Doctoral Students' Help Seeking Behaviors

Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive picture of doctoral students’ dissertation journeys using Finland as a case country. More specifically, the article examines (1) the students’ backgrounds, (2) their study motives and experiences, and (3) whether or not these elements are related. Background: Despite the massification of higher education (HE), there is a shortage of detailed mixed-methods studies about PhD students’ backgrounds and their experiences of doctoral study. Existing research does not give a clear indication of the extent to which home background is reflected in PhD applications and whether or not that background is related to the subsequent experience of doctoral students. Methodology: This paper is based on both quantitative and qualitative data. We utilize a person-based register (N = 18,585) and a survey (n = 1,651). Our main methods are k-means cluster analysis, t-test, and directed content analysis. Our theoretical approach is Bourdieuian. We use the concept of doctoral capital when evaluating the backgrounds, resources, and success of PhD students through the dissertation process. Contribution: This study uses a mixed-methods approach and is the first to incorporate quantitative data about the entire doctoral student population in Finland. In addition, open-ended responses in the survey make the PhD students’ own experiences visible. By approaching our research subject through a mixed methods lens, we aim to create a comprehensive understanding about their dissertation journeys. With this study, we also contribute to the debate initiated by Falconer and Djokic (2019). They found that age, race, and socioeconomic status (SES) do not influence academic self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping behaviors in doctoral students. However, in this study, a link was found between the PhD students’ backgrounds (age and parents’ SES), and their study aims and experiences. Findings: Cluster analysis revealed three different groups of PhD students: Status Raisers, Educational Inheritors, and Long-term Plodders. PhD students in these groups have different resources, experiences, and chances to survive in the academic community. There are two main findings. First, the influence of the childhood family extends all the way to doctoral education, even in Finland, which is considered to have one of the most equal HE systems in the world. Some PhD students from low-educated families even experienced so-called imposter syndrome. They described experiences of inadequacy, incompetence, and inferiority in relation to doctoral studies and fellow students. Second, the influence of family background may diminish with age and life experiences. In our study, many mature doctoral students had become empowered and emancipated to such an extent that they relied more on their own abilities and skills than on their family backgrounds. Many felt that their own persistence and resilience have played an important role in their doctoral studies. There were also a few ‘heroic tales’ about hard work and survival in spite of all the hurdles and distresses. Recommendations for Practitioners: PhD students are a very heterogeneous group. Their motives and goals for applying for doctoral studies vary, and their backgrounds and life situations affect their studies. There are three critical points educational practitioners should pay special attention to (1) supervision and support (mentoring), (2) length of funding, and (3) granted research periods. Recommendation for Researchers: Because Finland and the other Nordic countries have a long tradition of equal educational opportunities, we need comparative studies on the same topic from countries with higher educational disparities. Impact on Society: Inequalities in educational opportunities and experiences originate at the very beginning of the educational path, and they usually cumulate over the years. For this reason, the achievement of educational equality should be promoted not only through education policy but also through family, regional, and social policy decisions. Future Research: The Bourdieuian concepts of cultural, social, and economic capitals are also relevant in doctoral education. PhD students’ family backgrounds are reflected in their motives, experiences, and interpretations in the academic community. Future research should explore how to best support and reinforce the self-confidence of doctoral students from lower SES backgrounds.

