What Do Supervisors Mean When They Say ‘Be More Confident in Your Argument’?

At some point in the PhD journey, many of us hear a familiar line in supervisory feedback:
“You need to make your argument with more confidence.”

On the surface, this sounds straightforward. Encouraging, even. But for many mature PhD learners, it lands awkwardly, sometimes painfully. Not because confidence is absent in our lives, but because it is very much present elsewhere.

Very recently, I had a supervisory meeting with all members of my supervisory team as I began working on the first full draft of my thesis. While my supervisors commended the progress of my work and outlined what was needed to bring the thesis to completion, one comment was reiterated. As I worked to link my chapters into a single, coherent narrative, I was reminded to ensure that my arguments were clear and that I should be confident in making them.

At first, at the beginning of my doctoral journey, this instruction had felt familiar yet elusive. And that’s because many mature doctoral researchers come into the PhD having led teams, shaped strategy, implemented policy, managed risk, and taken responsibility for decisions that had real consequences. We have lived purposeful, confident professional lives. So why, then, does academic confidence feel so elusive?

How can someone who has spoken authoritatively in boardrooms, classrooms, courtrooms, hospitals, or community spaces suddenly feel unsure of their voice on the page?

One of the first things worth recognising is this: confidence does not automatically transfer across domains.

Professional confidence is earned through experience, practice, and feedback within a particular set of norms. Academic confidence operates under a different logic. It is not about decisiveness or authority in the everyday sense, but about positioning.

When supervisors ask for confidence in an argument, they are rarely asking for louder claims or stronger language. They are asking for clarity of epistemic position:

What are you claiming?
On what grounds?
In relation to whom?

For mature learners, this shift can be destabilising. Because in professional life, confidence often comes from action and outcomes. In doctoral work, confidence comes from sustained engagement with uncertainty, which reduces your confidence in making claims.

Over time, and as my research skills developed, I began to understand what supervisors often mean when they ask for confidence in an argument. As I mentioned earlier, it is not about assertion or authority in the professional sense, but about clarity of position, responsibility for claims, and transparency about what is still being worked through.

Here I discuss the practical unpacking of that realisation, providing support to others as they work towards clearer, more confident doctoral writing.

Turning “Be More Confident” into Practical Academic Work

When supervisors ask you to “make your argument with confidence,” the instruction can feel abstract and unhelpful unless it is translated into concrete scholarly practice. One productive way to do this is to slow the instruction down and treat it as a series of analytical questions rather than a judgement about your voice or capability.

1. Where Is My Argument Located?

This question asks you to identify the intellectual space your work occupies.

An argument is not simply a position you hold; it is a response to an existing conversation. Academic confidence begins when the reader can see clearly where your work sits in relation to others.

Ask yourself:

• Which debate, problem, or gap is my work addressing?
• Whose work am I responding to, extending, challenging, or reframing?
• What does my study do that existing work does not?

Example (less clear):

“There has been considerable research on digital literacy in higher education.”

Reworked with a clearer location:

“While existing research on digital literacy in higher education has focused primarily on undergraduate learners, far less attention has been paid to how mature doctoral researchers experience and negotiate digital academic practices. This study addresses that gap by…”

The confidence here comes from situating, not asserting. You are not claiming superiority; you are claiming relevance.

A practical step:
At the start of each chapter, write one sentence that answers:

This chapter contributes to the field by…
If you struggle to complete the sentence, the issue is not confidence but clarity of location.

2. What Am I Responsible for Claiming?

Many mature PhD learners hesitate here because professional experience has taught them the cost of overclaiming. In academic writing, however, responsibility does not mean certainty about everything; it means being clear about what you are claiming and what you are not.

Supervisors often read “lack of confidence” when they encounter writing that avoids ownership through excessive hedging or citation stacking.

Example (over-defensive):

“It could be argued, based on previous studies, that this finding may suggest…”

Reworked with responsible ownership:

“This finding suggests that mature doctoral researchers experience supervision not only as academic guidance but as a site of identity negotiation.”

You are not claiming universality. You are claiming interpretation, which is your responsibility as the researcher.

