Abstract

This paper uses abstracts of completed PhDs to generate evidence about what the ‘PhD in design’ is. It considers its history to identify the epistemological assumptions that underlie it. To achieve this, the paper does two things. It starts by reviewing criteria that have been applied to doctoral studies, drawing conclusions about what these criteria indicate about the location of the PhD in Design relative to other areas of study in various parts of the world. It suggests that this disciplinary location to some extent determines what a ‘PhD in Design’ is taken to be because it brings with it assumptions about appropriate ways of going about research that come from closely related areas of study. The paper maps the history of design doctorates in the UK, then reviews PhD abstracts in the ADIT database of UK theses a resource compiled as a tool to help doctoral students and supervisors identify previous relevant work in their field. The review indicates the ways in which these assumptions have played out in the UK, discussing some cases in detail. This discussion has practical use. To properly frame their enquiry, doctoral students need to address previous work – their ‘field of study’. This is where they and their examiners will look for criteria for evaluating their results. Although it might be convenient to identify a unified, homogenous set of characteristics of Design PhDs, this paper proposes that the current and historical reality indicates instead that a particular PhD study always takes its particular place in a rather complex landscape defined by institutional groupings of subjects and the epistemological custom and practice that accompanies them. Each PhD claims its own place in this territory – there is no single ‘PhD in Design’.