The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Examining the Doctorate: Institutional policy and the PhD examination process in Britain
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Further, the hallmark of PhD programmes continues to be the production of a piece of research (i.e., the thesis), which is examined by experts in the field and must meet particular institutional and disciplinary requirements (Jackson & Tinkler, 2001;Tinkler & Jackson, 2000).”
From Assessing the person or the project? How disciplinary ontological and epistemological assumptions shape doctoral admissions in elite UK institutions (2026) · cites this paper as Tinkler & Jackson, 2000
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- BECHER T., 1989, Academic Tribes and Territories
- BOOTH A., 1996, Higher Education Review, 28, 48
- 10.1111/1468-2273.00130 · DOI
- BRITISH PSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY and THE UNIVERSITIEs' AND COLLEGEs' STAFF DEVELOPMENT UNIT, 1995, Guidelines for Assessment of the PhD in Psychology and Related Disciplines
- BURGESS R.G., 1997, Beyond the First Degree: graduate education, lifelong learning and careers
- BURNHAM P., 1994, Journal of Graduate Education, 1, 30
- 10.1353/rhe.1987.0024 · DOI
- COLLINSON J., 1995, Higher Education Review, 27, 56
- DAVIES S., 1994, Changing the Subject: women in higher education
- 10.1080/0954025890010105 · DOI
- 10.1080/0142569970180404 · DOI
- 10.1080/03075079712331380926 · DOI
- DELAMONT S., 1997, Supervising the PhD. A Guide to Success
- 10.1080/1356215980030203 · DOI
- HIGHER EDUCATION STATISTICS AGENCY, 1998, Student Records 1996/97
- 10.1080/03075079112331382875 · DOI
- 10.1080/0305764940240211 · DOI
- 10.1080/0305498950210205 · DOI
- 10.1080/13596749700200004 · DOI
Cited by
Lovitts *, B. E. (2005) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070500043093 · Cited by 407
Inouye, K., Robson, J., Anaiz, P. R., Baker, S., & Ilie, S. (2026) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-025-01438-8 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Tinkler, P., & Jackson, C.
- Venue
- Studies in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2000-06
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 167-180
- ISSN
- 0307-5079
- 1470-174X
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Examining the Doctorate: Institutional policy and the PhD examination process in Britain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/713696136
- The paper
- Tinkler, P., & Jackson, C. (2000). Examining the Doctorate: Institutional policy and the PhD examination process in Britain. Studies in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696136
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
