Mapping Doctoral Education and Supervision Research (2014-2024): Insights, Trends, and Trajectories

Aim/Purpose: The conventional model of doctoral education, centered on conducting original research within an apprentice-supervisor framework, has evolved progressively toward alternative models, including shorter duration, the incorporation of a teaching component, a collaborative approach, and an emphasis on practice-based problem-solving. Using bibliometric methodologies, this paper aims to examine the intellectual landscape of doctoral education and supervision research over the past decade by identifying core literature, influential works, and key research trends, thereby supporting knowledge growth, innovation, and informed decision-making. Background: Doctoral education and its related supervision have undergone multi-dimensional transformations over the past two decades, leading to increased scholarly interest and an expanding body of literature. Despite this growth, we still know little about the intellectual structure of research within the field. Furthermore, hitherto few bibliometric and meta-analytic reviews have been conducted, leaving the conceptual landscape of doctoral education and supervision research under-mapped and difficult to navigate. Methodology: The study employs bibliometric methodologies, specifically citation and co-citation analyses, as well as bibliographic coupling, to rigorously and objectively map the intellectual structure of doctoral education and supervision research. These methods provide quantitative insights into relationships between documents, authors, and journals, facilitating the identification of research clusters and networks. Contribution: Drawing on a corpus of over 2,000 journal articles, the study analyses and maps the intellectual structure of the field, spotlighting influential researchers, institutions, and networks. The study identifies the areas where assimilation has taken place as a guide for future research. Further value is derived by identifying areas where there has been limited assimilation, and conclusions are drawn as to why such limited assimilation has occurred. Logical conclusions are then drawn regarding where future assimilation within doctoral education and supervision is needed, and how the field can make distinctive contributions to this literature. These contributions point to more effective collaboration, policymaking, and funding decisions within doctoral education and supervision research. Findings: The interdisciplinary nature of doctoral education and supervision is evidenced by the distribution of journal articles, which suggest a broad range of research interests, with a significant concentration in the social sciences. The findings have implications for various stakeholders, including doctoral students, educators, and policymakers, who seek insights into past research and contribute to an understanding of applying bibliometric review methodologies to capture insights into the intellectual structure of research fields. The study identifies a rapidly growing body of literature, reflecting an increasing interest in research on doctoral education and supervision. Citation and co-citation analyses reveal key academic communities and emerging trends within doctoral education and supervision research. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper represents a call to action, recommending that researchers continue to engage with rigorous bibliometric review methodologies to deepen their understanding of the field of doctoral education and supervision, moving beyond intellectual structure to intellectual content. Impact on Society: The study enhances institutional decision-making in doctoral education and supervision, supporting the development of effective teaching and research environments. Mapping intellectual communities fosters collaboration and knowledge sharing, ultimately benefiting doctoral students, educators, and policymakers. Future Research: While bibliometric analysis provides a broad overview, systematic reviews and meta-analyses could explore other diverse perspectives and methodologies, contributing to the intellectual development of the field. Despite the interdisciplinary nature of doctoral education, publications are predominantly found in the social sciences, which contrasts with the global dominance of STEM doctoral programs. Expanding research beyond social sciences is essential, as supervision practices vary across disciplines, with different approaches, actors, and dynamics shaping doctoral training. Recognizing these differences reinforces the need for tailored approaches – one size does not fit all.