The university sector is an evolving entity, moving from “pure” scholarly endeavours as produced by academics in their “ivory towers” to research that has impact and influence in communities beyond academia [1]. Despite this shift in focus, and an awareness that research must have some function beyond the confines of academic journals and publishing houses [2], there remains an emphasis on the true mark of an academic, and they being judged, at least in part, by their publication record. Indeed, research exercises, including the Research Excellence Framework (REF) [3] used in the UK, rank publications on a scale from 0–4 [4]. Those rated at level 4 are deemed to be “world leading”, those at level 3 to be “internationally excellent” and all the way to level 1 which is deemed to be “nationally recognised”. One of the reasons for the significance of this ranking system is the submission of these outputs to the exercise, with only those rated at levels 3 and 4 attracting funding for their institutions [5]. Research-active academics know how this system operates, how intrinsic it is to successful funding bids, to promotions, to their standing in the academic community and so on [6]. As such, academia can be identified as being powerfully underscored by the pressing need for continuous publication in leading and high-impact journals [7]. The consequence being that those academics contracted in research and teaching live according to the dictum “publish or perish” [8].

Doctoral students embody numerous aims and objectives for completing their studies. Evidently, not all of them wish to pursue a career in academia [9], but the process of undertaking study which is designed to establish original research [10] which contributes to the existing body of knowledge [11] lends itself to a system whereby these findings will be disseminated to as broad an audience as possible. In particular, those doctoral students who do intend to pursue a career in academia will find themselves very quickly drawn into the publish or perish environment, especially if they seek advancement in this sector [12]. Indeed, many such students experience the pressure of having to produce high-quality impactful research even before they submit their thesis for examination [13,14].

The focus of this entry is to explore the role of doctoral-student supervisors in providing the requisite support and assistance [15] to help develop doctoral students into academics that are producing, presenting and publishing work of a standard which is respected in academia [16]. The entry presents the contemporary academia [17], considering the process of doctoral training which has shifted in recent years from one which emphasises individual endeavour, to one of co-participation and shared responsibility between the student and the supervisory team [18]. In so doing, it recognises the pivotal role played by supervisors in shaping doctoral students’ research trajectories. They influence their publication strategies and outcomes. Supervisors can also play a pivotal role in facilitating the transference of tacit knowledge of academia, its unspoken and unwritten rules, its norms and its rituals, in respect of publishing to their doctoral students [19]. Such explicit academic “know-how” is invaluable in helping the doctoral student to develop into a fully fledged publishing academic [20].

The entry first explores the “publish or perish” phenomenon, its origins and implications for academia, particularly in doctoral education. Further, the benefits and potential negative effects this may have for doctoral students are identified.

The entry continues with an exploration of the culture of publishing and the broader systemic changes that are required in higher education to alleviate the pressures of the publish or perish culture. This includes the role of the doctoral supervisor and strategies that supervisors can adopt to better support their doctoral students. These include fostering a culture of early and regular publication, integrating the students into their academic networks, providing critical feedback on writing and presentation skills, and creating an environment conducive to resilience for coping with the potential for rejection in the academic-publishing sphere.

By focusing on the role of supervisors in supporting doctoral students to disseminate their research, the entry provides valuable insights into the literature and associated practical strategies that can be adopted to promote a more nurturing and supportive academic-publishing culture. Thus, a holistic understanding of the supervisor’s role, not just as gatekeepers, but as facilitators of knowledge dissemination in the realm of doctoral education is presented.

This entry is important to the existing scholarship as it focuses specifically on how the publish or perish culture impacts on, and guides, the supervision strategy for doctoral students. Much of the existing literature considers the phenomenon’s generalities or applies it to more established researchers. Yet, a growing literature is based on the phenomenon’s impact on doctoral students who, by their nature, are at a crucial and vulnerable stage in their academic career. This includes not just the doctoral students’ understanding of the concept of publish or perish in academia, but, and perhaps more importantly, the role of the supervisor in helping students navigate this culture.