action may feel like a terrible chore. Some feel relieved upon submission, and others worry about how it will be received.

Many candidates also worry about how they will perform. For candidates in the United Kingdom, where the viva takes place before final submission of the thesis and may determine the level of corrections required for the thesis, candidates worry about what the outcome of the thesis and viva will be. Major revisions could potentially add months to the doctoral journey. Because the viva is behind closed doors, candidates also may not know very well what to expect. In the Netherlands, where candidates are sure they will pass, other causes lead to worry and anxiety. As the defence is public, candidates feel the pressure to perform well in front of the committee, friends, colleagues, and family.

it is also important for supervisors and examiners to be aware of this emotional dimension, and to know how different groups of candidates experience these emotions

The first step in dealing with this anxiety, is to name and acknowledge it, and to know that these feelings are normal. Candidates who passed without corrections worry about passing their defence as much as those who had more work on their thesis after the defence. Breathing techniques, meditation, and relaxation exercises can help. University counselling services should be there to support as well. Being well-prepared for the day of the defence itself may also help candidates to feel more in control over the day and their feelings. A positive action, such as stopping by colleagues and expressing gratitude to them before the defence, can improve defence-day-anxiety. Many candidates feel more nervous right before and at the beginning of their defence. Taking notes, repeating the question, or asking for clarification of the question, are all valid options to start answering in a calm and controlled manner. At the end of the defence, candidates can be nervous to hear the outcome, and the minutes while the committee is in deliberation may feel like hours. Then, after hearing the verdict, often the final flood of emotions (relief, happiness, pride, or perhaps disappointment, anger, or worry about the thesis revision) comes.

Emotions play an important role leading up to and during the doctoral defence. Understanding the role of these emotions is important for candidates, so that they know that what they are feeling is normal, and does not mean that they are not worthy of a doctorate. At the same time, it is also important for supervisors and examiners to be aware of this emotional dimension, and to know how different groups of candidates experience these emotions. Being aware of and holding space for these emotions allows all those who are involved in the defence to experience the defence, not simply as a test of knowledge, but as the important moment it is, in the formation and affirmation of a new scholar.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Impact Blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  comments policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image Credit: Ralph Leue via Unsplash. 

About the author

Dr. Eva Lantsoght is a Full Professor in Civil Engineering at Universidad San Francisco de Quito in Ecuador and tenured assistant professor at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. Her blog and co-hosted podcast PhD Talk addresses the mechanics of doing research, PhD life, and general academic matters. Find her @evalantsoght or at evalantsoght.com.

• Pingback: Defending a PhD thesis is an emotional moment candidates and supervisors should be prepared for - Multidimensional News for Educators

In Australia there is no defence process and typically no discussion between the examiners…lots of secrecy and anonymity for some reason.

• Pingback: 2021 In Review: Living and Working in Academia | Impact of Social Sciences
• Pingback: Defending a PhD thesis is an emotional moment candidates and supervisors should be prepared for | Impact of Social Sciences – Cem S. Sütcü

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Related Posts

Peer review for academic jobs and grants continues to be shaped by metrics, especially if your reviewer is highly ranked

November 26th, 2021.

Keeping a research journal that works for you

November 4th, 2021.

F**k Ups in Social Research: Learning from what goes ‘wrong’

August 2nd, 2021.

Reflecting on discomfort in research

February 24th, 2021.

Visit our sister blog LSE Review of Books

• My Account |
• StudentHome |
• TutorHome |
• IntranetHome |
• Contact the OU Contact the OU Contact the OU |
• Accessibility hub Accessibility hub

Postgraduate

• International
• News & media
• Business & apprenticeships
• Contact Contact Contact
• A to Z of courses
• A to Z of subjects
• Course types
• Masters degrees
• Postgraduate diplomas
• Postgraduate certificates
• Microcredentials
• Postgraduate modules
• Postgraduate distance learning
• Postgraduate qualifications
• Postgraduate entry requirements
• How will I study?
• Tutors and assessment
• Support, networking and community
• Disability support

Fees and funding

• Postgraduate loan
• Credit or debit card
• Employer sponsorship
• Mixed payments
• Credit transfer
• OU bursaries
• Grant funding
• Study costs funding
• Carers' Bursary
• Care Experienced Bursary
• Disability financial assistance
• STEMM bursary
• Over 60s bursary
• Creative Writing Scholarship
• Hayes Postgraduate Scholarship
• Disabled Veterans' Scholarships

How to apply

• Research degrees
• Research areas
• Degrees we offer
• Fees and studentships
• Application process
• Being an OU research student
• Student views

Foreign policy, defence and security studies

POLIS staff have an international reputation for producing world-leading research on key contemporary challenges in foreign policy, defence and security. Research outputs include work on leadership, decision-making, defence capabilities, security governance, threat perception, counter-terrorism, conflict resolution, disinformation and security competition. Notably, they have expertise in a range of national, regional and international contexts, including, the UK, EU, Russia, Iran, China, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

POLIS staff are keen to undertake supervision that has theoretical and practical importance. They have received funding for practical research on intelligence accountability and the PREVENT programme and adopt a range of approaches to the subject, from conventional historical analysis to critical and gendered perspectives.

Entry requirements

Minimum 2:1 undergraduate degree (or equivalent). If you are not a UK citizen, you may need to prove your knowledge of English . 

Potential research projects

We welcome enquiries about PhD study in the broad field of democratic politics, including:

• British and EU foreign, defence and security policy
• Rising powers, Chinese foreign policy, Indian foreign policy, the Belt and Road Initiative
• Counter-terrorism and counter-radicalisation, national security politics, foreign policy, terrorism studies and critical security studies
• Russian foreign and security policy, (Russian) national identity and nation building, memory politics/history politics/ historical narratives including commemoration
• Populism and (social) media disinformation/propaganda/fake news/influence ops, public diplomacy/international broadcasting
• (Critical) discourse analysis and narrative analysis, Iran’s domestic politics and foreign policy, Middle East politics
• Gender, conflict resolution and peacekeeping
• African international relations

Potential supervisors

• Dr Filippo Boni
• Prof William Brown
• Dr Precious Chatterje-Doody
• Prof Jamie Gaskarth
• Dr Georgina Holmes
• Dr Tom Martin 
• Dr Edward Wastnidge

Research students can apply for funding via the Grand Union Doctoral Training Partnership with Oxford and Brunel, or the Open-Oxford-Cambridge DTP in collaboration with Oxford and Cambridge universities. The Citizenship Studies pathway of the Grand Union DTP is hosted within the Department. Alternatively, many of our students are self-funded.

For detailed information about fees and funding, visit  Fees and studentships .

To see current funded studentship vacancies across all research areas, see  Current studentships .

• Politics and International Studies at The Open University
• Postgraduate Research in Politics & International Studies (POLIS) | Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (open.ac.uk)  

Get in touch

If you have an enquiry specific to this research topic, please contact:

Dan Taylor – Postgraduate Coordinator Email: FASS-Polis-PG-Admissions Phone: +44 (0)1908 654534/654435

If you’re interested in applying for this research topic, please take a look at the application process .

The Open University

• Study with us
• Work with us
• Supported distance learning
• Funding your studies
• International students
• Global reputation
• Sustainability
• Apprenticeships
• Develop your workforce
• Contact the OU

Undergraduate

• Arts and Humanities
• Art History
• Business and Management
• Combined Studies
• Computing and IT
• Counselling
• Creative Arts
• Creative Writing
• Criminology
• Early Years
• Electronic Engineering
• Engineering
• Environment
• Film and Media
• Health and Social Care
• Health and Wellbeing
• Health Sciences
• International Studies
• Mathematics
• Mental Health
• Nursing and Healthcare
• Religious Studies
• Social Sciences
• Social Work
• Software Engineering
• Sport and Fitness
• Postgraduate study
• Masters in Social Work (MA)
• Masters in Economics (MSc)
• Masters in Creative Writing (MA)
• Masters in Education (MA/MEd)
• Masters in Engineering (MSc)
• Masters in English Literature (MA)
• Masters in History (MA)
• Masters in International Relations (MA)
• Masters in Finance (MSc)
• Masters in Cyber Security (MSc)
• Masters in Psychology (MSc)
• A to Z of Masters degrees
• OU Accessibility statement
• Conditions of use
• Privacy policy
• Cookie policy
• Manage cookie preferences
• Modern slavery act (pdf 149kb)

Follow us on Social media

• Student Policies and Regulations
• Student Charter
• System Status
• Contact the OU Contact the OU
• Modern Slavery Act (pdf 149kb)

© . . .

