Speaker 1: A PhD by published works or a PhD by publication. What is it? How is it different from a PhD by research? In this video we're going to explore these two different types of PhD, examining their advantages and disadvantages and addressing some common questions. The biggest one being, which is better? If we've not met before, hi, I'm Dr Elizabeth Yardley and I help PhD students get out of their own way and finish their PhD. Most of the students that I've supported in the last 20 years have done their PhD by research, the traditional way in the social sciences. But in recent years, PhDs by publication or PhDs by published works, they seem to have become a bit more of a thing. Several of my academic colleagues have achieved their PhDs by publication and I get asked about it all the time. So I thought it's high time I make a video about this. Let's get into it. What is a PhD by research? A PhD by research is what most people think of when they imagine getting their doctorate. It is the classic route. You dive deep into a specific topic, trying to uncover something new and significant over the course of between three and six years. And during this time, you work closely with one or more academic mentors or supervisors who will guide you through the research process. Your research journey will then culminate in the creation of a thesis or dissertation. This is a detailed document where you lay out the research problem you tackled, how you approached it, what you discovered and why it matters. The length of this document is around about 80,000 to 120,000 words, depending on the discipline that you're working within and depending on your institutional requirements. Once your thesis is ready, you'll face a viva or a thesis defense. And this is essentially where you present and defend your work in front of a panel of experts. They will ask you a series of questions to make sure that your research is really solid and that it makes a genuine original contribution to your field. Now, some of the advantages of a PhD by research. So first up, in-depth expertise. A PhD by research allows you to become an expert in a specific area of your field. The amount of time that you spend on that single research project enables you to develop a really deep understanding, which in turn enables you to contribute original knowledge to your field. Secondly, skill development. The process of conducting research, writing a thesis and defending it hones a really wide range of skills, including critical thinking, problem solving, data analysis, academic writing. And these skills are highly valued in academia and beyond. Next up, networking opportunities. Throughout the PhD process, candidates have got the opportunity to attend conferences, to publish papers and to collaborate with their peers. And this is really helpful for building a professional network in your field. And lastly, structured guidance. The guidance and the advice that you receive from your mentors or your supervisors is going to help you navigate the research process. They help you ensure that you remain on track and that you produce really high quality work. And these days, many universities have some form of doctoral training program as well. So you might go to classes that focus on specific elements of the research process or gain a qualification in research methods. Here in England, one of the things that people can come away with is a postgraduate certificate in research practice. Now, the disadvantages of a PhD by research. Firstly, it can be very time consuming. A PhD by research can take several years to complete, and that might not be feasible if you've got significant professional or personal commitments. Also, isolation. The really focused nature of a PhD by research can mean that you spend long periods of time on your own. And some people really enjoy that element of it. I know that I did being an introvert. But it can be a tricky balance to strike. And after a while, that solitary nature of a PhD does start to get to most people. Also, there's a bit of a pressure to publish. And whilst publishing peer reviewed papers or publishing books during the process of doing a PhD is often not a requirement of PhD programs when you're doing a PhD by research, there is definitely a pressure that PhD students feel to do this. That can add to the stress that can add to the workload. Now, before we get on to a PhD by published works, I want to hear from you in the comments. What kind of PhD program are you thinking about? Or are you on at the moment? Are you on a PhD by research or a PhD by published works or publication? Type that in the comments. Let me know. And if you want to share some more details about your PhD, I love hearing about what you're all studying. So pop that in the comments and I can geek out on it later. A PhD by published works or a PhD by publication is an alternative route to getting a doctoral degree. This option is typically available to people who've already published a significant body of work in academic books, academic journals, or a combination of the two. So instead of producing a traditional thesis, they will submit a collection of their published works. Alongside this, they'll also submit a critical commentary. And this should link those publications all together into a coherent narrative. And this should demonstrate how they've made a contribution to the advancement of knowledge in their field across those different publications. And similar to a PhD by research, there is a kind of viva where the candidate is quizzed by a panel of experts. So the