Aim/Purpose: The research reported here aims to demonstrate a method by which novel applications of qualitative data in quantitative research can resolve ceiling effect tensions for educational and psychological research. Background: Self-report surveys and scales are essential to graduate education and social science research. Ceiling effects reflect the clustering of responses at the highest response categories resulting in non-linearity, a lack of variability which inhibits and distorts statistical analyses. Ceiling effects in stress reported by students can negatively impact the accuracy and utility of the resulting data. Methodology: A longitudinal sample example from graduate engineering students’ stress, open-ended critical events, and their early departure from doctoral study considerations demonstrate the utility and improved accuracy of adjusted stress measures to include open-ended critical event responses. Descriptive statistics are used to describe the ceiling effects in stress data and adjusted stress data. The longitudinal stress ratings were used to predict departure considerations in multilevel modeling ANCOVA analyses and demonstrate improved model predictiveness. Contribution: Combining qualitative data from open-ended responses with quantitative survey responses provides an opportunity to reduce ceiling effects and improve model performance in predicting graduate student persistence. Here, we present a method for adjusting stress scale responses by incorporating coded critical events based on the Taxonomy of Life Events, the application of this method in the analysis of stress responses in a longitudinal data set, and potential applications. Findings: The resulting process more effectively represents the doctoral student experience within statistical analyses. Stress and major life events significantly impact engineering doctoral students’ departure considerations. Recommendations for Practitioners: Graduate educators should be aware of students’ life events and assist students in managing graduate school expectations while maintaining progress toward their degree. Recommendation for Researchers: Integrating coded open-ended qualitative data into statistical models can increase the accuracy and representation of the lived student experience. The new approach improves the accuracy and presentation of students’ lived experiences by incorporating qualitative data into longitudinal analyses. The improvement assists researchers in correcting data with ceiling effects for use in longitudinal analyses. Impact on Society: The method described here provides a framework to systematically include open-ended qualitative data in which ceiling effects are present. Future Research: Future research should validate the coding process in similar samples and in samples of doctoral students in different fields and master’s students.

There is a great demand internationally and locally for a workforce with high-quality knowledge, skills, and attitudes in all economic sectors. Studies reveal low completion rates and delays in completion of doctoral studies experienced globally and in Kenya. This study aimed to evaluate the extent to which doctoral students in selected public universities in Kenya are prepared for the completion of their doctoral dissertations. The objective of the study was to assess the preparedness of doctoral education students for the completion of the doctoral dissertation. The study used Tinto’s Doctoral Persistence Theory and Graduate Socialization Framework. The study employed a convergent parallel research design framed within a pragmatic philosophical view. Purposive, quota, and simple random sampling strategies were utilized in selecting 87 participants (55 doctoral students and 32 supervisors). Data was gathered using semi-structured questionnaires with a five-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics: frequencies, mean and standard deviation were used to analyze quantitative data, while qualitative data were coded and analyzed thematically. The study established that public universities in Kenya face significant challenges while attempting to achieve timely completion of doctoral studies. Doctoral students were often unprepared for dissertation completion; they struggle with limited digital skills necessary for data collection and analysis, have a poor research background, and experience various personal and professional obstacles such as work-related pressures, psychosocial difficulties, insufficient academic and institutional support, and financial constraints, all of which hinder dissertation progress. To address these challenges, the study recommends: strengthening student-supervisor collaboration, enhancing institutional support mechanisms, strengthening student mentorship, and securing additional research funding. By implementing these measures, public universities in Kenya can foster a more supportive research culture, improve doctoral completion rates, and the overall quality of post-graduate education.

Aim/Purpose: This qualitative case-study explores how a doctoral student’s family influences the doctoral student’s success from the perspective of doctoral students who were enrolled in an online doctoral program. Background: Previous research has shown that family can significantly influence doctoral student success; however, it is not clear what is meant by family nor what the details of the influence of family look like from the perspective of the doctoral student. Methodology: A qualitative case-study method was used. More than 500 former students enrolled in an online doctoral program were emailed a web-based survey that elicited information about who they considered to be in their family, how they thought their relationship with their family changed while they were a doctoral student, and how much they thought their family understood what it means to be a doctoral student. One hundred thirty-three (24%) former students participated in the study. Qualitative data were analyzed both manually and electronically by three researchers who subsequently triangulated the data to confirm themes. Contribution: This study defines ‘family’ from the doctoral student perspective and provides an in-depth look at how family influences doctoral student success including explanation of family support and lack thereof that previously has been shown to be significant to facilitating or hindering doctoral student success. Findings: Doctoral students mostly considered their immediate and extended family (i.e., spouses, significant others, children, grandchildren, parents, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and parents-in-law) to be family, but some considered friends and coworkers to be part of their family as well. Most doctoral students experienced positive family support, but for those who did not, two major themes emerged as problematic: a reduction in the amount of time spent with family and family not understanding the value of earning a doctoral degree. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions of higher education should consider these findings when creating interventions to increase retention of doctoral students. Interventions might include orientation programs to help family members understand the value of earning a doctoral degree, the time commitment necessary to complete a doctoral degree, and ways to support a family member earning a doctoral degree. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings inform future research by surfacing more specific information about what family support and lack thereof looks like for doctoral students and what interventions for improving family support might include. Impact on Society: Improving family support may improve doctoral student success by adding more doctoral-trained leaders, innovators, scholars, and influential educators to society and by supporting the financial investment of students and their families by decreasing attrition. Future Research: Future research should focus on creating quantitative instrumentation to measure the influence of family on doctoral student success. Student populations from different types of doctoral programs (e.g., PhD, MD, DO) might be studied as well. Interventions aimed at improving family support should be designed, implemented, and evaluated for effectiveness.

