Do viva questions really differ by discipline?

The underlying tests do not — every viva probes your contribution, methods, limitations, and whether you know your own thesis. What differs is emphasis and vocabulary. Sciences press hardest on design, statistics, and reproducibility; humanities on theoretical framing and sources; social sciences sit between; professional doctorates add the bridge from evidence to practice. Read your field's questions, but prepare the cross-cutting ones too.

What discipline gets the hardest methodology questions?

There is no single answer — every field has rigorous methodology questions, just aimed at different things. Quantitative scientists face statistics, power, and confounds; qualitative researchers face sampling logic, coding, and reflexivity; humanities scholars face the justification of their theoretical approach and source selection. The hardest methodology question is always the one about a choice you made without a clear reason, whatever your field.

I work across disciplines — which questions should I prepare?

Prepare for both fields and, especially, for the integration question: why combining the approaches was worth it, and how you handled the different standards of evidence each one brings. Interdisciplinary candidates are most often challenged at the seams — where one field's method meets another's — so rehearse defending those joins explicitly.

Where do I find the questions for my specific field?

Use the discipline links in this guide: Computer Science, Engineering, Psychology, Sociology, Nursing, and Education each have a dedicated question set. Pair your field's page with the Methodology and Defending your contribution guides, which apply to every discipline.

Complete guide

Viva Questions by Discipline: How Examiners Differ by Field

Every viva tests the same four things — your contribution, your methods, your awareness of limitations, and whether you know your own thesis. What changes by discipline is where the examiners push hardest: a scientist gets grilled on statistical power and reproducibility, a humanities candidate on theoretical framing and positionality, a professional-doctorate candidate on the link between evidence and practice. This guide maps those differences and links to the question sets for each field.

Last updated June 13, 2026

What every discipline tests

Before the differences, the constant. Whatever your field, an examiner is checking four things: that the work is original and you can say precisely how; that the methods were appropriate and you can justify the choices you made; that you understand the limits of what you found; and that the thesis is genuinely yours — that you can think on your feet about it, not just recite it. Disciplines weight these differently, but none of them skip any.

So the field-specific question sets below are not separate exams. They are the same four tests, asked in the vocabulary and against the standards of evidence your field uses. Read your discipline's page, but read the core questions too — most candidates are caught out by a cross-cutting question, not a field-specific one.

Sciences, engineering, and computing

In the experimental and quantitative sciences, the pressure lands on design and reliability. Examiners want to know whether the result would survive being run again. Expect questions about sample size and statistical power, the choice of test, controls and confounds, instrument calibration, and what would falsify your claim. In computing and engineering, add reproducibility, baselines and ablations, the validity of your evaluation, and whether the system actually does what the contribution claims.

Why this design, this sample, this statistical test — and what you ruled out.
How you handled threats to validity, confounds, and reproducibility.
Engineering and CS: your baselines, evaluation metrics, and whether the result generalises beyond your test set.
What result would have falsified your hypothesis — and what you would do if a reviewer could not reproduce your finding.

Humanities

Humanities vivas are about argument, sources, and framing rather than samples and statistics. The examiner wants to know why this theoretical lens and not another, how you handled the archive or corpus, where your reading sits against the existing scholarship, and what is genuinely new in your interpretation. The 'methodology' question is still there — it is just a question about your approach to texts, evidence, and theory, and about the choices you made in selecting and reading your material.

Why this theoretical framework, and what a different lens would have shown.
How you selected and handled your sources, archive, or corpus.
Where your argument sits against the key scholarship — and who would disagree with you, and why.
What is original in your reading, stated in one sentence.

Humanities candidates are often surprised by how much the viva turns on defending the boundaries of the project — why you included this and excluded that. Have a clear, unapologetic answer for your scope.

Professional doctorates (EdD, DNP, DBA, and clinical fields)

Professional and clinical doctorates add a layer the academic PhD does not always emphasise: the bridge from evidence to practice. Examiners ask how your findings change what a practitioner should do, how you handled the ethics and governance of researching your own field or workplace, and how you managed the dual role of insider and researcher. Rigour still matters, but it is rigour in service of a defensible practice claim.

What a practitioner should do differently because of your work — concretely.
How you handled insider research, consent, and the governance of your setting.
Where the evidence is strong enough to recommend a change in practice, and where it is not.

How to use these by discipline

Pick your field's page for the specific questions and the standards your examiners apply. Then read the two cross-cutting guides every candidate needs: how examiners decide what to ask, and how to defend your contribution. The fastest way to find your own gaps is to be asked these questions out loud under a little pressure — by your supervisor, a labmate, or a mock committee — rather than rehearsing answers in your head.

MockDefense runs that rehearsal against a rotating committee — a Chair, a Methodologist who goes after your design, and an Outside Examiner who challenges your contribution — from a short summary of your work. The first focused drill is free, with no card. It will not replace your field's specific standards, but it will surface the questions you cannot yet answer cleanly, in any discipline.

Frequently asked questions

Do viva questions really differ by discipline?: The underlying tests do not — every viva probes your contribution, methods, limitations, and whether you know your own thesis. What differs is emphasis and vocabulary. Sciences press hardest on design, statistics, and reproducibility; humanities on theoretical framing and sources; social sciences sit between; professional doctorates add the bridge from evidence to practice. Read your field's questions, but prepare the cross-cutting ones too.
What discipline gets the hardest methodology questions?: There is no single answer — every field has rigorous methodology questions, just aimed at different things. Quantitative scientists face statistics, power, and confounds; qualitative researchers face sampling logic, coding, and reflexivity; humanities scholars face the justification of their theoretical approach and source selection. The hardest methodology question is always the one about a choice you made without a clear reason, whatever your field.
I work across disciplines — which questions should I prepare?: Prepare for both fields and, especially, for the integration question: why combining the approaches was worth it, and how you handled the different standards of evidence each one brings. Interdisciplinary candidates are most often challenged at the seams — where one field's method meets another's — so rehearse defending those joins explicitly.
Where do I find the questions for my specific field?: Use the discipline links in this guide: Computer Science, Engineering, Psychology, Sociology, Nursing, and Education each have a dedicated question set. Pair your field's page with the Methodology and Defending your contribution guides, which apply to every discipline.

The MockDefense Committee

Doctoral defense preparation, MockDefense

MockDefense builds AI examiners that rehearse the questions a real doctoral committee asks — on methodology, contribution, and the gaps you haven't patched yet. Our guides are written from that examiner's-eye view of what defenses actually test.

Keep preparing

Practise your field's questions out loud

Run a free focused drill against a committee that pushes on your methods and your contribution — the way examiners in your field will. No card required.