ArticlePloS one2025
Choosing to succeed? Insights into doctoral students' supervisor selection and its outcomes.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Doctoral student experience and outcomes largely depend on the quality of supervision. Research on doctoral supervision usually focuses on the attributes, styles, and roles of a supervisor during doctoral training, while the process and effects of initiating supervisor-supervisee relationships remain less explored. This paper aims to examine how students' strategies for supervisor selection are related to subsequent difficulties in interaction with their supervisors and their confidence about their future dissertation defense. Based on a nationwide survey of doctoral students in Russia (N = 1796) and regression analysis, we demonstrate that academic criteria such as a supervisor's subject-matter expertise and successful supervision history are the best factors for students to consider to reduce the probability of future difficulties with the supervisor and to avoid experiencing a lack of confidence. Using an existing positive personal relationship with a supervisor as a criterion reduces the chances of interaction difficulties, but does not affect a student's confidence in future academic success. At the same time, the "only option" scenario (i.e., a situation when students have no alternatives to choose from) is associated with higher chances of facing difficulties during the doctoral journey and a lower level of student confidence. The study highlights the critical role of agency in supervisor selection, showing that structured support for informed decision-making - whether through institutional matchmaking systems or student mentoring programs - can mitigate risks of poor supervision outcomes. These findings call for policy interventions to promote transparency in supervisor selection processes, especially in contexts where students have limited choices. The results of the research can be used by prospective doctoral students and doctoral program administrators to create a personal or institutional navigation system for choosing a supervisor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.