Introduction
For many Indian PhD scholars, especially those pursuing their degree in private universities or alongside full-time jobs, writing the thesis feels like the most demanding part of the journey. It’s not just the length of the document — it’s the constant pressure to sound academic, meet supervisor expectations, and submit on time. In this context, AI tools have become extremely popular. They offer instant paraphrasing, literature summaries, and even chapter drafts with fluent grammar and structure.
But the thesis journey doesn’t end with submission. It ends at the viva — the oral defence of your research. This is where scholars must explain their work to an expert panel, respond to unpredictable questions, and justify their choices. And this is where AI tools cannot help. No matter how polished your writing is, you are the one who has to speak. You are the one who must demonstrate ownership. AI can assist in writing — but it cannot stand beside you during your viva voce. That moment demands understanding, confidence, and real connection with your work.
The Role of the Viva in Indian PhD Culture
In the Indian doctoral process, the viva is more than a formality. Whether held online or in person, it is seen as a final test of the scholar’s originality and depth. While thesis guides may have helped shape your research, and reviewers may have given written feedback, the viva committee tests whether you actually understand what you’ve submitted. They can ask about your problem statement, methods, interpretation, and even why you chose to cite certain authors.
A scholar from a private university in Noida shared that her viva took over two hours. The external examiner focused on her literature review and asked why she selected certain frameworks and left others out. Because she had relied heavily on AI to structure that chapter, she couldn’t explain the logic clearly. This led to further questions — and ultimately, a revision requirement before approval.
This experience is not uncommon. Indian reviewers often come from traditional academic backgrounds and expect a scholar to speak confidently, not just quote theory. If a chapter sounds perfect but the scholar seems detached from it, doubts begin to arise. And in research, perception of authorship matters as much as actual content.
How AI-Supported Writing Can Undermine Your Preparation
When you let AI handle parts of your thesis writing, you might save time — but you also skip essential steps of the learning process. Reading source material, comparing frameworks, interpreting results, rewriting drafts — these are not just writing tasks; they are thinking exercises. They prepare you for the kinds of questions that arise in a viva.
AI-generated paragraphs may sound academic, but they often include vague generalisations, unverified references, and shallow reasoning. If you don’t revise them deeply — or worse, if you submit them as they are — you risk becoming unfamiliar with your own arguments. Then, during the viva, you may find yourself struggling to explain why you wrote what you did.
A PhD candidate in psychology from Hyderabad admitted that she used ChatGPT to help frame parts of her methodology. During the viva, she was asked why she chose thematic analysis over grounded theory — and she froze. The answer was in her document, but she had never fully understood it herself. The panel allowed her to resubmit, but the experience left her shaken.
Being Present in Your Writing Prepares You for the Defence
The scholars who perform well in vivas aren’t necessarily the ones with perfect grammar or flawless formatting. They are the ones who are present in their writing — who know what they wrote, why they wrote it, and what their findings mean. These are scholars who can handle unexpected questions calmly, even if they don’t know every answer. Because they know their work.
If you’ve written your literature review by reading and comparing studies yourself, you can talk about why certain ideas stood out. If you’ve personally analysed your data, you can explain not just what the results were, but what they mean. AI cannot do that thinking for you. It can’t recall fieldwork challenges, explain emotional reactions from interviews, or reflect on how your findings relate to Indian society or policy. Only you can.
In Indian doctoral vivas, especially those involving social science or humanities topics, questions can also touch on personal motivation, real-world applications, or current events. A generic answer generated by AI will not hold up under this kind of dialogue. In fact, it can reveal a lack of connection between you and your own research — a red flag no scholar wants to raise.
Use AI Thoughtfully — But Don’t Lose Your Voice
This doesn’t mean AI tools have no role at all. You can use them to polish language, suggest synonyms, check citation formats, or improve clarity after you’ve done the core writing. Some scholars also use AI to test how their arguments read — almost like a practice audience. These are valid uses, as long as you stay in control of your ideas.
But when AI becomes the main writer and you become the editor, the relationship is reversed — and risky. Ethical research means staying grounded in your process. You don’t need to sound like a published professor. You need to sound like yourself — a scholar who has engaged seriously with their topic.
Conclusion
The viva is where your research becomes real. It’s not a grammar test. It’s a conversation — one where your thinking, clarity, and commitment are on display. No AI tool can sit beside you and answer for the decisions made in your thesis. That moment belongs entirely to you.
In a PhD journey that can feel lonely and uncertain, AI may feel like a helpful shortcut. But when it comes to defending your work, only your own engagement will guide you. Write in your own words. Learn from your mistakes. Use tools to support, not replace. Because when the questions come — and they will — it’s not your document that has to answer. It’s you.