Candidates and examiners experiencing the PhD defence – An international comparison

In the context of internationalised doctoral education, the oral defence remains an under-researched academic practice. This article presents a comparative case study of two doctoral defences – one in Portugal and one in China – drawing on semi-structured interviews, document analysis and direct observation. It examines how the purpose of the defence is interpreted by participants and institutional regulations, and how interpersonal relationships influence the selection of examining committee members. The findings reveal a discrepancy between formal expectations and participants’ perceptions: ‘unknown’ examiners tend to emphasise assessment and judgement, while ‘known’ examiners highlight formative and ceremonial functions. Supervisors’ influence over examiner selection shapes both the conduct of the defence and the candidate’s experience. These dynamics raise important questions about transparency in doctoral assessment. Universities should consider how committee composition affects the rigour of the defence, and whether revisions to regulatory frameworks are warranted.