
This article presents the research of writing practices in two Ph.D. programs: Philosophy and Physical Oceanography, in order to promote the generation of scientific vocation from the undergraduate level. A qualitative approach was taken, based on depth interviews with students, researchers, and administrative staff, as well as focus groups with students. Atlas.ti was used to analyze the data. The results suggest that Ph.D. students become specialized at work through collaborative environments where they are supervised and guided by experts. During this training process, students play the role of author, reader, critic, editor, and local expert, all through gradually participating in research processes and on policy and management committees, review panels, and evaluation committees. First and foremost, they learn to write and review academic articles, then submit for review to scientific disciplinary committees.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
