Artigo britânico interessante, extraído de um livro, sobre mal-entendidos e armadilhas no processo de se obter um PhD. Muito também se aplica a toda a pesquisa acadêmica, de forma que é leitura recomendada para todos nós que optamos por este caminho. Alguns extratos:

PhDs are given for a particular form of research activity and if you do not wish to carry out this form of work then you effectively do not want to do a PhD. It is precisely the same distinction as that between hoping to become a millionaire and setting out to make a million pounds. […] You cannot expect with an activity as demanding as doing a PhD that the intrinsic satisfaction (such as the interest of doing the research, the enjoyment of discussing your subject with other like-minded researchers) will be sufficient on its own to carry you through. You must always have a clear eye on the extrinsic satisfactions (your commitment to the whole exercise of doing a PhD, its necessary place in your career progression, and so on); you must want to do it.

[…] the penalties of failure are greater for the student than for the supervisor. The relationship is not one of equality, so the student has to work harder to keep in touch with the supervisor than the other way around.

A thesis in this sense is something that you wish to argue, a position that you wish to maintain (the word ‘thesis’ derives from the Greek for ‘place’) […] Your PhD must have a thesis in this sense. It must argue a position. […] It is not enough for your thesis report to be ‘a short trot with a cultured mind’.