Hi everyone,

I'm not sure that there's any magic solution to this problem, but thought I'd ask the wider community anyway.

I've had a pretty rough time during my PhD. My supervisors are known for being difficult to work with, and the topic of my PhD is in an area outside of their expertise (they also happen to be highly critical of the field in general). I've been slogging through for 5 years now (with a 1 year break), and should be close to finishing. However, they have a habit of suddenly calling for entire re-writes of chapters (back to the most basic thing of changing the hypotheses and aims), and it's very hard to make any progress.

In the past I have backed down and gone with what they say (though this doesn't seem to help, they still end up saying it's boring, unpublishable, or plain wrong). However, I made a new contact in my field who is highly respected and wants to co-author with me. Together we've written a manuscript as my first chapter. However, supervisors have suddenly decided they don't like it, and again have called for a huge re-write, change of methods, analyses, focus.

That could be doable, but I feel strongly that the methods they suggest are wrong, and borne from misunderstanding as it's outside of their field. Co-author agrees, but I haven't told them that (they dislike the idea of me having any outside help). Not only that, but I feel the paper they want me to write is misleading and almost morally wrong, as it doesn't include my later work which changes the conclusions and implications.

I'm trying to defend my work and argue my point (respectfully), but am getting repeatedly shut down. Has anyone had a similar problem? I doubt I can change supervisors this late in the game (?) Would you publish a paper you feel is wrong and misleading, or keep trying to argue your point?

Can anyone help panny?

Supervisors are supposed to make sure that your work is of the highest standards. You may disagree with your supervisor now, but it is likely that you will change your mind in the future (talking from personal experience). However, there is one thing I would never do even if they paid me): author a paper I don't agree with. So, please if you don't feel like it, do not put yourself in such a position. Wait. Something else will turn up instead. Good things come to those who wait, and this is certainly not your only opportunity to get published.

Thanks marasp, I appreciate the advice. I understand where you're coming from re: disagreeing with your supervisors, and with the work in my other chapters I'm always happy to go with their advice as it's within their field, and they are the experts. Unfortunately this one is not in their field, and I'm certain their criticisms are coming from misunderstanding (perhaps my fault for not explaining it well enough). Fingers crossed I'll be successful in convincing them this work is sound as it is, as I'm definitely not writing the paper they want me to write (it honestly would be a very misleading paper if I did). It's good to know I'm not the only one who wouldn't write something I'm not happy with (others have advised me just to write whatever the supervisors want in order to get my PhD). Thanks again for your help and all the best :)