Get expert support shaping your interdisciplinary PhD project: make your rationale, methods and contributions clear across disciplines. See our PhD services page.
Interdisciplinary training in PhD programs is increasingly recognised for its potential to enhance research quality, skill versatility, and career readiness, but it also introduces significant challenges in supervision, assessment, and methodological integration.
Outcomes of interdisciplinary training
Interdisciplinary doctoral programs foster skill versatility, adaptability, and broader career opportunities. Students report increased capacity for collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving, as well as exposure to diverse perspectives and research methods.
These benefits are linked to improved readiness for complex, real-world challenges and long-term advantages in research funding and academic networks, even if short-term publication impact may lag behind more specialised peers (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Carr, Loucks and Blöschl, 2018; Lyall and Meagher, 2012; Purvis et al., 2023; Sun et al., 2021; Fulkerson et al., 2025).
Interdisciplinary environments also promote teamwork, flexibility, and reflexivity, preparing graduates for both academic and non-academic careers (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Purvis et al., 2023; Fulkerson et al., 2025).
Challenges in supervision
Supervising interdisciplinary PhD students is complex due to differing disciplinary norms, terminologies, and expectations. Cross-disciplinary co-supervision can lead to conflicting theoretical orientations and approaches, complicating the research process and student support. Students may feel isolated or struggle to balance interdisciplinary outputs with the standards of their home departments. Effective supervision requires explicit training in both research integrity and interpersonal skills, as well as institutional support for collaborative environments (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Haven et al., 2022; Lyall and Meagher, 2012; Purvis et al., 2023; Kaur, Kumar and Noman, 2021; Kluger and Bartzke, 2020).
Assessment difficulties
Assessment of interdisciplinary research quality is hindered by a lack of clear definitions and standardised metrics. Most programs still rely on monodisciplinary assessments, which may not capture interdisciplinary learning or integration. There is often a misalignment between curriculum aims and assessment practices, leading to underestimation of program impact and insufficient feedback for improvement (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Gao et al., 2020; Kovacic and Marcos-Valls, 2023).
Methodological Integration
Integrating methodologies across disciplines is challenging, especially for students still mastering their primary field. Successful integration requires intentional curriculum design, explicit articulation of cross-disciplinary connections, and practical frameworks for collaboration. Without these, interdisciplinary projects risk superficial integration or misunderstandings that can impede research progress (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Kluger and Bartzke, 2020; Rossini and Porter, 1979; Bazeley, 2024; Guetterman, Molina-Azorín and Fetters, 2020).
Key outcomes and challenges in interdisciplinary PhD training
| Benefit/Challenge | Description | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| Skill versatility & adaptability | Broader skillset, career readiness, and research adaptability | (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Carr, Loucks and Blöschl, 2018; Lyall and Meagher, 2012; Purvis et al., 2023) |
| Supervision complexity | Conflicting norms, co-supervision challenges, need for explicit training | (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Haven et al., 2022; Lyall and Meagher, 2012; Purvis et al., 2023) |
| Assessment misalignment | Lack of interdisciplinary metrics, reliance on monodisciplinary assessment | (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Gao et al., 2020; Kovacic and Marcos-Valls, 2023) |
| Methodological integration | Difficulties in integrating diverse methods, need for intentional curriculum design | (Rana, Aitken and Chimoriya, 2025; Kluger and Bartzke, 2020; Rossini and Porter, 1979; Bazeley, 2024) |
| Long-term research impact | Greater long-term funding and collaboration, despite short-term publication disadvantages | (Sun et al., 2021; Fulkerson et al., 2025) |
Figure 1: Summary of main outcomes and challenges in interdisciplinary PhD training.
Conclusion
Interdisciplinary PhD training enhances research quality and career prospects but requires targeted support in supervision, assessment, and methodological integration to fully realise its benefits and address persistent challenges.
References
- Rana, K., Aitken, S., & Chimoriya, R., 2025. Interdisciplinary Approaches in Doctoral and Higher Research Education: An Integrative Scoping Review. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010072
- Carr, G., Loucks, D., & Blöschl, G., 2018. Gaining insight into interdisciplinary research and education programmes: A framework for evaluation. Research Policy, 47, pp. 35-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.010
- Haven, T., Bouter, L., Mennen, L., & Tijdink, J., 2022. Superb supervision: A pilot study on training supervisors to convey responsible research practices onto their PhD candidates. Accountability in Research, 30, pp. 574 – 591. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2022.2071153
- Lyall, C., & Meagher, L., 2012. A Masterclass in interdisciplinarity: Research into practice in training the next generation of interdisciplinary researchers. Futures, 44, pp. 608-617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2012.03.011
- Purvis, B., Keding, H., Lewis, A., & Northall, P., 2023. Critical reflections of postgraduate researchers on a collaborative interdisciplinary research project. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01494-w
- Kovacic, Z., & Marcos-Valls, A., 2023. Institutionalising interdisciplinarity in PhD training: challenging and redefining expertise in problem-oriented research. Environmental Education Research, 29, pp. 473 – 488. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2174252
- Gao, X., Li, P., Shen, J., & Sun, H., 2020. Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, pp. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00225-4
- Fulkerson, J., Panoskaltsis-Mortari, A., Maronde, M., Rohde, S., & Merrifield, A., 2025. 175 The importance of interdisciplinary synergy in TL1 trainees – the University of Minnesota (UMN) model. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 9, pp. 53 – 53. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.831
- Rossini, F., & Porter, A., 1979. Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research. Research Policy, 8, pp. 70-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(79)90030-1
- Bazeley, P., 2024. Conceptualizing Integration in Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 18, pp. 225 – 234. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898241253636
- Sun, Y., Livan, G., , A., & Latora, V., 2021. Interdisciplinary researchers attain better long-term funding performance. Communications Physics, 4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-021-00769-z
- Guetterman, T., Molina-Azorín, J., & Fetters, M., 2020. Virtual Special Issue on “Integration in Mixed Methods Research”. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14, pp. 430 – 435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820956401
- Kaur, A., Kumar, V., & Noman, M., 2021. Partnering with doctoral students in research supervision: opportunities and challenges. Higher Education Research & Development, 41, pp. 789 – 803. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1871326
- Kluger, M., & Bartzke, G., 2020. A practical guideline how to tackle interdisciplinarity—A synthesis from a post-graduate group project. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00540-9