Kleio Pethainou

I wanted the first post to be about PhD-ing and not about my research. I intend to share my thoughts on the general PhD experience and how it is for me, and it is the first thing that I will talk about because it is the most important thing that I learned in my first two years. It helped with stress management, with networking and with my self-confidence at those early stages when I felt that I should know what I am doing, and I knew I didn’t.

The statement was made during a seminar on effective presentations, to which I will return later. These were the presenter’s words of wisdom:

You do not have to know everything when you start your PhD.

If you did know, then you would have your PhD already. You are only starting, so all you have is probably a vague idea of what you want to prove, research, control etc. A vague idea is fine for beginners. Some students enter their PhD thinking that they should already have all the answers, and that a PhD is just about writing them down to a long, coherent text. This is not the case, not even when you do have some of the answers. You will never have them all, so we will not go there.

My PhD most of the time feels like detective work, or at least that’s how I think about it. You have a suspicion, you search for evidence, you confirm or not your suspicion, you match the evidence and then you have results that you can present and support. I understand this is not exactly how some disciplines describe their PhD, but this is how mine feels like.

Similarly to detectives, therefore, at first you don’t know anything but you have suspicions: that’s your research idea. Then you research, you find evidence, data, whatever you need to reach a conclusion and test your hypothesis. It is customary that detectives do not release any statements during that phase, and neither should you.

Your research will take time and you will very likely not be able to have a discussion backed by data in the first months of your studies. People will ask you and it is absolutely fine if you just answer broadly, or if you point out to them that you are actually researching it now so you don’t have anything conclusive. They will understand because they have been there, and hopefully they will talk with you about the ways you approach your research on this topic. This is where good advice comes from, so make sure to pay attention.

You obviously do not publish something that is not supported by data, although I doubt that you will have anything to publish this early in your research – well done if you do, run it by your supervisor and go ahead if they approve! Even in casual discussion, though, with other academics either in your department or in conferences and other gatherings, it is fine if you do not have concrete answers yet.

This brings me to the second revelation that came from the same effective presentations seminar.

You do not have to remember everything at all times.

This is particularly relevant to presentations and conference Q&As, where it is possible that you will be asked for things that you do not have on the top of your head. Don’t try to pretend that you remember, don’t try to fool them that you know when you do not. Thank them for the question, and if you do not know the answer, just thank them again for pointing out a question that you should add to your research. It is reasonable that you cannot think of everything and this is partly why we participate in conferences and present our work: for feedback and ideas. Treat it like brainstorming and don’t panic.

If you know the answer but you cannot remember where you found it, say so. It is good if you can remember every single thing that you read, but most of us don’t remember everything at all times, considering the amount of reading included in humanities PhDs. In this case, it is OK to refer the asking person to your notes or bibliography and ask them to follow it up with you afterwards, in person or via email. This is also how you network, so double bonus there.

Now having said that, this is not an excuse for going to conferences and presentations unprepared, or for making official claims that are not founded in research; but this is a topic for another time.

For me the admission that I do not have to know or remember everything at all times was liberating. It significantly reduced my stress when meeting with other academics, all of whom were higher ranking than me. It also helps me manage my stress levels when I am presenting in conferences, and all help is needed on that front.

I am quite sure that other people will have similar experiences, things that they consider valuable lessons that helped them through their PhD. If you do, please share them in the comments, I look forward to talking about it!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License