I have recently declined a PhD at a particular Uni and consequently the supervisor offered me the same funding to do a one-year MPhil instead.

Of course, all or most PhDs start off as MPhils with very few unis offering standalone MPhils as normal (I think Oxbridge might be the only two?)

I intend to apply to other PhDs starting next September but, I was wondering, would doing the MPhil in the meantime look bad? There is of course a degree of stigma around it as a 'failed PhD'.

My field is biochem / molecular biology.

Does anyone have any knowledge or experience of people doing standalone MPhils?

I have just completed and MSc in the same discipline at the uni which has offered me the MPhil.

Why did you turn down the PhD offer?
Was it because the funding was very little, or you are just not interested in doing a PhD?

Can you negotiate with your supervisor instead of an MPhil position to hire you as a research assistant for a year? In this way, it will appear as research experience (and not like a "stigma") in your CV.

Personally, I wouldn't do an MPhil if I had an MSc, because I don't see the point, not because I care what other people would think.

I do want to do a PhD. I turned it down because of the supervisor - he is a great guy and well regarded but not particularly specialised in aspects of my field which I believe are important.

I did try that negotiation but it failed. I agree it would have been the perfect solution.

It's not so much that I care what other people think because of self-concious reasons, more that it might be a hindrance when applying for other things. For example, I fear that if I start this MPhil it will be hard to get on another PhD. Not least because my supervisor knows everybody and I fear (perhaps irrarionally) that they wouldn't want to nick his student.

Am I being paranoid?

In laboratory biomedical sciences, Masters degrees (rightly or wrongly) used to be considered a little superfluous - one only did one if you didn't get a 2.1/1st, or your BSc was broad based and you wanted to specialise or switch to a different speciality.

That perception may have changed in recent years, particularly as PhD places have become more competitive. Hopefully someone with more up to date knowledge of this can comment?

There may be a stigma, but I think there are other things to consider. First, what would you gain by doing the MPhil? You will still have to start from scratch with a PhD, unless the MPhil supervisor is going to provide further funding in the future. Secondly, what could you be doing instead? A research assistant job (elsewhere) would give you a similar experience and better pay. On the other hand, would being in the lab of a well connected academic help you to network?

The stigma aspect can be explained away in personal statements/CVs by making it clear that the MPhil was a standalone affair. But it is the other questions that would put me off it more.