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

PhD Defence Process: A Comprehensive Guide

Embarking on the journey toward a PhD is an intellectual odyssey marked by tireless research, countless hours of contemplation, and a fervent commitment to contributing to the body of knowledge in one’s field. As the culmination of this formidable journey, the PhD defence stands as the final frontier, the proverbial bridge between student and scholar.

In this comprehensive guide, we unravel the intricacies of the PhD defence—a momentous occasion that is both a celebration of scholarly achievement and a rigorous evaluation of academic prowess. Join us as we explore the nuances of the defence process, addressing questions about its duration, contemplating the possibility of failure, and delving into the subtle distinctions of language that surround it.

Beyond the formalities, we aim to shed light on the significance of this rite of passage, dispelling misconceptions about its nature. Moreover, we’ll consider the impact of one’s attire on this critical day and share personal experiences and practical tips from those who have successfully navigated the defence journey.

Whether you are on the precipice of your own defence or are simply curious about the process, this guide seeks to demystify the PhD defence, providing a roadmap for success and a nuanced understanding of the pivotal event that marks the transition from student to scholar.

Introduction

A. definition and purpose:, b. overview of the oral examination:, a. general duration of a typical defense, b. factors influencing the duration:, c. preparation and flexibility:, a. preparation and thorough understanding of the research:, b. handling questions effectively:, c. confidence and composure during the presentation:, d. posture of continuous improvement:, a. exploring the possibility of failure:, b. common reasons for failure:, c. steps to mitigate the risk of failure:, d. post-failure resilience:, a. addressing the language variation:, b. conforming to regional preferences:, c. consistency in usage:, d. flexibility and adaptability:, e. navigating language in a globalized academic landscape:, a. debunking myths around the formality of the defense:, b. significance in validating research contributions:, c. post-defense impact:, a. appropriate attire for different settings:, b. professionalism and the impact of appearance:, c. practical tips for dressing success:, b. practical tips for a successful defense:, c. post-defense reflections:, career options after phd.

Embarking on the doctoral journey is a formidable undertaking, where aspiring scholars immerse themselves in the pursuit of knowledge, contributing new insights to their respective fields. At the pinnacle of this academic odyssey lies the PhD defence—a culmination that transcends the boundaries of a mere formality, symbolizing the transformation from a student of a discipline to a recognized contributor to the academic tapestry.

The PhD defence, also known as the viva voce or oral examination, is a pivotal moment in the life of a doctoral candidate.

PhD defence is not merely a ritualistic ceremony; rather, it serves as a platform for scholars to present, defend, and elucidate the findings and implications of their research. The defence is the crucible where ideas are tested, hypotheses scrutinized, and the depth of scholarly understanding is laid bare.

The importance of the PhD defence reverberates throughout the academic landscape. It is not just a capstone event; it is the juncture where academic rigour meets real-world application. The defence is the litmus test of a researcher’s ability to articulate, defend, and contextualize their work—an evaluation that extends beyond the pages of a dissertation.

Beyond its evaluative nature, the defence serves as a rite of passage, validating the years of dedication, perseverance, and intellectual rigour invested in the research endeavour. Success in the defence is a testament to the candidate’s mastery of their subject matter and the originality and impact of their contributions to the academic community.

Furthermore, a successful defence paves the way for future contributions, positioning the scholar as a recognized authority in their field. The defence is not just an endpoint; it is a launchpad, propelling researchers into the next phase of their academic journey as they continue to shape and redefine the boundaries of knowledge.

In essence, the PhD defence is more than a ceremonial checkpoint—it is a transformative experience that validates the intellectual journey, underscores the significance of scholarly contributions, and sets the stage for a continued legacy of academic excellence. As we navigate the intricacies of this process, we invite you to explore the multifaceted dimensions that make the PhD defence an indispensable chapter in the narrative of academic achievement.

What is a PhD Defence?

At its core, a PhD defence is a rigorous and comprehensive examination that marks the culmination of a doctoral candidate’s research journey. It is an essential component of the doctoral process in which the candidate is required to defend their dissertation before a committee of experts in the field. The defence serves multiple purposes, acting as both a showcase of the candidate’s work and an evaluative measure of their understanding, critical thinking, and contributions to the academic domain.

The primary goals of a PhD defence include:

• Presentation of Research: The candidate presents the key findings, methodology, and significance of their research.
• Demonstration of Mastery: The defence assesses the candidate’s depth of understanding, mastery of the subject matter, and ability to engage in scholarly discourse.
• Critical Examination: Committee members rigorously question the candidate, challenging assumptions, testing methodologies, and probing the boundaries of the research.
• Validation of Originality: The defence validates the originality and contribution of the candidate’s work to the existing body of knowledge.

The PhD defence often takes the form of an oral examination, commonly referred to as the viva voce. This oral component adds a dynamic and interactive dimension to the evaluation process. Key elements of the oral examination include:

• Presentation: The candidate typically begins with a formal presentation, summarizing the dissertation’s main components, methodology, and findings. This presentation is an opportunity to showcase the significance and novelty of the research.
• Questioning and Discussion: Following the presentation, the candidate engages in a thorough questioning session with the examination committee. Committee members explore various aspects of the research, challenging the candidates to articulate their rationale, defend their conclusions, and respond to critiques.
• Defence of Methodology: The candidate is often required to defend the chosen research methodology, demonstrating its appropriateness, rigour, and contribution to the field.
• Evaluation of Contributions: Committee members assess the originality and impact of the candidate’s contributions to the academic discipline, seeking to understand how the research advances existing knowledge.

The oral examination is not a mere formality; it is a dynamic exchange that tests the candidate’s intellectual acumen, research skills, and capacity to contribute meaningfully to the scholarly community.

In essence, the PhD defence is a comprehensive and interactive evaluation that encapsulates the essence of a candidate’s research journey, demanding a synthesis of knowledge, clarity of expression, and the ability to navigate the complexities of academic inquiry. As we delve into the specifics of the defence process, we will unravel the layers of preparation and skill required to navigate this transformative academic milestone.

How Long is a PhD Defence?

The duration of a PhD defence can vary widely, but it typically ranges from two to three hours. This time frame encompasses the candidate’s presentation of their research, questioning and discussions with the examination committee, and any additional deliberations or decisions by the committee. However, it’s essential to note that this is a general guideline, and actual defence durations may vary based on numerous factors.

• Sciences and Engineering: Defenses in these fields might lean towards the shorter end of the spectrum, often around two hours. The focus is often on the methodology, results, and technical aspects.
• Humanities and Social Sciences: Given the theoretical and interpretive nature of research in these fields, defences might extend closer to three hours or more. Discussions may delve into philosophical underpinnings and nuanced interpretations.
• Simple vs. Complex Studies: The complexity of the research itself plays a role. Elaborate experiments, extensive datasets, or intricate theoretical frameworks may necessitate a more extended defence.
• Number of Committee Members: A larger committee or one with diverse expertise may lead to more extensive discussions and varied perspectives, potentially elongating the defence.
• Committee Engagement: The level of engagement and probing by committee members can influence the overall duration. In-depth discussions or debates may extend the defence time.
• Cultural Norms: In some countries, the oral defence might be more ceremonial, with less emphasis on intense questioning. In others, a rigorous and extended defence might be the norm.
• Evaluation Practices: Different academic systems have varying evaluation criteria, which can impact the duration of the defence.
• Institutional Guidelines: Some institutions may have specific guidelines on defence durations, influencing the overall time allotted for the process.

Candidates should be well-prepared for a defence of any duration. Adequate preparation not only involves a concise presentation of the research but also anticipates potential questions and engages in thoughtful discussions. Additionally, candidates should be flexible and responsive to the dynamics of the defense, adapting to the pace set by the committee.