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine how the basic psychological needs of self-determination theory are reflected in doctoral students’ motivation to earn the PhD. Background: As isolating as the doctoral experience seems, it is one that occurs in a social-cultural environment that can either support or hinder the student. This research highlights the motivational influences of library and information science doctoral students regarding experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Methodology: Qualitative data were collected from seven (7) enrolled doctoral students at library and information science programs in the United States and Canada. Transcripts from semi-structured interviews and students’ personal admission statements were subjected to deductive content analysis for emphasis on three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Contribution: Findings illustrate the role faculty play in student motivation and satisfaction with the doctoral experience. There are implications for faculty, mentors, and advisors working with current and former graduate students who may be considering a PhD. The findings have implications for doctoral recruitment, advising, and student services of interest to faculty and administrators across disciplines. It also shows the applicability of self-determination theory in the examination of the doctoral student experience and overall motivation. Findings: Deductive analysis based on self-determination theory (SDT) demonstrates factors related to self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs – autonomy, competence, and relatedness – as relevant to participants’ motivation to pursue a doctoral degree and to the examination of doctoral student initial motivation. Doctoral students are motivated by multiple factors including their interactions with and encouragement received from current and former faculty. Students report experiences related to autonomy, competence, and relatedness that energized them to pursue a doctoral degree and that have positively influenced their doctoral experience thus far. Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty and program administrators may use this data to inform their understanding of the expectations of today’s doctoral students and motivational drivers of prospective students and to tailor support services accordingly. Recommendation for Researchers: This is a preliminary investigation of doctoral student motivation in relation to the basic psychological needs. More research is needed on a larger sample of students to more fully understand the influence of autonomy, competence, and relatedness on doctoral student initial and ongoing motivation. Impact on Society: This research is an important step in bridging faculty and student perceptions of what is important to their initial and ongoing enrollment in a doctoral program. By improving students’ experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, it may be possible to improve the overall doctoral experience leading to completion of the PhD. Future Research: Future research will expand to include doctoral students farther along in their doctoral programs, the administration of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale, and may examine faculty perceptions of the three basic psychological needs.

IntroductionAcademic writing is a core element of a successful graduate program, especially at the doctoral level. Graduate students are expected to write in a scholarly manner for their thesis and scholarly publications. However, in some cases, limited or no specific training on academic writing is provided to them to do this effectively. As a result, many graduate students, especially those having English as an Additional Language (EAL), face significant challenges in scholarly writing. Further, faculty supervisors often feel burdened by reviewing and editing multiple drafts and find it difficult to help and support EAL students in the process of scientific writing. In this study, we explored academic writing challenges faced by EAL doctoral students and faculty supervisors at a research intensive post-secondary university in Canada.Methods and AnalysisWe conducted a sequential explanatory mixed-method study using an online survey and subsequent focus group discussions with EAL doctoral students (n = 114) and faculty supervisors (n = 31). A cross-sectional online survey was designed and disseminated to the potential study participants using internal communications systems of the university. The survey was designed using a digital software called Qualtrics™. Following the survey, four focus group discussions (FGDs) were held, two each with two groups of our participants with an aim to achieve data saturation. The FGD guide was informed by the preliminary findings of the survey data. Quantitative data was analyzed using Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS) and qualitative data was managed and analyzed using NVivo.DiscussionThe study findings suggest that academic writing should be integrated into the formal training of doctoral graduate students from the beginning of the program. Both students and faculty members shared that discipline-specific training is required to ensure success in academic writing, which can be provided in the form of a formal course specifically designed for doctoral students wherein discipline-specific support is provided from faculty supervisors and editing support is provided from English language experts.Ethics and DisseminationThe general research ethics board of the university approved the study (#6024751). The findings are disseminated with relevant stakeholders at the university and beyond using scientific presentations and publications.