advantages of a PhD by published works. Firstly, recognition of prior work. This route enables experienced professionals and academics to gain recognition for work they've already done without having to start a brand new research project from scratch. Since the candidate has already completed a lot of research and published the results, the process of obtaining a PhD by published works is often faster than a PhD by research. Flexibility. This kind of option is ideal for people who've been conducting research within or alongside their professional careers, and they might not have the time to commit to a full-time research project. So this option is one that is flexible enough to fit in with that life. Impact. The publications that form part of a PhD by published works have already been published. They've already been peer-reviewed, they've already been disseminated. So the research has already had an impact in that field. Now let's look at the disadvantages of a PhD by published works. A PhD by published works is often only available to people who've got quite a significant track record of publication, and not just a significant track record, but a significant track record of publishing in high impact journals. And that's something that is quite challenging for early career researchers to achieve. Lack of structured guidance. Unlike a PhD by research, people who are doing a PhD by published works might not receive the same level of support and guidance from their supervisors, and that can be quite a significant disadvantage, especially if they're not accustomed to academic processes. Retrospective nature. Since the publications have already been completed, there's a limited opportunity for new research or exploration of different ideas. You've just got to go with what you've got. Complexity. The process of linking together a number of different publications and turning that into a coherent narrative that demonstrates collectively a contribution to knowledge can be quite challenging. I've heard a lot of people really stressing out about the critical commentary document, and I hear a lot of them just saying, I wish I'd just done a PhD by research. It would have been easier. Now let's look at some common questions. First up, which is better for my career? The answer to this really depends on your career goals. If you're an early career researcher or you aspire to work in academia, a PhD by research might be preferable. It provides you with the opportunity to develop a really deep expertise in a specific area, gain valuable research skills, and build a professional network, all of which are really important for a career in academia. On the other hand, if you are a seasoned professional with quite a significant body of published work, a PhD by publication might be more advantageous. It allows you to gain formal recognition for contributions that you've already made to your field without having to start a lengthy research project from scratch. Secondly, is a PhD by published works less prestigious? Now in my view, both types of PhD are equally prestigious. They both require the candidate to demonstrate an original contribution to knowledge. However, perceptions do vary, and this often depends on what academic or professional community you're talking to. In some disciplines, a PhD by research is more traditional. It's something that people are more familiar with, so it's more recognised. Whilst in others, a PhD by publication might be seen as evidence of somebody's practical impact on their field. So it all depends, and I know that that is a really irritating answer, but it's an accurate one. Another question I get asked quite a lot is, can I switch from one to the other? Can I switch from PhD by publication to PhD by research, and from PhD by research to PhD by publication? And generally, that's not very common, because there are very different requirements and very different expectations of these individual routes to getting a PhD. So again, that all depends. It depends on how much you've already done, it depends on what the rules and regulations are at your institution, and it depends on common practice in your discipline. So that's one you need to talk to your supervisor about. And lastly, what are the key challenges for each of these routes? For a PhD by research, the key challenges definitely include maintaining motivation over a long period of time, managing the unpredictability of research outcomes, and coping with the pressure to publish. In contrast, a PhD by published works requires the candidate to synthesise quite a significant body of work, and some of the individual parts of that body of work, the individual articles and book chapters and books, might be quite disparate. And trying to build that together into a coherent narrative that makes sense can be incredibly challenging. Plus, the relative lack of structured supervision, that can be a real challenge for some candidates. So PhD by publication, PhD by published work, both of them are a really valuable path to earning a doctoral degree. And as we've seen in this video, they both come with advantages and disadvantages. But the outcome is the same. You get your doctorate, you get to call yourself doctor, which is really cool. Popping up on the screen right now is a video I think you're going to enjoy, regardless of the type of PhD you're doing. It's about a very common issue that most PhD students experience, especially if you're working full-time or part-time alongside doing your doctorate. It's about how to find a balance. Go check it out. I'll see you over there.