Success Factors in a PhD Defence

• Successful defence begins with a deep and comprehensive understanding of the research. Candidates should be well-versed in every aspect of their study, from the theoretical framework to the methodology and findings.
• Thorough preparation involves anticipating potential questions from the examination committee. Candidates should consider the strengths and limitations of their research and be ready to address queries related to methodology, data analysis, and theoretical underpinnings.
• Conducting mock defences with peers or mentors can be invaluable. It helps refine the presentation, exposes potential areas of weakness, and provides an opportunity to practice responding to challenging questions.
• Actively listen to questions without interruption. Understanding the nuances of each question is crucial for providing precise and relevant responses.
• Responses should be clear, concise, and directly address the question. Avoid unnecessary jargon, and strive to convey complex concepts in a manner that is accessible to the entire committee.
• It’s acceptable not to have all the answers. If faced with a question that stumps you, acknowledge it honestly. Expressing a willingness to explore the topic further demonstrates intellectual humility.
• Use questions as opportunities to reinforce key messages from the research. Skillfully link responses back to the core contributions of the study, emphasizing its significance.
• Rehearse the presentation multiple times to build familiarity with the material. This enhances confidence, reduces nervousness, and ensures a smooth and engaging delivery.
• Maintain confident and open body language. Stand tall, make eye contact, and use gestures judiciously. A composed demeanour contributes to a positive impression.
• Acknowledge and manage nervousness. It’s natural to feel some anxiety, but channelling that energy into enthusiasm for presenting your research can turn nervousness into a positive force.
• Engage with the committee through a dynamic and interactive presentation. Invite questions during the presentation to create a more conversational atmosphere.
• Utilize visual aids effectively. Slides or other visual elements should complement the spoken presentation, reinforcing key points without overwhelming the audience.
• View the defence not only as an evaluation but also as an opportunity for continuous improvement. Feedback received during the defence can inform future research endeavours and scholarly pursuits.

In essence, success in a PhD defence hinges on meticulous preparation, adept handling of questions, and projecting confidence and composure during the presentation. A well-prepared and resilient candidate is better positioned to navigate the challenges of the defence, transforming it from a moment of evaluation into an affirmation of scholarly achievement.

Failure in PhD Defence

• While the prospect of failing a PhD defence is relatively rare, it’s essential for candidates to acknowledge that the possibility exists. Understanding this reality can motivate diligent preparation and a proactive approach to mitigate potential risks.
• Failure, if it occurs, should be seen as a learning opportunity rather than a definitive endpoint. It may highlight areas for improvement and offer insights into refining the research and presentation.
• Lack of thorough preparation, including a weak grasp of the research content, inadequate rehearsal, and failure to anticipate potential questions, can contribute to failure.
• Inability to effectively defend the chosen research methodology, including justifying its appropriateness and demonstrating its rigour, can be a critical factor.
• Failing to clearly articulate the original contributions of the research and its significance to the field may lead to a negative assessment.
• Responding defensively to questions, exhibiting a lack of openness to critique, or being unwilling to acknowledge limitations can impact the overall impression.
• Inability to address committee concerns or incorporate constructive feedback received during the defense may contribute to a negative outcome.
• Comprehensive preparation is the cornerstone of success. Candidates should dedicate ample time to understanding every facet of their research, conducting mock defences, and seeking feedback.
• Identify potential weaknesses in the research and address them proactively. Being aware of limitations and articulating plans for addressing them in future work demonstrates foresight.
• Engage with mentors, peers, or advisors before the defence. Solicit constructive feedback on both the content and delivery of the presentation to refine and strengthen the defence.
• Develop strategies to manage stress and nervousness. Techniques such as mindfulness, deep breathing, or visualization can be effective in maintaining composure during the defence.
• Conduct a pre-defense review of all materials, ensuring that the presentation aligns with the dissertation and that visual aids are clear and supportive.
• Approach the defence with an open and reflective attitude. Embrace critique as an opportunity for improvement rather than as a personal affront.
• Clarify expectations with the examination committee beforehand. Understanding the committee’s focus areas and preferences can guide preparation efforts.
• In the event of failure, candidates should approach the situation with resilience. Seek feedback from the committee, understand the reasons for the outcome, and use the experience as a springboard for improvement.

In summary, while the prospect of failing a PhD defence is uncommon, acknowledging its possibility and taking proactive steps to mitigate risks are crucial elements of a well-rounded defence strategy. By addressing common failure factors through thorough preparation, openness to critique, and a resilient attitude, candidates can increase their chances of a successful defence outcome.

PhD Defense or Defence?

• The choice between “defense” and “defence” is primarily a matter of British English versus American English spelling conventions. “Defense” is the preferred spelling in American English, while “defence” is the British English spelling.
• In the global academic community, both spellings are generally understood and accepted. However, the choice of spelling may be influenced by the academic institution’s language conventions or the preferences of individual scholars.
• Academic institutions may have specific guidelines regarding language conventions, and candidates are often expected to adhere to the institution’s preferred spelling.
• Candidates may also consider the preferences of their advisors or committee members. If there is a consistent spelling convention used within the academic department, it is advisable to align with those preferences.
• Consideration should be given to the spelling conventions of scholarly journals in the candidate’s field. If intending to publish research stemming from the dissertation, aligning with the conventions of target journals is prudent.
• If the defense presentation or dissertation will be shared with an international audience, using a more universally recognized spelling (such as “defense”) may be preferred to ensure clarity and accessibility.
• Regardless of the chosen spelling, it’s crucial to maintain consistency throughout the document. Mixing spellings can distract from the content and may be perceived as an oversight.
• In oral presentations and written correspondence related to the defence, including emails, it’s advisable to maintain consistency with the chosen spelling to present a professional and polished image.
• Recognizing that language conventions can vary, candidates should approach the choice of spelling with flexibility. Being adaptable to the preferences of the academic context and demonstrating an awareness of regional variations reflects a nuanced understanding of language usage.
• With the increasing globalization of academia, an awareness of language variations becomes essential. Scholars often collaborate across borders, and an inclusive approach to language conventions contributes to effective communication and collaboration.

In summary, the choice between “PhD defense” and “PhD defence” boils down to regional language conventions and institutional preferences. Maintaining consistency, being mindful of the target audience, and adapting to the expectations of the academic community contribute to a polished and professional presentation, whether in written documents or oral defences.

Is PhD Defense a Formality?

• While the PhD defence is a structured and ritualistic event, it is far from being a mere formality. It is a critical and substantive part of the doctoral journey, designed to rigorously evaluate the candidate’s research contributions, understanding of the field, and ability to engage in scholarly discourse.
• The defence is not a checkbox to be marked but rather a dynamic process where the candidate’s research is evaluated for its scholarly merit. The committee scrutinizes the originality, significance, and methodology of the research, aiming to ensure it meets the standards of advanced academic work.
• Far from a passive or purely ceremonial event, the defence involves active engagement between the candidate and the examination committee. Questions, discussions, and debates are integral components that enrich the scholarly exchange during the defence.
• The defence serves as a platform for the candidate to demonstrate the originality of their research. Committee members assess the novelty of the contributions, ensuring that the work adds value to the existing body of knowledge.
• Beyond the content, the defence evaluates the methodological rigour of the research. Committee members assess whether the chosen methodology is appropriate, well-executed, and contributes to the validity of the findings.
• Successful completion of the defence affirms the candidate’s ability to contribute meaningfully to the academic discourse in their field. It is an endorsement of the candidate’s position as a knowledgeable and respected scholar.
• The defence process acts as a quality assurance mechanism in academia. It ensures that individuals awarded a doctoral degree have undergone a thorough and rigorous evaluation, upholding the standards of excellence in research and scholarly inquiry.
• Institutions have specific criteria and standards for awarding a PhD. The defence process aligns with these institutional and academic standards, providing a consistent and transparent mechanism for evaluating candidates.
• Successful completion of the defence is a pivotal moment that marks the transition from a doctoral candidate to a recognized scholar. It opens doors to further contributions, collaborations, and opportunities within the academic community.
• Research presented during the defence often forms the basis for future publications. The validation received in the defence enhances the credibility of the research, facilitating its dissemination and impact within the academic community.
• Beyond the academic realm, a successfully defended PhD is a key credential for professional advancement. It enhances one’s standing in the broader professional landscape, opening doors to research positions, teaching opportunities, and leadership roles.