ABSTRACTIn this paper we focus on individual coaching carried out by an external coach as a new pedagogical element that can impact doctoral students’ sense of progress in doctoral education. The study used a mixed-methods approach in that we draw on quantitative and qualitative data from the evaluation of a project on coaching doctoral students. We explore how coaching can contribute to the doctoral students’ development of a broad set of personal competences and suggest that coaching could work as a means to engender self-management and improve relational competences. The analysis of the participants’ self-reported gains from coaching show that doctoral students experience coaching as an effective method to support the doctoral study process. This study also provides preliminary empirical evidence that coaching of doctoral students can facilitate the doctoral study process so that the doctoral students experience an enhanced feeling of progress and that they can change their study behaviour in a positive direction. The study discusses the difference between coaching and supervision, for instance power imbalances and contrary to earlier research into coaching of doctoral students this study indicates that coaching can impact the supervisor–student relationship in a positive way.

The main purpose of this proposed study is to understand the relationship between doctoral students' Internet self-efficacy and their affections when seeking academic information on the Internet. A structured questionnaire will be designed and conducted for 300 doctoral students. Participants' demographic information, information seeking behavior, Internet self-efficacy, and emotions will be measured in this questionnaire by using Information-Seeking Behavior Scale (ISBS), Internet Self-efficacy Scale (ISS), and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). For the predicted outcomes, doctoral students' academic information seeking behaviors will be analyzed. Moreover, the interventions among doctoral students' Internet self-efficacy, emotions, and their information seeking behaviors will be analyzed and addressed. In the future, this proposed study will be conducted practically. The expected findings will be proposed for doctoral students so that they can based on the provided information to build up their suitable information seeking styles. Furthermore, the expected findings can also be presented for professionals, scholars, or even doctoral students' academic advisors who mainly do research and seek academic information online to have a better understanding of doctoral students' mental and psychical statuses on conducting academic information seeking activity on the Internet. To sum up, the results will not only reflect doctoral students' information seeking behaviors but also provide helpful suggestions for further researches.

BackgroundDoctoral students report high rates of mental health problems. Universities are required to provide support services to all students, yet doctoral students infrequently access such services. For those doctoral students who do access these services, little is known about their experiences. This research aimed to explore the acceptability of university mental health support services for doctoral students with mental health problems.MethodsThe project accessed qualitative data from a large online survey of UK doctoral student mental health, collected between 2018 and 2019, in which doctoral students were asked about their experiences of university support services. Qualitative data from 586 participants were included. The data were analysed using a deductive–inductive thematic analysis approach. A theoretical model of acceptability was used, which had seven thematic categories: affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness and self‐efficacy.ResultsTen subthemes were identified across the seven higher order themes, reflecting the multidimensional nature of doctoral student experiences of acceptability. Factors including positive interactions with staff and receiving contextually sensitive support were associated with greater acceptability, whilst perceived difficulties relating to confidentiality and accessing help contributed to lower acceptability.ConclusionsPositive and negative perceptions of university support services were identified across various domains of acceptability. This research identified multiple avenues for improving the acceptability of university support services to the vulnerable doctoral student group, such as better advertisement, upskilling of staff and increased utilisation of remote service delivery. Future research should seek to explore perceptions of diverse student groups and to more precisely identify specific attributes of support services that influence perceptions of acceptability, particularly with respect to perceived effectiveness.

Doctoral student attrition is a consistent and ongoing problem, particularly among women and minority students. Attrition results in negative consequences for students, departments and institutions, and the broader academic community. Although efforts to support doctoral students exist, challenges remain. The Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences’ Doctoral Student Summit (DSS) is a unique model of comprehensive professional development aimed at developing doctoral students’ technical and inter/intrapersonal skills across multiple professional domains. The DSS supports students in degree completion, the development of positive academic identities, and the building of strong academic communities. The current case study documents the effectiveness and impact of a unique model of professional development through analyzing quantitative and qualitative survey data from doctoral students in criminology, criminal justice, and related fields. Implications are discussed.

