The doctoral defense is an important step towards obtaining the doctoral degree. As such, preparing for the event is necessary. Anecdotal evidence highlights that there is a wide variety of ways in which doctoral candidates prepare for the defense. In this work, I want to explore if there is a relation between the way in which a doctoral candidate prepares for the defense and two important aspects of the defense: the outcome of the defense, and the student perception during and after the defense. For this purpose, I first reviewed the literature on the topic of the preparation for the doctoral defense. Then, I carried out an international survey on the doctoral defense and analyzed the data of the 204 completed surveys with respect to the preparation for the defense using quantitative and qualitative methods. The methods I used included the statistical tests of the correlation between on one hand the preparation and on the other hand the defense outcome and student perception. I used inductive thematic analysis of the open-ended survey questions to gain deeper insight in the way candidates prepared for their defense. I found that candidates most often prepare by making their presentation, reading their thesis, and practicing. The most effective measure is the mock defense, followed by a preparatory course. Reading blogs, books, and chapters is a less effective preparation measure. The conclusion of this work is that doctoral candidates need to understand the format of their defense in order to be able to prepare properly, and that universities should explore either individual pathways to the defense or pilots using a mock defense and/or preparatory course to give their doctoral candidates the necessary tools to prepare for their doctoral defense.

The doctoral defense, which is an essential requirement for the doctoral degree, is considered to have three dimensions: the scholarly dimension, the emotional (affective) dimension, and the cultural dimension. In this work, I explore the link between sociodemographic factors and students’ perception of the doctoral defense. In particular, I focus on gender, ethnicity, and age at time of defense, as well as current position, and field of study. To address the influence of these aspects on the affective dimension of the doctoral defense, I first reviewed the literature on these socio-demographic aspects as well as the affective dimension of the defense. I then carried out an international survey on doctoral defenses, defense formats, and students’ perceptions and analyzed the 204 completed surveys for this study using quantitative and qualitative methods. The analysis included cross-correlations between students’ perceptions and the studied sociodemographic aspects. The main results of these analyses are that gender affects various aspects of the students’ perception of the doctoral defense and long-term perception, and that female candidates experience more issues with their committee. Ethnicity is important as well, although the participations of non-white respondents in this survey was limited. The influence of age at the defense is limited, and only for the youngest and oldest age groups I observe some differences in perception. There is no relation between current position and perception of the candidates during the defense. Finally, field of study is correlated for various aspects of student perception, committee issues, and long-term perception. The conclusion of this work is that socio-demographic aspects, and in particular gender, ethnicity, and field of study, influence how doctoral candidates experience their defense.

The doctoral defense is an important step in the doctoral journey and an essential requirement for obtaining the doctoral degree. Past research on the doctoral defense has focused solely on national practices. In this work, I investigate the potential link between the doctoral defense format based on its major and minor elements and the perception of the defense by the student. For this purpose, I first reviewed the different defense formats used internationally to extract the different elements of the doctoral defense, as well as the literature on students’ perceptions of the doctoral defense. Then, I carried out an international survey which received 297 responses, of which 204 completed surveys which I used for the analysis in this article. I first analyzed the outcomes of the survey using qualitative and quantitative methods, and then cross-correlated the outcomes of defense format to the outcomes of student perception. From this analysis, I observe that the defense elements that positively impact the students’ perception are: publication of the thesis before the defense, receiving committee feedback before the defense, knowing the recommendation of one or more committee members in advance, having the supervisor present in the audience or as part of the committee, using a dress code, and including a laudatio. The final conclusion of this work is threefold. The first conclusion is that the details of the defense format impact most the students’ perception. The second conclusion is that doctoral students on average value the defense as a positive experience. The third conclusion is that the defense format cannot influence two important aspects of how a student perceives the defense: the student’s inner life and lived experience during the defense, and the behavior of the committee members.