In essence, the PhD defence is a rigorous and meaningful process that goes beyond formalities, playing a crucial role in affirming the academic merit of a candidate’s research and marking the culmination of their journey toward scholarly recognition.

Dressing for Success: PhD Defense Outfit

• For Men: A well-fitted suit in neutral colours (black, navy, grey), a collared dress shirt, a tie, and formal dress shoes.
• For Women: A tailored suit, a blouse or button-down shirt, and closed-toe dress shoes.
• Dress codes can vary based on cultural expectations. It’s advisable to be aware of any cultural nuances within the academic institution and to adapt attire accordingly.
• With the rise of virtual defenses, considerations for attire remain relevant. Even in online settings, dressing professionally contributes to a polished and serious demeanor. Virtual attire can mirror what one would wear in-person, focusing on the upper body visible on camera.
• The attire chosen for a PhD defense contributes to the first impression that a candidate makes on the examination committee. A professional and polished appearance sets a positive tone for the defense.
• Dressing appropriately reflects respect for the gravity of the occasion. It acknowledges the significance of the defense as a formal evaluation of one’s scholarly contributions.
• Wearing professional attire can contribute to a boost in confidence. When individuals feel well-dressed and put-together, it can positively impact their mindset and overall presentation.
• The PhD defense is a serious academic event, and dressing professionally fosters an atmosphere of seriousness and commitment to the scholarly process. It aligns with the respect one accords to academic traditions.
• Institutional norms may influence dress expectations. Some academic institutions may have specific guidelines regarding attire for formal events, and candidates should be aware of and adhere to these norms.
• While adhering to the formality expected in academic settings, individuals can also express their personal style within the bounds of professionalism. It’s about finding a balance between institutional expectations and personal comfort.
• Select and prepare the outfit well in advance to avoid last-minute stress. Ensure that the attire is clean, well-ironed, and in good condition.
• Accessories such as ties, scarves, or jewelry should complement the outfit. However, it’s advisable to keep accessories subtle to maintain a professional appearance.
• While dressing professionally, prioritize comfort. PhD defenses can be mentally demanding, and comfortable attire can contribute to a more confident and composed demeanor.
• Pay attention to grooming, including personal hygiene and haircare. A well-groomed appearance contributes to an overall polished look.
• Start preparation well in advance of the defense date. Know your research inside out, anticipate potential questions, and be ready to discuss the nuances of your methodology, findings, and contributions.
• Conduct mock defenses with peers, mentors, or colleagues. Mock defenses provide an opportunity to receive constructive feedback, practice responses to potential questions, and refine your presentation.
• Strike a balance between confidence and humility. Confidence in presenting your research is essential, but being open to acknowledging limitations and areas for improvement demonstrates intellectual honesty.
• Actively engage with the examination committee during the defense. Listen carefully to questions, respond thoughtfully, and view the defense as a scholarly exchange rather than a mere formality.
• Understand the expertise and backgrounds of the committee members. Tailor your presentation and responses to align with the interests and expectations of your specific audience.
• Practice time management during your presentation. Ensure that you allocate sufficient time to cover key aspects of your research, leaving ample time for questions and discussions.
• It’s normal to feel nervous, but practicing mindfulness and staying calm under pressure is crucial. Take deep breaths, maintain eye contact, and focus on delivering a clear and composed presentation.
• Have a plan for post-defense activities. Whether it’s revisions to the dissertation, publications, or future research endeavors, having a roadmap for what comes next demonstrates foresight and commitment to ongoing scholarly contributions.
• After successfully defending, individuals often emphasize the importance of taking time to reflect on the entire doctoral journey. Acknowledge personal and academic growth, celebrate achievements, and use the experience to inform future scholarly pursuits.

In summary, learning from the experiences of others who have successfully defended offers a wealth of practical wisdom. These insights, combined with thoughtful preparation and a proactive approach, contribute to a successful and fulfilling defense experience.

You have plenty of career options after completing a PhD. For more details, visit my blog posts:

7 Essential Steps for Building a Robust Research Portfolio

Exciting Career Opportunities for PhD Researchers and Research Scholars

Freelance Writing or Editing Opportunities for Researchers A Comprehensive Guide

Research Consultancy: An Alternate Career for Researchers

The Insider’s Guide to Becoming a Patent Agent: Opportunities, Requirements, and Challenges

The journey from a curious researcher to a recognized scholar culminates in the PhD defence—an intellectual odyssey marked by dedication, resilience, and a relentless pursuit of knowledge. As we navigate the intricacies of this pivotal event, it becomes evident that the PhD defence is far more than a ceremonial rite; it is a substantive evaluation that validates the contributions of a researcher to the academic landscape.

Upcoming Events

• Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
• Visit for  Research Internships Worldwide

Recent Posts

Copyright © 2024 Research Voyage

Design by ThemesDNA.com

Free Course – Viva Success: Mastering Your PhD Defence

We are excited to announce the launch of a new, simple, and free course designed specifically for dementia researchers preparing for their PhD Viva Defence! Whether you’re nearing your viva or just starting to think ahead, this course will provide you with the practical tools and strategies you need to feel confident and well-prepared.

What’s covered?

• Understanding the viva process
• Tips for presenting your research clearly
• How to anticipate and handle challenging questions
• Strategies for effective communication
• Handling questions, stress and what comes next

This course is completely free for members of our community and can be accessed anytime, anywhere. Don’t miss this opportunity to build your confidence and sharpen your skills ahead of your viva. It draws on content from our website, is self-paced, and structured to give you knowledge you will need to help you prepare.

Get started today – your next step towards viva success!

Download the Dementia Researcher App

• x (twitter)

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Dementia Researcher

Blog – Reflections on My PhD Viva & Next Steps

Virtual Journal Club Platform for Dementia Researchers

Presenters Needed for the Dementia Researcher Salon

Blog – Cracking the Viva: Preparing for PhD Success

Blog – Surviving a bad viva

Defending a PhD thesis – are you ready for the emotions?

Browser does not support script.

Go to…

• Diversity & inclusion
• Our connections
• Postgraduate study

Professional military education

• MA International Security & Strategy
• MA Defence Studies
• MRes Defence Studies
• MSc Defence Innovation
• MA Military & Security Studies
• Research centres & groups

Postgraduate Study

The defence academy of the uk fosters an intellectually stimulating academic environment within a dynamic, international student body, supportive of professional development.

In addition to providing Professional Military Education we offer postgraduate education available to the public ,  including a fully online, innovative and highly successful Masters in International Affairs ,  and a prestigious Doctorate as part of our MPhil/PhD Programme. We aim to empower students with the intellectual tools through critical engagement, personal responsibility, imagination and creativity.

Our distinctive teaching and research programmes draw upon the expertise of a large and multidisciplinary department. Our acknowledged strength in the field of diplomatic and military history is complemented by world-class research into numerous aspects of contemporary and future warfare, such as security and defence policy, strategy, land, air and maritime doctrine and operations, proxy warfare, conflict termination, space power, and the use of artificial intelligence.

In addition , we offer tremendous expertise across a range of non-military subject areas such as regional and area studies, international security organisations, gender, war and violence, domestic and international terrorism, peacebuilding, political economy, and military ethics. Such breadth of research offers our students the intellectual tools to expand and enhance their knowledge and understanding of all aspects of conflict, defence, security and strategy.

Professional Military Education

Military Education at the Defence Studies Department

International Affairs MA

Find out more and apply to the International Affairs MA.

PhD programmes

The Department welcomes applications and research proposals covering all areas of defence, and is…

World-leading interdisciplinary research from the Defence Studies Department.

H4MoD is an innovative program allowing students to work on real-world government defence problems.

• View the H4MoD programme page

Student testimonials

Hear from some of our students and PhD candidates from across the Defence Studies Department.

• Hear from our students

News & Events from the Department of Defence Studies

18 September 2024

King's and partners host critical discussions on global security in Washington D.C.

