Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to apply psychological contract theory to the study of faculty‐doctoral student collaborations.
Design/methodology/approach
Through a survey of 170 doctoral students, four types of psychological contracts were investigated and reliable measures of relationship quality were developed.
Findings
The results showed that the quality of collaborations differ significantly across the four contract types. In addition, quality of collaboration varied significantly across collaborations using different research methods (e.g. laboratory work, theory building) and disciplinary paradigms (i.e. high and low consensus). Several other factors conducive to enhanced evaluation of relationship quality were also identified, including similarity in research philosophy, perceived motives for being in the research collaboration, meeting frequency, and conflict resolution.
Research limitations/implications
The present study is somewhat limited in its sample, which is drawn from one university from the student perspective using self‐report measures. Future research might benefit from matching student and faculty assessments of particular collaborations.
Practical implications
Insights from the analyses suggest that greater awareness of the contract‐making mechanisms that operate in graduate education can help improve the quality of student experiences in research collaborations.
Originality/value
The framework of psychological contracts offers a novel perspective in understanding the dynamics of faculty‐student relationships.