Abstract
Prospective PhD by Publication may be seen as a pedagogical imperative, as it develops in doctoral researchers a wide range of knowledge and skills related to scholarly publishing that are highly valued in modern academia and beyond. However, the scholarly publishing process is one that is fraught with ethical dilemmas, politics, inequalities and biases that can negatively impact doctoral researchers’ ability to succeed, regardless of the quality of their work. In this chapter, we draw on the extant literature, and on our experiences as former doctoral researchers who adopted the model and who now provide support for others, to highlight these realities. Specifically, we discuss issues related to the ethics of authorship, the nature of the scholarly publication process including biases in scholarship, and inequity in the distribution of resources and support. We conclude with some recommendations for the promotion of ethical policy and practice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aagaard, K., Kladakis, A., & Nielsen, M. W. (2020). Concentration or dispersal of research funding? Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 117–149. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00002
Akre, O., Barone-Adesi, F., Pettersson, A., Pearce, N., Merletti, F., & Richiardi, L. (2011). Differences in citation rates by country of origin for papers published in top-ranked medical journals: Do they reflect inequalities in access to publication? Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 65(2), 119–123. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2009.088690
Badenhorst, C., & Xu, X. (2016). Academic publishing: Making the implicit explicit. Publications, 4(3), Article 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications4030024
Bański, J., & Ferenc, M. (2013). “International” or “Anglo-American” journals of geography? Geoforum, 45, 285–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.11.016
Bazi, T. (2020). Peer review: Single-blind, double-blind, or all the way-blind? International Urogynecology Journal, 31, 481–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04187-2
Bhattacharya, S. (2010). Authorship issue explained. Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery, 43(2), 233–234. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0358.73482
Bould, M. D., Boet, S., Riem, N., Kasanda, C., Sossou, A., & Bruppacher, H. R. (2010). National representation in the anaesthesia literature: A bibliometric analysis of highly cited anaesthesia journals. Anaesthesia, 65, 799–804. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06424.x
Chilisa, B., & Ntseane, G. (2010). Resisting dominant discourses: Implications of indigenous, African feminist theory and methods for gender and education research. Gender and Education, 22(6), 617–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2010.519578
Christian, G. E. (2008). Open access initiative and the developing world. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 18(2), 1–11. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1304665
Cross, M., & Backhouse, J. (2014). Evaluating doctoral programmes in Africa: Context and practices. Higher Education Policy, 27(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2014.1
Dowling, R., Gorman-Murray, A., Power, E., & Luzia, K. (2012). Critical reflections on doctoral research and supervision in human geography: The ‘PhD by publication’. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 36(2), 293–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2011.638368
Fanelli, D. (2010). Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS One, 5(4), Article e10271. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010271
Faraldo-Cabana, P., & Lamela, C. (2021). How international are the top international journals of criminology and criminal justice? European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 27, 151–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-019-09426-2
Frick, L. (2019). PhD by publication–Panacea or paralysis? Africa Education Review, 16(5), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2017.1340802
Gray, R. J. (2020). Sorry, we’re open: Golden open-access and inequality in non-human biological sciences. Scientometrics, 124, 1663–1675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03540-3
Hannover Recommendations. (2019). Forces and forms of doctoral education. https://www.doctoral-education.info/dl/Hannover-Recommendations-DocEd-2019.pdf
Heesen, R., & Bright, L. K. (2021). Is peer review a good idea? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 72, 635. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axz029
Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., & Mol, M. J. (2005). So you call that research? Mending methodological biases in strategy and organization departments of top business schools. Strategic Organization, 3(1), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127005050030
Horta, H., & Santos, J. M. (2015). The impact of publishing during PhD studies on career research publication, visibility, and collaborations. Research in Higher Education, 57(1), 28–50.
Huang, J., Gates, A. J., Sinatra, R., & Barabási, A. L. (2020). Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(9), 4609–4616. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1914221117
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2019). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf
Jackson, D. (2013). Completing a PhD by publication: A review of Australian policy and implications for practice. Higher Education Research and Development, 32(3), 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.692666
Joober, R., Schmitz, N., Annable, L., & Boksa, P. (2012). Publication bias: What are the challenges and can they be overcome? Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience, 37(3), 149–152. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.120065
Kawase, T. (2015). Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006
Keane, M., Khupe, C., & Seehawer, M. (2017). Decolonising methodology: Who benefits from indigenous knowledge research? Educational Research for Social Change, 6(1), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.17159/2221-4070/2017/v6i1a2
Kelly, J., Sadegieh, T., & Adeli, K. (2014). Peer review in scientific publications: Benefits, critiques, & a survival guide. The Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 25(3), 227–243. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975196/
Kotecha, P., Steyn, A., & Vermeulen, P. (2012). The status quo of doctoral education in the SADC region. SARUA Leadership Dialogue Series, 4(1), 16–21.
Krishna, A., & Peter, S. M. (2018). Questionable research practices in student final theses–Prevalence, attitudes, and the role of the supervisor’s perceived attitudes. PLoS One, 13(8), Article 0203470. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203470
Li, J., Xie, Y., Wu, D., & Chen, Y. (2017). Underestimating or overestimating the distribution inequality of research funding? The influence of funding sources and subdivision. Scientometrics, 112(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2402-2
Lillis, T. M., & Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. Routledge.