Security & Defence PLuS, a trilateral university partnership between King’s College London, Arizona…

14 June 2024

King's students return to the Defence Academy of the United Kingdom for graduation

Students from the Defence Studies Department at King’s College London crossed the stage at the Joint…

DSD Research Seminar Series: The military dimension of outer space

31 October 2024

Gain insight into the ethics of using force in space and how technology drives strategic competition…

KCSI Sem­i­nar: Nav­i­gat­ing Lead­er­ship in Nation­al Secu­ri­ty and Intelligence

04 November 2024

Gain insight into the challenges of leadership in national security and intelligence as panelists…

• Select country:
• Select campus:
• View all courses
• Taught postgraduate study
• Postgraduate taught degree courses
• Postgraduate taught tuition fees
• Pre-masters for international students
• Funding your postgraduate taught studies
• How to apply for a postgraduate taught degree
• Postgraduate offer holders - prepare for your studies
• Pre-sessional English courses
• PhDs and research degrees
• Create your own research project
• Find a PhD project
• Funding your research degree
• How to apply for a PhD or research degree
• How to make a PhD enquiry
• Support while studying your PhD or research degree
• Exchanges and studying abroad
• Undergraduate study
• Undergraduate degree courses
• Foundation year programmes
• Undergraduate tuition fees
• Customise your degree
• Funding undergraduate studies
• How to apply
• Tuition fees and funding
• Short courses
• Lunchtime evening and weekend courses
• Summer schools
• Get a prospectus
• Student life
• Accommodation
• Choose your halls of residence
• Apply for accommodation
• Guaranteed accommodation
• Your accommodation options
• Accommodation for those with additional requirements
• International and pre-sessional students
• Postgraduate accommodation
• Couples and students with children
• Renting privately
• Our accommodation areas
• Privacy notice
• Terms and conditions
• Fees and contracts
• Southampton
• Sports and gyms
• Sports facilities
• Sports clubs
• Watersports centres
• Our campuses
• Avenue Campus
• Boldrewood Innovation Campus
• City Centre Campus
• Highfield Campus
• University Hospital Southampton
• Waterfront Campus
• Winchester Campus
• Join our student community
• What's on
• Clubs and societies
• Sports teams
• SUSU places
• Representing you
• SUSU support and advice
• Support and money
• Living costs
• Academic and mental health support
• Support for disabled students
• Part-time work
• Health services
• Research projects
• Research areas
• Research facilities
• Collaborate with us
• Institutes, centres and groups
• Support for researchers
• Faculties, schools and departments
• Research jobs
• Find people and expertise
• Why work with us?
• Collaboration
• Consultancy
• Commercialisation
• Use our facilities
• Connect with our students
• How we operate
• Make a business enquiry
• International students
• International Office
• Partnerships and initiatives
• Visiting delegations
• Visiting fellowships
• University of Southampton Delhi
• Centre for Defence and Security Research

Our multi-disciplinary research responds to the breadth of defence and security requirements, delivering leading edge capability to both government and to our industrial partners.

The Centre for Defence and Security Research gathers together a wide range of expertise from across Southampton’s world-class research community.

We work across disciplines to meet complex national defence and security challenges through direct engagement with government and in collaboration with industrial partners. Our research spans digital, physical and biological systems.

Southampton is a leading academic supplier into UK defence through various research frameworks, as well as addressing security and policing requirements. Through our PhD programmes we support the training and development of future leaders in defence and security. 

Our academic staff from across the University’s faculties, schools and departments bring experience in diverse fields to bear on challenges in defence and national security. 

Particular areas of expertise include: 

• autonomous systems, artificial intelligence and machine learning 
• maritime, aerospace and space systems engineering 
• sensing and communications 
• cyber security 
• human factors 
• psychology 
• defence medicine and life sciences 
• acoustics, noise and vibration 
• advanced materials 
• optoelectronics 
• mathematics and statistics 
• operational research 

We have industry partnerships with a number of UK defence companies, including:  

• BAE Systems 
• Thales 
• Airbus 
• Rolls Royce 
• Boeing 
• Northrop Grumman 
• QinetiQ 
• Leonardo 

The University of Southampton is registered into many of the defence and Security supplier frameworks, including:

• RCloud (Dstl research cloud) 
• DASA (defence and security accelerator) 
• Progeny (maritime research framework) 
• ASTRID (operational research and technology futures) 
• WSRF (weapons sector framework) 
• CW-ITP (UK/FR complex weapons innovation and technology partnership) 
• Serapis Lot 1 (ISTAR) 
• DE&S Ships NDP (naval design partnering) 
• Home Office ACE (accelerated capability environment) 

Research highlights

Revolutionising ways to find essential materials

Expanding the use of satellite data to provide real-world benefits

People, projects and publications, publications, professor adam sobey.

Accepting applications from PhD students

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 3769

Dr Claire Clarkin

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 4273

Dr Erisa Karafili

Research interests.

• Formal methods techniques applied to security problems
• Attributing and investigating Cyber Attacks
• Threat Models for IoT devices and Hybrid systems

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 7695

Professor James Scanlan

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 2369

Professor Joerg Fliege

• Nonlinear Optimization
• Discrete Optimization
• Operational Research

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 8453

Professor Jordan Cheer BMus (Tonmeister), MSc, PhD, CEng, MIMechE, FHEA

• Active Noise Control
• Active Vibration Control
• Smart Structures for Noise and Vibration Control

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 3082

Dr Katie Plant

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 3705

Professor Philippa Reed

• Fatigue processes in additively manufactured high performance alloys
• High temperature oxidation and creep fatigue processes in nickel based turbine disc and blade alloys
• Fatigue mitigation and prediction approaches in turbine blades

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 3763

Professor Robert Wood

• the application of lubrication, wear and friction science
• current and next generation critical machine components (bearings, transmissions, turbines, pumps)
• renewable energy systems

Email: [email protected]

Tel: +44 23 8059 4881

Related research institutes, centres and groups

Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics Group

Astronautics Group

Centre for Operational Research, Management Science and Information Systems (CORMSIS)

