I did a mock viva for someone recently, and I shared lots of my views on a successful viva based ion examining around 50 PhDs over the years, so I thought Iโd share them here. This relates to the UK viva system, which is usually an open-ended defence, with two examiners discussing the thesis with the candidate. Things vary quite differently elsewhere. These are obviously just my views, and Iโm generally a โniceโ examiner, I want people to enjoy the experience and to pass. Most examiners Iโve met are the same, but one does hear the occasional horror story. So hereโs my top ten tips:
- Have a nice opening summary โ itโs common to start with a friendly, settling in question along the lines of โcan you summarise your main contributions?โ or โwhy were you interested in doing this research?โ. See my point below about answering the actual question, but what these are inviting you to do is to give a brief summary of your work. Sometimes a presentation will be allowed or encouraged, itโs worth checking. Note here that it is a brief summary. The examiners are likely to work through the thesis chapter by chapter, so you do not need to give the whole thesis in a one hour monologue. Five or ten minutes here, just as an opening.
- Donโt over-prepare answers โ you may well have a mock viva with your examiners beforehand and they will identify some questions that may be answered. Itโs important to remember though that there is no set list of questions to ask from the examiners. They are likely to ask you things you hadnโt predicted, and not ask you things you thought would definitely come up. So while itโs good to have some ideas as to what you will answer if queried about your methodology choice, say, there is a danger of preparing something akin to a script. You can end up being thrown when different questions are asked, or not answering the actual question. You know your thesis better than anyone, so trust in your ability to be able to respond in the moment.
- Answer the question being asked โ sometimes candidates will give a long, detailed answer to something which wasnโt really necessary. This may be because they were expecting a certain question, as mentioned above, or they think the examiner is asking something different. So, listen carefully, and answer what is actually being asked, and if youโre not sureโฆ
- Ask for clarification if needed โ this is obvious but more important than you might think. Sometimes the examiner might be asking a fairly straightforward question to which they just want a yes or no answer, and you think theyโre after something else and after a 30 minute defence of your methodology they say โso thatโs a yes?โ. Ask if youโve understood the question if youโre not sure.
- Donโt be too defensive โ as I said, most examiners are sympathetic, but they are meant to test the robustness of your research. So theyโre going to pick at bits. What you donโt want to do is end up in an argument, so firstly ask for clarification if you think youโre being unfairly criticised (Iโve certainly seen vivas where there has just been a misunderstanding), and donโt get too defensive. Sometimes itโs best to just say, โyes, I see your point, Iโll take that on boardโ
- Be honest(ish) โ I would advise against trying to trick examiners, or hide flaws, theyโre usually good at digging these out, and donโt like to feel as though you were trying to con them. For example, hiding small data samples behind percentages. So be honest โ eg itโs ok to say โI would have explored this more fully, but I didnโt have timeโ, or โmy methodology was partly influenced by the practical access I had to dataโ. The (ish) part I added there relates to my next tip, some people feel like itโs an interrogation and they crack โ you donโt need to reveal to the examiners that in reality you really didnโt understand the conceptual theory youโre using and you were crying into your books every night.
- Donโt talk yourself out of a pass โ some candidates seem determined to talk themselves down maybe itโs the imposter syndrome kicking in. Most examiners will accommodate this to a degree, but if every question is responded to with a comment along the lines of โI just made it upโ, โthat bit isnโt very goodโ, etc, you can get to a stage where you have examiners doubting their judgement about the work.
- Expect some revisions โ itโs rare, but Iโve seen some people take the idea of being asked to do revisions as a personal affront. A pass without revisions is very rare. So expect some, and also be very clear exactly what is required (they should provide you with a list of required changes). Donโt do more than they suggest, and donโt argue about the ones youโre asked to do (unless really unreasonable).
- Itโs an exam to be passed โ if you view the viva like a car driving test that is to be passed, rather than some existential rite of passage, itโs probably going to be a lot easier. Do what you need to do, get the pass, move on. In a yearโs time no-one will care (probably including you) that you had to add in an extra page on the examinerโs pet topic even though you didnโt feel it was necessary. Be pragmatic about the whole thing.
- Enjoy it โ I always say this to my students. I know it can be stressful, but by the time you get to the viva, assuming youโve done the work, listened to your supervisors and got a decent thesis, then it can be an experience to be enjoyed. Youโve been doing this research for three or more years. You have bored friends and family about it, no-one knows this subject in more detail than you. And now you get to have a long, detailed conversation with two people who really want to hear about it, you can go into all the detail you want without friendsโ eyes glazing over. Enjoy that moment.
Just my experience of course, mileage may vary. If you have a doctoral viva coming up, good luck!