Macfarlane, B. (2017). The ethics of multiple authorship: Power, performativity and the gift economy. Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), 1194–1210. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1085009
Mäkinen, E. I. (2019). The power of peer review on transdisciplinary discovery. Science, Technology & Human Values, 19(3), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243918822741
Mantai, L. (2017). Feeling like a researcher: Experiences of early doctoral students in Australia. Studies in Higher Education, 42(4), 636–650. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1067603
Martin, B. (2013). Countering supervisor exploitation. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 45(1), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.45-1-004
Martin, G. N., & Clarke, R. M. (2017). Are psychology journals anti-replication? A snapshot of editorial practices. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 523. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00523
Marušić, A., Bošnjak, L., & Jerončić, A. (2011). A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. PLoS One, 6(9), e23477. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023477
Mason, S. (2018). Publications in the doctoral thesis: Challenges for doctoral candidates, supervisors, examiners and administrators. Higher Education Research and Development, 37(6). https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1462307
Mason, S., Merga, M. K., & Morris, J. E. (2020a). Choosing the thesis by publication approach: Motivations and influencers for doctoral candidates. Australian Educational Researcher, 47, 857–871. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00367-7
Mason, S., Merga, M. K., & Morris, J. E. (2020b). Typical scope of time commitment and research outputs of thesis by publication in Australia. Higher Education Research and Development, 39(2), 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1674253
Mason, S., Morris, J. E., & Merga, M. K. (2021). Institutional and supervisory support for the thesis by publication. Australian Journal of Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944120929065
Mavrogenis, A. F., Quaile, A., & Scarlat, M. M. (2020). The good, the bad and the rude peer-review. International Orthopaedics, 44(3), 413–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04504-1
Merga, M. K., Mason, S., & Morris, J. (2019). ‘The constant rejections hurt’: Skills and personal attributes needed to successfully complete a thesis by publication. Learned Publishing, 32(3), 271–281.
Mills, D., & Inouye, K. (2020). Problematizing ‘predatory publishing’: A systematic review of factors shaping publishing motives, decisions, and experiences. Learned Publishing. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1325
Morse, J. M. (2009). Negotiating authorship for doctoral dissertation publications. Qualitative Health Research, 19(1), 3–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308326637
Neumann, R. (2007). Policy and practice in doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 32(4), 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070701476134
Nygaard, L. P., & Solli, K. (2021). Strategies for writing a thesis by publication in the social sciences and humanities. Routledge.
O’Connor, P., & Fauve-Chamoux, A. (2016). European policies and research funding: A case study of gender inequality and lack of diversity in a Nordic research programme. Policy & Politics, 44(4), 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557315X14501227093917
O’Keeffe, P. (2020). PhD by publication: Innovative approach to social science research, or operationalisation of the doctoral student … or both? Higher Education Research and Development, 39(2), 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1666258
Paré, A. (2010). Slow the presses: Concerns about premature publication. In C. Aitchison, B. Kamler, & A. Lee (Eds.), Publishing pedagogies for the doctorate and beyond (pp. 42–58). Routledge.
Patel, V., & Kim, Y.-R. (2007). Contribution of low- and middle-income countries to research published in leading general psychiatry journals, 2002–2004. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, 77–78. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.106.025692
Petersen, A. M., & Penner, O. (2014). Inequality and cumulative advantage in science careers: A case study of high-impact journals. EPJ Data Science, 3(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-014-0024-y
Pezzoni, M., Mairesse, J., Stephan, P., & Lane, J. (2016). Gender and the publication output of graduate students: A case study. PLoS One, 11(1), Article e0145146. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145146
Platow, M. J. (2012). PhD experience and subsequent outcomes: A look at self-perceptions of acquired graduate attributes and supervisor support. Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.501104
Powell, K. (2016). Does it take too long to publish research? Nature, 530(7589), 148–151. https://doi.org/10.1038/530148a
Poyatos Matas, C. (2012). Doctoral education and skills development: An international perspective. REDU: Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 10(2), 163–191. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/4021055.pdf
Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O’Hare, A., Nightingale, P., & Stirling, A. (2012). How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between innovation studies and business & management. Research Policy, 41(7), 1262–1282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.015
Reisig, M. D., Holtfreter, K., & Berzofsky, M. E. (2020). Assessing the perceived prevalence of research fraud among faculty at research-intensive universities in the USA. Accountability in Research, 27(7), 457–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1772060
Sá, C., Cowley, S., Martinez, M., Kachynska, N., & Sabzalieva, E. (2020). Gender gaps in research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in the U.S., Canada, and South Africa. PLoS One, 15(10), Article e0240903. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240903
Sharmini, S., Spronken-Smith, R., Golding, C., & Harland, T. (2015). Assessing the doctoral thesis when it includes published work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.888535
Simonds, V. W., & Christopher, S. (2013). Adapting western research methods to indigenous ways of knowing. American Journal of Public Health, 103(12), 2185–2192. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301157
Smith, C., & Ulus, E. (2020). Who cares for academics? We need to talk about emotional well-being including what we avoid and intellectualise through macro-discourses. Organization, 27(6), 840–857. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508419867201
Starck, J. M. (2017). Scientific peer review. Springer Spektrum.
Tarkang, E. E., Kweku, M., & Zotor, F. B. (2017). Publication practices and responsible authorship: A review article. Journal of Public Health in Africa, 8(1), Article 723. https://doi.org/10.4081/jphia.2017.723
Wintrol, K., & Jerinic, M. (2013). Rebels in the classroom: Creativity and risk-taking in honors pedagogy. Honors in Practice, 9, 47–67. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchchip/186
Yeung, N. (2019). Forcing PhD students to publish is bad for science. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(10), 1036–1036. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0685-4
Yousefi-Nooraie, R., Shakiba, B., & Mortaz-Hejri, S. (2006). Country development and manuscript selection bias: A review of published studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6, 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-37
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mason, S., Frick, L. (2022). Ethical and Practical Considerations for Completing and Supervising a Prospective PhD by Publication. In: Chong, S.W., Johnson, N. (eds) Landscapes and Narratives of PhD by Publication. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04895-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04895-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-04894-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-04895-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)