Computational Engineering and Design Group

Engineering Materials and Surface Engineering Group

Institute for Life Sciences

• Course modules
• Acoustical engineering
• Biomedical and medical engineering
• Civil engineering
• Every day I’m completely immersed in an environment that’s creative in all aspects
• Everything I learn feels so relevant, even If it’s a subject rooted in the past
• Maritime engineering
• Photonics and optoelectronics
• Social statistics and demography
• A missing link between continental shelves and the deep sea: Have we underestimated the importance of land-detached canyons?
• A seismic study of the continent-ocean transition southwest of the UK
• A study of rolling contact fatigue in electric vehicles (EVs)
• Acoustic monitoring of forest exploitation to establish community perspectives of sustainable hunting
• Acoustic sensing and characterisation of soil organic matter
• Advancing intersectional geographies of diaspora-led development in times of multiple crises
• Aero engine fan wake turbulence – Simulation and wind tunnel experiments
• Against Climate Change (DACC): improving the estimates of forest fire smoke emissions
• All-in-one Mars in-situ resource utilisation (ISRU) system and life-supporting using non-thermal plasma
• An electromagnetic study of the continent-ocean transition southwest of the UK
• An investigation of the relationship between health, home and law in the context of poor and precarious housing, and complex and advanced illness
• Antibiotic resistance genes in chalk streams
• Being autistic in care: Understanding differences in care experiences including breakdowns in placements for autistic and non-autistic children
• Biogeochemical cycling in the critical coastal zone: Developing novel methods to make reliable measurements of geochemical fluxes in permeable sediments
• Bloom and bust: seasonal cycles of phytoplankton and carbon flux
• British Black Lives Matter: The emergence of a modern civil rights movement
• Building physics for low carbon comfort using artificial intelligence
• Building-resolved large-eddy simulations of wind and dispersion over a city scale urban area
• Business studies and management: accounting
• Business studies and management: banking and finance
• Business studies and management: decision analytics and risk
• Business studies and management: digital and data driven marketing
• Business studies and management: human resources (HR) management and organisational behaviour
• Business studies and management: strategy, innovation and entrepreneurship
• Carbon storage in reactive rock systems: determining the coupling of geo-chemo-mechanical processes in reactive transport
• Cascading hazards from the largest volcanic eruption in over a century: What happened when Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai erupted in January 2022?
• Characterisation of cast austenitic stainless steels using ultrasonic backscatter and artificial intelligence
• Climate Change effects on the developmental physiology of the small-spotted catshark
• Climate at the time of the Human settlement of the Eastern Pacific
• Collaborative privacy in data marketplaces
• Compatibility of climate and biodiversity targets under future land use change
• Cost of living in modern and fossil animals
• Creative clusters in rural, coastal and post-industrial towns
• Deep oceanic convection: the outsized role of small-scale processes
• Defect categories and their realisation in supersymmetric gauge theory
• Defining the Marine Fisheries-Energy-Environment Nexus: Learning from shocks to enhance natural resource resilience
• Design and fabrication of next generation optical fibres
• Developing a practical application of unmanned aerial vehicle technologies for conservation research and monitoring of endangered wildlife
• Development and evolution of animal biomineral skeletons
• Development of all-in-one in-situ resource utilisation system for crewed Mars exploration missions
• Ecological role of offshore artificial structures
• Effect of embankment and subgrade weathering on railway track performance
• Efficient ‘whole-life’ anchoring systems for offshore floating renewables
• Electrochemical sensing of the sea surface microlayer
• Engagement with nature among children from minority ethnic backgrounds
• Enhancing UAV manoeuvres and control using distributed sensor arrays
• Ensuring the Safety and Security of Autonomous Cyber-Physical Systems
• Environmental and genetic determinants of Brassica crop damage by the agricultural pest Diamondback moth
• Estimating marine mammal abundance and distribution from passive acoustic and biotelemetry data
• Evolution of symbiosis in a warmer world
• Examining evolutionary loss of calcification in coccolithophores
• Explainable AI (XAI) for health
• Explaining process, pattern and dynamics of marine predator hotspots in the Southern Ocean
• Exploring dynamics of natural capital in coastal barrier systems
• Exploring the mechanisms of microplastics incorporation and their influence on the functioning of coral holobionts
• Exploring the potential electrical activity of gut for healthcare and wellbeing
• Exploring the trans-local nature of cultural scene
• Facilitating forest restoration sustainability of tropical swidden agriculture
• Faulting, fluids and geohazards within subduction zone forearcs
• Faulting, magmatism and fluid flow during volcanic rifting in East Africa
• Fingerprinting environmental releases from nuclear facilities
• Flexible hybrid thermoelectric materials for wearable energy harvesting
• Floating hydrokinetic power converter
• Glacial sedimentology associated subglacial hydrology
• Green and sustainable Internet of Things
• How do antimicrobial peptides alter T cell cytokine production?
• How do calcifying marine organisms grow? Determining the role of non-classical precipitation processes in biogenic marine calcite formation
• How do neutrophils alter T cell metabolism?
• How well can we predict future changes in biodiversity using machine learning?
• Hydrant dynamics for acoustic leak detection in water pipes
• If ‘Black Lives Matter’, do ‘Asian Lives Matter’ too? Impact trajectories of organisation activism on wellbeing of ethnic minority communities
• Illuminating luciferin bioluminescence in dinoflagellates
• Imaging quantum materials with an XFEL
• Impact of neuromodulating drugs on gut microbiome homeostasis
• Impact of pharmaceuticals in the marine environment in a changing world
• Impacts of environmental change on coastal habitat restoration
• Improving subsea navigation using environment observations for long term autonomy
• Information theoretic methods for sensor management
• Installation effect on the noise of small high speed fans
• Integrated earth observation mapping change land sea
• Interconnections of past greenhouse climates
• Investigating IgG cell depletion mechanisms
• Is ocean mixing upside down? How mixing processes drive upwelling in a deep-ocean basin
• Landing gear aerodynamics and aeroacoustics
• Lightweight gas storage: real-world strategies for the hydrogen economy
• Long-term change in the benthos – creating robust data from varying camera systems
• Machine learning for multi-robot perception
• Marine ecosystem responses to past climate change and its oceanographic impacts
• Mechanical effects in the surf zone - in situ electrochemical sensing
• Microfluidic cell isolation systems for sepsis
• Migrant entrepreneurship, gender and generation: context and family dynamics in small town Britain
• Miniaturisation in fishes: evolutionary and ecological perspectives
• Modelling high-power fibre laser and amplifier stability
• Modelling soil dewatering and recharge for cost-effective and climate resilient infrastructure
• Modelling the evolution of adaptive responses to climate change across spatial landscapes
• Nanomaterials sensors for biomedicine and/or the environment
• New high-resolution observations of ocean surface current and winds from innovative airborne and satellite measurements
• New perspectives on ocean photosynthesis
• Novel methods of detecting carbon cycling pathways in lakes and their impact on ecosystem change
• Novel technologies for cyber-physical security
• Novel transparent conducting films with unusual optoelectronic properties
• Novel wavelength fibre lasers for industrial applications
• Ocean circulation and the Southern Ocean carbon sink
• Ocean influence on recent climate extremes
• Ocean methane sensing using novel surface plasmon resonance technology
• Ocean physics and ecology: can robots disentangle the mix?
• Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal: Assessing the utility of coastal enhanced weathering
• Offshore renewable energy (ORE) foundations on rock seabeds: advancing design through analogue testing and modelling
• Optical fibre sensing for acoustic leak detection in buried pipelines
• Optimal energy transfer in nonlinear systems
• Optimizing machine learning for embedded systems
• Oxidation of fossil organic matter as a source of atmospheric CO2
• Partnership dissolution and re-formation in later life among individuals from minority ethnic communities in the UK
• Personalized multimodal human-robot interactions
• Preventing disease by enhancing the cleaning power of domestic water taps using sound
• Quantifying riparian vegetation dynamics and flow interactions for Nature Based Solutions using novel environmental sensing techniques
• Quantifying the response and sensitivity of tropical forest carbon sinks to various drivers
• Quantifying variability in phytoplankton electron requirements for carbon fixation
• Resilient and sustainable steel-framed building structures
• Resolving Antarctic meltwater events in Southern Ocean marine sediments and exploring their significance using climate models
• Robust acoustic leak detection in water pipes using contact sound guides
• Silicon synapses for artificial intelligence hardware
• Smart photon delivery via reconfigurable optical fibres
• The Gulf Stream control of the North Atlantic carbon sink
• The Mayflower Studentship: a prestigious fully funded PhD studentship in bioscience
• The calming effect of group living in social fishes
• The duration of ridge flank hydrothermal exchange and its role in global biogeochemical cycles
• The evolution of symmetry in echinoderms
• The impact of early life stress on neuronal enhancer function
• The oceanic fingerprints on changing monsoons over South and Southeast Asia
• The role of iron in nitrogen fixation and photosynthesis in changing polar oceans
• The role of singlet oxygen signaling in plant responses to heat and drought stress
• Time variability on turbulent mixing of heat around melting ice in the West Antarctic
• Triggers and Feedbacks of Climate Tipping Points
• Uncovering the drivers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease progression using patient derived organoids
• Understanding recent land-use change in Snowdonia to plan a sustainable future for uplands: integrating palaeoecology and conservation practice
• Understanding the role of cell motility in resource acquisition by marine phytoplankton
• Understanding the structure and engagement of personal networks that support older people with complex care needs in marginalised communities and their ability to adapt to increasingly ‘digitalised’ health and social care
• Unpicking the Anthropocene in the Hawaiian Archipelago
• Unraveling oceanic multi-element cycles using single cell ionomics
• Unravelling southwest Indian Ocean biological productivity and physics: a machine learning approach
• Using acoustics to monitor how small cracks develop into bursts in pipelines
• Using machine learning to improve predictions of ocean carbon storage by marine life
• Vulnerability of low-lying coastal transportation networks to natural hazards
• Wideband fibre optical parametric amplifiers for Space Division Multiplexing technology
• Will it stick? Exploring the role of turbulence and biological glues on ocean carbon storage
• X-ray imaging and property characterisation of porous materials
• GREAT Scholarships 2025 – Egypt
• GREAT Scholarships 2025 – France
• GREAT Scholarships 2025 – Ghana
• Postgraduate Taught Diversity Scholarship (Environmental and Life Sciences)
• Southampton Business School Postgraduate UK Scholarship
• Southampton Genomics Talent Scholarship
• Southampton History Patricia Mather and Helen Patterson Scholarship
• Southampton MA Holocaust scholarships
• Southampton Philosophy David Humphris-Norman Scholarship
• Southampton UK Alumni Music Scholarship
• The National Institute for Health and care Research South Central INSIGHT Programme
• Engineering Excellence Scholarship
• Southampton Physics and Astronomy Achievement Scholarship
• Winchester School of Art Postgraduate Global Talent Scholarship
• Southampton Education Civic Scholarship
• Southampton Ageing and Gerontology Talent Scholarship
• Southampton Presidential International Scholarship
• Engineering Global Talent Scholarship
• Southampton University Corporate Civil Engineering Scholarship Scheme
• Excellence Scholarship 
• Merit scholarships for international undergraduates
• Scholarships, awards and funding opportunities
• Becas Chile Scholarship
• Chevening Scholarships
• China Scholarship Council Scholarships
• COLFUTURO Scholarships
• Commonwealth Distance Learning Scholarships
• Commonwealth Master's Scholarships
• Commonwealth PhD Scholarships
• Commonwealth PhD Scholarships for high income countries
• Commonwealth Shared Scholarships
• Commonwealth Split-Site Scholarships
• FIDERH Scholarships
• Fulbright Awards
• FUNED Scholarships
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Mexico
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Nigeria
• Marshall Scholarship
• Saïd Foundation Scholarships
• British Council Scholarships for Women in STEM
• Southampton Canadian Prestige Scholarship for Law
• Xiamen University PhD Scholarships
• Scholarship terms and conditions
• Continuing professional development
• Archers Road
• City Gateway
• Erasmus Park
• Highfield Hall
• Orion Point
• Wessex Lane
• Cancer Sciences Protein Facility
• Geotechnical Centrifuge
• Maritime Robotics and Instrumentation Laboratory (MRIL)
• Active Living
• Advanced Fibre Applications
• Advanced Laser Laboratory
• Advanced Project Management Research Centre
• Antibody and Vaccine Group
• Astronomy Group
• Autism Community Research Network @ Southampton (ACoRNS)
• Bioarchaeology and Osteoarchaeology at Southampton (BOS)
• Bladder and Bowel Management
• Cell and Developmental Biology
• Centre for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease
• Centre for Digital Finance
• Centre for Eastern European and Eurasian Studies (CEEES)
• Centre for Empirical Research in Finance and Banking (CERFIB)
• Centre for Geometry, Topology, and Applications
• Centre for Global Englishes
• Centre for Global Health and Policy (GHaP)
• Centre for Health Technologies
• Centre for Healthcare Analytics
• Centre for Human Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration
• Centre for Imperial and Postcolonial Studies
• Centre for Inclusive and Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Innovation (CISEI)
• Centre for International Film Research (CIFR)
• Centre for International Law and Globalisation
• Centre for Internet of Things and Pervasive Systems
• Centre for Justice Studies
• Centre for Linguistics, Language Education and Acquisition Research
• Centre for Machine Intelligence
• Centre for Maritime Archaeology
• Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Culture (CMRC)
• Centre for Modern and Contemporary Writing (CMCW)
• Centre for Political Ethnography (CPE)
• Centre for Research in Accounting, Accountability and Governance
• Centre for Research on Work and Organisations
• Centre for Resilient Socio-Technical Systems
• Centre for Transnational Studies
• Child and Adolescent Research Group
• Clinical Ethics, Law and Society (CELS)
• Computational Nonlinear Optics
• Cyber Security Academy
• Data Science Group
• Digital Oceans
• EPSRC and MOD Centre for Doctoral Training in Complex Integrated Systems for Defence and Security
• Economic Theory and Experimental Economics
• Economy, Society and Governance
• Electrical Power Engineering
• Environmental Hydraulics
• Gas Photonics in Hollow Core Fibres 
• Geochemistry
• Global Health (Demography)
• Global Health Community of Practice
• Gravity group
• Healthy Oceans
• High Power Fibre Lasers
• Hollow Core Fibre
• Human Genetics and Genomic Medicine
• Infrastructure Group
• Institute of Developmental Sciences
• Institute of Maritime Law (IML)
• Integrated Photonic Devices
• Integrative Molecular Phenotyping Centre
• Interdisciplinary Musculoskeletal Health
• International Centre for Ecohydraulics Research (ICER)
• Language Assessment and Testing Unit (LATU)
• Laser-Direct-Write (LDW) Technologies for Biomedical Applications
• Law and Technology Centre
• Long Term Conditions
• Magnetic Resonance
• Mathematical Modelling
• Medicines Management
• Molecular and Precision Biosciences
• Multiwavelength Accretion and Astronomical Transients
• National Biofilms Innovation Centre (NBIC)
• National Centre for Research Methods
• National Infrastructure Laboratory
• Nature-Based Ocean Solutions
• Nonlinear Semiconductor Photonics
• Ocean Perception Group
• Optical Engineering and Quantum Photonics Group
• Paediatrics and Child Health - Clinical and Experimental Sciences
• People, Property, Community
• Photonic Systems, Circuits and Sensors Group
• Physical Optics
• Primary Care Research Centre
• Quantum, Light and Matter Group
• Silica Fibre Fabrication
• Silicon Photonics
• Skin Sensing Research Group
• Southampton Centre for Nineteenth-Century Research
• Southampton Ethics Centre
• Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre (SHTAC)
• Southampton High Energy Physics group
• Southampton Imaging
• Southampton Theory Astrophysics and Gravity (STAG) Research Centre
• Stefan Cross Centre for Women, Equality and Law
• String theory and holography
• The India Centre for Inclusive Growth and Sustainable Development
• The Parkes Institute
• Tony Davies High Voltage Laboratory
• Ultrafast X-ray Group
• Vision Science
• WSA Exchange
• Work Futures Research Centre (WFRC)
• Departments