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand how one graduate program shaped doctoral students’ scholarly identities as interdisciplinary scientists. Background: Scholarly identity refers to the ways individuals see themselves as legitimate, contributing members of their academic community. However, much of the research on scholarly identity focuses on students and faculty within traditional, discipline-bound contexts. We therefore know little about how doctoral students develop scholarly identities that are interdisciplinary in nature. By interdisciplinary, we refer broadly to scholarly work that uses methods, concepts, frameworks, or perspectives from two or more academic fields or disciplines, or scholarly work aimed at addressing research problems that spans multiple academic fields or disciplines. Methodology: This qualitative, ethnographic case study focuses on the University of Maryland’s Language Science Center (LSC), which houses a National Science Foundation Research Traineeship (NRT) Program for doctoral students in the interdisciplinary language sciences, which includes fields such as linguistics, hearing and speech, computer science, and neuroscience. The LSC is nationally and internationally known for its interdisciplinary graduate training program and thus provides a platform for understanding the components of graduate training that contribute to students’ scholarly identity development as interdisciplinary scientists. We draw from four years of qualitative data collection, including student interviews, student and faculty focus groups, ethnographic observations, and document analysis. Contribution: Across the public and private sectors, there is a strong push for developing interdisciplinary solutions to society’s problems. However, many colleges and universities are not organized to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration and research. Focusing on the ways one graduate program facilitated interdisciplinary scholarly identity development for doctoral students therefore provides graduate programs with a potential roadmap for navigating the barriers that may block the development of students with interdisciplinary research interests. Findings: We found curricular and co-curricular NRT program activities contributed to students’ scholarly identity development as interdisciplinary scientists by connecting them (or “plugging them in”) to a pre-existing, interdisciplinary network of students and faculty; increasing doctoral student competence in the methods, cultures, and perspectives of other disciplines; encouraging doctoral students to find common ground with scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds; and broadening doctoral students’ views of the potential impact and application of their work. Recommendations for Practitioners: Graduate training programs in the interdisciplinary sciences should think strategically about the kinds of activities that help students develop a scholarly identity and the conditions and contexts in which scholarly identity development might be undermined. We offer multiple examples of the kinds of activities graduate programs can consider using to facilitate scholarly identity development and the underlying mechanisms that make such activities successful. Recommendation for Researchers: Developing a scholarly identity is an important component of doctoral student success and should be considered as a useful potential theory for individuals who study graduate education. Impact on Society: Graduate programs play a critical role in training not only the next generation of faculty, but also the next generation of scientists in government and industry. If more graduate programs can successfully train doctoral students to be interdisciplinary scientists, societal benefits could include more responsive and adaptive solutions to pressing social problems. Future Research: Future researchers should consider how different graduate training elements produce students with different types of interdisciplinary scholarly identities, how the scholarly identity of students trained in interdisciplinary graduate programs continues to evolve as they transition into both academic and non-academic careers, and the strategies and experiences of faculty members who mentor students from outside of their own disciplines.

BackgroundDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)-prepared nurses are expected to exercise leadership in their various roles. Therefore, European nurse scholars developed a cross-national web-based Nursing Leadership and Mentoring Educational (Nurse-Lead) program. PurposeTo evaluate changes in leadership practices, professional and research competencies as well as career development of PhD-prepared nurses and doctoral nursing students after participation in the Nurse-Lead program. MethodsA pre-post-test evaluation was conducted. Surveys addressed leadership, professional and research competencies, and career development. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and paired sample t-tests. Content analysis was used for qualitative data. DiscussionThe 30 participants showed significant improvements in all leadership practices, professional competencies, and most research competencies. Participants reported increased confidence in decision-making, taking on new responsibilities, and becoming more visible within research teams. ConclusionWeb-based, international leadership and mentoring programs are promising tools for the leadership and professional development of PhD-prepared nurses and doctoral nursing students.