A practical step:
Highlight sentences that begin with:

• “It could be argued that…”
• “This may possibly suggest…”
• “Some researchers have noted…”

Then ask:

Is this hesitation epistemically necessary, or is it avoidance?

Where the evidence supports you, allow yourself to claim.

3. What Am I Still Working Through, and How Can I Say That Clearly?

Academic confidence does not require closure. In fact, one of the most confident moves in doctoral writing is to name what is unresolved, rather than obscure it.

Mature learners often struggle here because professional contexts reward decisiveness. Doctoral work rewards transparent thinking.

Example (unclear uncertainty):

“This area requires further research.”

Reworked with intellectual clarity:

“While this study identifies key patterns in supervisory relationships, the interaction between institutional policy and individual supervisory practice remains underexplored and warrants further investigation.”

The second version does not weaken the argument; it strengthens it by demonstrating analytical control.

A Practical Way to Show Confidence in Your Discussion Chapter

One of the most effective ways to demonstrate academic confidence is to separate clearly what your study establishes, what it suggests, and what remains open. 

Below are concrete examples of how this can look in practice.

1. What Your Study Establishes

This is where you state what your data allows you to claim with confidence, based on your methodology, scope, and analysis.

These statements are grounded, specific, and owned by you.

Example:

This study establishes that mature doctoral researchers experience supervision not only as a site of academic guidance, but also as a space where professional identity is renegotiated.

Another example:

The findings demonstrate that clarity of supervisory expectations plays a significant role in how mature PhD students navigate responsibility and autonomy during their doctoral studies.

Notice that:

• the claims are precise

• the language is measured but firm

• the study’s scope is respected

A useful phrase starter:

This study establishes that…
The findings show that…
The analysis confirms that…

2. What Your Study Suggests

This is where you move into interpretation and implication, without overstating certainty. These claims are still confident, but they acknowledge complexity and context.

Example:

These findings suggest that supervision practices which recognise prior professional experience may better support mature doctoral researchers’ sense of agency and confidence.

Another example:

The data suggests that difficulties often attributed to individual confidence may, in fact, reflect structural or relational dynamics within supervisory arrangements.

Here, confidence is shown through:

• careful interpretation

• clear logical links to evidence

• avoidance of overgeneralisation

A useful phrase starter:

These findings suggest that…
The analysis points to the possibility that…
This study indicates that…

3. What Remains Open

This section demonstrates some of the strongest academic confidence, because it shows you understand the limits of your work and can articulate them clearly.

Uncertainty, when named precisely, strengthens credibility.

Example:

While this study highlights key patterns in supervisory relationships, it does not examine how these dynamics may differ across disciplines or institutional contexts.

Another example:

Further research is needed to explore how supervisory power dynamics intersect with race, gender, and institutional culture for mature doctoral researchers.

This signals:

• intellectual honesty

• awareness of the field

• readiness for future research

A useful phrase starter:

This study does not address…
An area that remains open for further exploration is…
Future research could examine…

Here, we can see a clear alignment between professional experience and academic writing practice. For mature PhD learners, this approach mirrors familiar ways of working from professional and leadership contexts, where clarity about what is known, what is inferred, and what remains unresolved is often a marker of credibility. These same principles can be productively applied to doctoral writing.

What Academic Confidence Actually Looks Like on the Page

When I speak about academic confidence, I am not suggesting that you should sound forceful or authoritative in the everyday sense. Rather, I am referring to a form of confidence that becomes visible through careful scholarly practice, such as:

• clear conceptual framing

• consistent and precise use of terms

• deliberate and purposeful engagement with sources

• a willingness to allow your analytical voice to be visible

• honest articulation of the limits of your study

This kind of confidence allows you to say, with clarity and intention:

This is what I am arguing.
This is why.
This is where it applies.
This is where it does not.

Academic confidence allows your thinking to take its place in a scholarly conversation, without apology, but also without pretence. And I believe this kind of experience gets you ready for your viva voce when examiners begin to question your knowledge in your field.

If you are struggling with this, it is not a sign of inadequacy. It is evidence that you are learning how to think and write at doctoral level. I hope the ideas shared here offer some clarity and practical support as you continue to develop your thesis writing.

Always, always rooting for you.

Welcome to 2026!

Your mature PhD supporter,
Adeola Eze