The dreaded doctoral defense

An oral defence, or Viva, is common in the UK, Europe, NZ. The viva is less common in Australia.  Most Australian students will do a final presentation before the PhD, but many universities are currently discussing how to introduce a defence as part of the examination process, so we can expect a defence of some sort to become more common.

In the USA, the viva is called a ‘doctoral defense and PhD students have the additional challenge of being examined by their supervision committee. The US system is so different I don’t tend to write specific posts to address the various challenges because I don’t have any first hand experience, so I’m always grateful when a US colleague offers to write one.

This post is by author, editor, writing coach, dissertation nurturer, and spiritual counselor, Noelle Sterne, Ph.D. (Columbia University). She has published over 400 academic, writing craft, and spiritual articles and stories and essays in print and online venues. She delivers workshops and presentations to university faculty and writers and assists doctoral candidates in completing their dissertations (finally). Her handbook addresses these students’ largely overlooked but extremely important nonacademic difficulties: Challenges in Writing Your Dissertation: Coping with the Emotional, Interpersonal, and Spiritual Struggles (Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2015). In Noelle’s first book, Trust Your Life: Forgive Yourself and Go After Your Dreams  (Unity Books, 2011), she helps readers release regrets, relabel their past, and reach lifelong yearnings. Website:  www.trustyourlifenow.com .

This post is adapted from: Challenges in Writing Your Dissertation: Coping With the Emotional, Interpersonal, and Spiritual Struggles , chapter 7 – “The Dreaded Doctoral Defense”.

Almost everyone who has a doctorate has a final defense story. They may be different but they all have two things in common: few are pretty and theyíre emblazoned on the new doctor’s mind forever.

A friend of mine was obviously pregnant at her defense. After she successfully passed, her chair (supervisor), staring at her bulk, informed her with a tone of incontrovertibility that her entire graduate education had been a ‘waste’. Outrageous and maddening, I know.

Happily, she proved the chair monumentally wrong. Later, with two kids, she became an award-winning professor at Brandeis.

My defense was a little less dramatic but no less discomfiting. During the two hours of grilling and false camaraderie, my right foot fell asleep. As I rose for the verdict, my leg collapsed and I almost fell over the table into a bald committee member’s lap. They all laughed, almost as embarrassed as I. I still blush reliving it.