BackgroundUnderstanding the experiences of doctoral students regarding courses and comprehensive examinations is crucial to enhance the quality of doctoral programs. Scarce information is available on the experiences of nursing doctoral students on the courses and comprehensive examinations in China. The purpose of this study was to understand the nursing doctoral students’ experiences on courses and comprehensive examinations of the doctoral program at Xiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, and propose improvements.DesignA convergent parallel mixed methods design adhering to EQUATOR guidelines for Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study.MethodsA total of 20 doctoral students were recruited through purposive sampling in September 2022 from the Xiangya School of Nursing, Central South University. They completed the self-designed questionnaire on demographic data, course, and comprehensive examination evaluations and participated in focus groups. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were recorded and transcribed for content analysis.ResultsRegarding course experience, doctoral students preferred in-person lectures (80%) and group discussions (60%) for specialized compulsory courses. They were satisfied with the course novelty (85%), difficulty (75%), and practicality (85%), and half of the students found the credit allocation reasonable. The qualitative findings revealed their preference for appropriate and blended teaching methods, needs for additional interdisciplinary courses, statistics, and inter-school collaborative courses, accessible Nursing Philosophy and Theory courses, and high proportion of compulsory course credits. Regarding comprehensive examination experience, only 20% considered it necessary, and qualitative data revealed that they prefer more distinctive and effective contents; moreover, students were confused about the purpose of comprehensive examinations. The triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data demonstrated relative convergence.ConclusionsThese findings illustrated nursing doctoral students' experiences on courses and comprehensive examinations and provide suggestions on improving the courses and comprehensive examinations in China and possibly in the world. This study contributes to improving the quality of nursing doctoral programs in China and can serve as valuable guidance for nursing doctoral programs with similar educational environment around the world that are undergoing course and comprehensive examination reform.

Aim/Purpose: This study explored changes in writing self-efficacy and writing apprehension among online doctoral students throughout their first dissertation writing course. By examining the facilitators and obstacles to online doctoral student writing success, we concluded that receiving specific, concrete, and iterative feedback is instrumental for the growth of doctoral students’ confidence during the early stages of the dissertation process. Background: Previous scholarship has recognized that the dissertation writing process is a key contributor to attrition rates in doctoral programs. However, there is limited research on how online doctoral students experience writing apprehension and self-efficacy during this crucial stage. Drawing upon self-efficacy theory as a framework, our study sought to fill this gap by investigating changes in these constructs among 53 participants as they composed their first two chapters. Methodology: This convergent mixed methods study employed both quantitative surveys and qualitative reflections collected before and after the completion of a one-term dissertation writing course intervention. We examined participants’ self-perceptions of their mechanics skills, essentials efficacy (overcoming difficulties), relational-reflective efficacy (connecting with others), and relationship building. Contribution: This study contributes to existing research on online doctoral student dissertation writing experiences by revealing the importance of specific, concrete, and iterative feedback in fostering students’ writing confidence. Findings: Our findings revealed small effect sizes in participants’ overall confidence levels related to their academic writing self-efficacy but no statistically significant changes. Nonetheless, qualitative data indicated positive experiences of growth in terms of scholarly proficiency development, which contributes to existing literature gaps. Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty working with online doctoral students who are writing their dissertations should provide specific, concrete, and iterative feedback to support the growth of students’ writing confidence during the early stages of the dissertation process. Recommendation for Researchers: Future researchers on this topic should expand the scope of their focus beyond just the first term or course and conduct longitudinal studies that encompass different phases of dissertation work in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of changes in writing self-efficacy and apprehension among online doctoral students. Impact on Society: By providing specific, concrete, and iterative feedback to doctoral students during the dissertation writing process, faculty can empower them towards disciplinary mastery and expertise, enabling successful completion of the program and equipping them with expert knowledge to make a meaningful impact in their respective fields and industries. Future Research: Future research should expand the scope of the focus on doctoral student writing apprehension, anxiety, and self-efficacy to include other stages of the dissertation research and writing process, perhaps also examining these writing constructs and how they vary given student characteristics.

Mentoring relationships between research supervisors and doctoral students play a key role in doctoral students’ success. Self-determination theory assumes that the quality of these relationships can be defined in terms of fulfillment of students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Studies on how supervisors and students build need-supportive relationships are, however, lacking. Taking a schema-based perspective, this article investigates supervisors’ and doctoral students’ (mis)alignments in schemas on how to fulfill students’ basic needs in their relationship. Qualitative data were obtained from a sample of 18 interviews (nine dyads) to reveal the schema-driven sensemaking of students and their supervisors. Findings show that the idea of schema similarity might be too simple: For each of the three basic needs, tensions arise between students’ and supervisors’ schemas. These need-based schemas in action offer a fresh perspective for understanding why some supervisor-doctoral student relationships are experienced as successful while others are not.