PhD by Publication vs PhD by Research: A guide for qualitative researchers

There often comes a point, usually quite early on, where you realise that “doing a PhD” isn’t quite as singular as it first seemed.

You might have assumed there was one clear path: develop a research project, spend several years immersed in it, and write a thesis. And for many qualitative researchers, that is the path.

But then you come across something else: a PhD by publication.

And the question shifts slightly. Not just “Can I do a PhD?” but “What kind of PhD actually fits the way I want to work?”

If you’re working qualitatively, or considering it, this isn’t just a logistical decision. It’s a conceptual one. It shapes how you think, how you write, and how your research unfolds over time.

So rather than asking which route is “better,” it’s often more useful to ask:

Which route allows you to do your best thinking?

The traditional PhD by research: depth, immersion, and coherence

A PhD by research is still the most common route in the social sciences, and particularly in qualitative research.

At its core, it is an extended process of developing a single, coherent piece of work. You begin with a question - or sometimes just a direction - and over time, you refine, reshape, and deepen it.

For qualitative researchers, this often means:

• spending sustained time with a particular context or group

• developing a close relationship with your data

• allowing your analysis to evolve gradually rather than being fixed from the outset

There is something quite distinctive about this kind of work. It is not just about producing findings. It is about working your way into an understanding.

Your thesis becomes the space where that understanding is built - carefully, iteratively, and often non-linearly. That matters, because qualitative research rarely moves in straight lines.

What this route offers (and where it stretches you)

One of the strengths of the traditional route is the coherence it allows you to build.

You are not just producing pieces of work. You are constructing an argument that develops over time. Your methodology, your theoretical positioning, your analysis, they all have space to connect.

For qualitative PhD students, this is often where confidence begins to grow.

At the same time, this route does ask quite a lot of you.

It requires patience, particularly when your data doesn’t immediately “make sense.” It requires you to tolerate uncertainty, especially in the early stages where everything feels slightly unfinished. It also often involves long periods of working independently, which can feel isolating if you’re not prepared for it.

None of this means it’s the wrong choice. But it does mean it’s worth going in with a clear sense of what the process actually involves.

PhD by publication: a different kind of coherence

A PhD by publication works quite differently.

Rather than developing a single thesis from the ground up, you bring together a body of published work - journal articles, book chapters, sometimes reports - and write a critical commentary that connects them.

On the surface, this can look more efficient. And in some cases, it is. But the intellectual work doesn’t disappear. It shifts.

Instead of building coherence as you go, you are asked to construct it retrospectively.

You are looking across pieces of work that may have been written at different times, for different purposes, and drawing out the thread that connects them. You are making a case - not just that the work exists, but that together, it forms a meaningful contribution to knowledge.

For qualitative researchers, this can be more complex than it first appears because qualitative work often develops through depth rather than accumulation. It is not always easily divided into neat, publishable segments without losing some of that depth along the way.

Where this route tends to fit best

In practice, PhDs by publication are often better suited to researchers who:

• already have a substantial body of published work

• have been working within academia or research for some time

• have developed a clear thematic or conceptual focus across their publications

It can be a strong route if your work already exists in this form.

But it is less commonly a starting point - particularly for qualitative PhD students who are still developing their research identity and approach.

The question of prestige (and why it’s not the right question)

It’s very common to ask whether one route is more “prestigious” than the other.

In reality, both routes require you to demonstrate an original contribution to knowledge. Both involve examination, scrutiny, and defence.

What differs is not the value of the outcome, but the shape of the process.

For qualitative researchers, that process matters because your thinking doesn’t just appear at the end. It develops through the work itself - through time spent with data, through writing, through revisiting and refining your interpretations.

So the more useful question becomes: Which route supports that kind of thinking?

A more grounded way to decide

If you are early in your PhD journey, or considering starting one, most qualitative researchers find that the traditional route gives them the space they need to:

• develop their conceptual foundations

• build confidence in their methodological decisions

• construct an argument that unfolds with their data

A PhD by publication can absolutely be a valid and valuable route.

But it tends to work best when the research is already there.

This isn’t really a decision about efficiency. It’s a decision about how you want to think, work, and develop as a researcher.

For many qualitative PhD students, the traditional route offers something that is difficult to replicate elsewhere: the time and space to stay with a question long enough for something meaningful to emerge.

And that process, while demanding, is often where the real value of the PhD sits.

If you’re still figuring this out

If you’re reading this and thinking, “I’m not completely sure how I’d even begin to approach a PhD like this,” that’s completely normal.

Before choosing a route, it often helps to get clearer on what qualitative research actually involves - how it works in practice, and what it asks of you.

My starter guide “What Does It Mean to Be a Qualitative Researcher?” was designed for exactly that stage.

It’s not a substitute for supervision or formal training, but it will give you a much clearer sense of what this kind of work really looks like - so you can make decisions from a more grounded place.

It’s here when you need it.