A fellow student in my doctoral cohort, by far the most brilliant of us all, felt he did so poorly at his defense that he cancelled a long-planned prepaid vacation to Scandinavia with his fiance. I never heard whether he ever went on the trip got married. This was mea culpa at its worst.

What do these cautionary tales tell you? To see your defense rightly. A rite of passage, certainly, it is nevertheless an important event in your progress and professional development. You don’t want to fail or flub it. You also want to maintain dignity and engender the respect of your chair and committee members’ your future colleagues.

As a consultant and coach to dissertation writers, I have often noticed that most candidates are petrified of the defense and either overdo it or try to underplay it. They imagine the committee asking impossible questions, like a detailed explanation of their statistical involutions, or asking ridiculous questions, like their opinion of the university cafeteria food.

Many candidates either spend every possible moment cramming, and risk predefense burnout, or avoid preparation entirely. James started preparing before he had even completed his data collection. He kept asking me questions about the required procedures and sent me loads of articles on defense advice, confessing he kept losing sleep panicking about his defense. I gently told him, several times, that his preparation, although admirable, was premature.

At the other extreme, Viola, a very bright candidate, told me years later that, despite my admonitions, she had minimized her defense and barely squeaked by. She knew the material but her nervousness and lack of preparation got the best of her. She regrets to this day not following my advice.

Recognizing that both extremes are, well, extreme, I developed the following suggestions for a good final defense before, during, and after the event. First, though, for your greater perspective, especially in U.S. defenses, some words about your committee.

Your Committee

Doubtless all members have their own defense horror stories, and your defense may trigger echoes of theirs. Their egos are at stake in your meeting, and they probably want to show off to each other. They also may want to show off by asking you tough questions. And yes, they may be unpredictable, quirky, mercurial. But remember that they are also upholding the high research standards of the university and their part in it. Keep in mind too that they have worked hard to get where they are. Theyíre not your enemies and want you to succeed, for you and for them.

So now, for you to make the experience a pleasant one for everyone, some advice on preparation.

Way Before the Defense

It’s better to be overprepared than underprepared. You will thank yourself for it later. Remind yourself that you are the expert on your dissertation, especially every time your stomach sinks. Read the university manual on defense protocols. It should tell you the time allotted for your introductory presentation, if you need a PowerPoint presentation and the number of slides, and whether the defense will be open to the ‘public’ (usually friends, family, and a few stray predefense doctoral students). Attend several defenses before your own to familiarize yourself with the process. Observe how the candidates respond, and make notes on the positive behavior (poise and direct eye contact with the committee) and negative behavior (a lot of ìuhs,î ìahs,î and slouching). Youíll be combating your fear of the unknown. Ask your chair for advice. About a month before the defense, schedule a meeting and discuss the defense format and range of possible questions. Ask the chair to look at your PowerPoint beforehand (they often want to and will critique it) and ask too for (diplomatic) insights on the committee members. If trouble erupts, such as another member calling for your running your statistics completely again or insisting that you ‘need’ to survey 132 more dock workers, the chair is supposed to fight for you (diplomatically).

Especially if other candidates have had your chair, study their final PowerPoints. When youíre ready for your own, use these and any outlines in the doctoral manual. Creating the new slides from your dissertation will help you remember, review, and summarize everything.

Think of the worst questions you donít want to be asked. Write them all down.

Type out your answers. You can refine them later. Make sure your dissertation backs up your answers (for example, correct number of participants, statistical results, themes revealed).

Know your material! Some candidates mark a hard copy of their dissertation at the pages reflecting anticipated questions. If you do, you can turn to the pages quickly. Alternatively, use the PowerPoint’s space at the bottom of each slide for your notes and scripts.

Rehearse with a relative or friend (something you can involve them in, and theyíll be tickled to help).

A Little Before

If your university has a media specialist, schedule an appointment for your electronic needs for the PowerPoint and have a list ready.

Visit the room in which the defense is scheduled, preferably with the media specialist, and plan together where you’ll place your computer and other equipment.

Alone in the room, do a mock rehearsal. Stand at the podium and look out into the vast sea of faces eager for your wisdom. See the chair and committee members sitting there beaming at you.

A few days before, decide what you’ll wear (even if the defense is by teleconference). Choose clothes that look and feel professional and get them in shape.

The day before, pack your materials: computer, flashdrive backup, hard copy, handouts, pens, pencils, recorder/phone app if you choose, and anything else that anticipates any technical malfunctions and may seem like overkill but will make you breathe easier.

Don’t forget the deodorant.

The night before, go to the movies, binge watch your favorite TV show, or do something physical. No alcohol. Get a good night’s sleep.

Arrive early and meditate beforehand either in your car, on a bench outside, or even in the empty room.

Reflect on your previous successful presentation experiences’ from your job, a speech at a wedding, an impassioned piece of advice to a friend who took it.

Set up your materials.

Tell yourself you are confident and passionate about your topic and findings.

When they enter, SMILE.

Stand up, stand straight.

Greet each committee member, even if your knees are shaking.

Look ’em in the eye.

Remember that you are the expert. Take a few deep breaths.

When the committee starts asking questions, have a notepad and pen ready to take notes, and take your time responding.

If you don’t know an answer, don’t fudge. Instead say, “That’s a very good question. I’ll have to think more about it” or “I’ll do more research on that.” Remember you are still the humble student. The committee will admire your response.

At the end of the defense, smile, shake hands (admittedly clammy), and thank everyone profusely. Tell them you enjoyed the meeting (it is possible).

Expect some revisions. Just because it’s the ‘final’ defense doesnít mean the committee can’t change its collective mind and swoop down on niggling and not-so points.

Collect the committeeís hard copies with their notes, if this is the procedure. Or offer to pick them up or ask them to email you their marked-up copies or lists of revisions.

Study up on all the red-tape requirements and regulations for revised documents, all committee signatures, and final deposit of the dissertation. You don’t want to miss any deadlines.

Throughout: A Few Helpful Affirmations

• Every time panic hits, practice defensive affirmations:
• I am perfectly competent, confident, express, poised.
• I am in command of myself.
• I look forward to sharing what I know and have learned.
• My defense goes perfectly.
• The committee is for me.
• I trust my knowledge, good work, and good mind to come up with the right answers.
• I know everything I need to know, instantly.
• I now visualize the movie of my perfect defense. I see myself poised and self-assured, talking easily about any aspect of the work, adlibbing from the PowerPoint. I graciously accept all compliments about the brilliance of my presentation. I hear the chair’s magic words, “Congratulations! You have passed!”

* * * * * * When you practice the steps here, you will be one of the few new Doctors without a defense horror story. Your story will be a much happier one, and as you continue in your successful professional career, your defense will shine forever bejeweled in your memory. © 2017 Noelle Sterne

Love the Thesis whisperer and want it to continue? Consider becoming a $1 a month Patreon and get special, Patreon only, extra Thesiswhisperer content every two weeks!

Share this:

The Thesis Whisperer is written by Professor Inger Mewburn, director of researcher development at The Australian National University . New posts on the first Wednesday of the month. Subscribe by email below. Visit the About page to find out more about me, my podcasts and books. I'm on most social media platforms as @thesiswhisperer. The best places to talk to me are LinkedIn , Mastodon and Threads.

• Post (609)
• Page (16)
• Product (6)
• Getting things done (259)
• Miscellany (139)
• On Writing (139)
• Your Career (113)
• You and your supervisor (66)
• Writing (48)
• productivity (23)
• consulting (13)
• TWC (13)
• supervision (12)
• 2024 (8)
• 2023 (12)
• 2022 (11)
• 2021 (15)
• 2020 (22)

Whisper to me....

Enter your email address to get posts by email.

Email Address

Sign me up!

• On the reg: a podcast with @jasondowns
• Thesis Whisperer on Facebook
• Thesis Whisperer on Instagram
• Thesis Whisperer on Soundcloud
• Thesis Whisperer on Youtube
• Thesiswhisperer on Mastodon
• Thesiswhisperer page on LinkedIn
• Thesiswhisperer Podcast
• 12,265,026 hits

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading