Professor Debbie Riby Professor of Developmental Psychology and Co-Director of the Centre for Neurodiversity & Development, Durham University, UK
In association with the UK Council for Graduate Education (UKCGE), we welcomed Professor Debbie Riby on 28 November 2025 to share insights from her research on neurodivergent PhD researchers and lead a discussion about supervision practices for neuroinclusion.
Professor Riby began the session by explaining that we all have different brains shaped by biological, psychological and social factors. Aspects such as memory and problem-solving are all part of our individuality. Professor Riby went on to explain that PGR supervision can often mean working in a small team or on a one-to-one basis. She spoke about the importance of thinking about what that means for the supervisory relationship. “Being ‘neurodiversity affirming’ is understanding the differences between all of us, irrespective of diagnostic labels,” she observed.
She then turned to a broad look at neurodiversity and its contexts. As she explained, the term encompasses a wide range of different neurotypes. “We see a huge overlap between neurodivergence and mental health challenges, especially anxiety and depression,” she remarked. She also explained that neurodivergence is not limited to individuals of a specific gender, colour, age or ethnicity.
“It’s well recognised the Higher Education institutions are accepting more diverse populations, and we know from anecdotal reports that we’re also seeing an increase in neurodivergence amongst the postgraduate community” Professor Riby said. She explained that we had become used to taking a deficit-based approach to these students but suggested, instead, that we think how to scaffold areas of challenge and encourage students to play to their strengths.
While it’s important that supervisors are encouraged to embed these practices, Professor Riby also emphasised that it was not all on their shoulders. “We are here to provide neuro-affirming supervision, but every Higher Education institution does have its own structures for providing extra support for students which we should be using.”
She then turned to the start of the PhD journey and how this experience brings with it a natural sense of uncertainty and anxiety which can be magnified in the case of neurodivergent researchers. “We do need to recognise that onboarding PhD students and setting up ways of working as a supervisor are especially important,” she said. She talked specifically about anxiety, saying that while most of us feel anxious from time to time, clinical levels of anxiety will impact on all aspects of the PhD journey. One way of tackling this might be to plan ahead with supervisory meetings, so that students know exactly what to expect and uncertainty is reduced.
Professor Riby then went through a checklist of considerations for supervisors in terms of conducting the meetings themselves. She said that neurodivergent PhD students might want to get involved with a lot of aspects of university life, which – although in some ways a positive thing – might lead to burnout because of difficulties managing time. She also covered the flexible approaches to the meetings that supervisors might choose to adopt (for example: walking meetings might help students to be more present and confident during discussions).
She then moved onto the issue of feedback. “There’s the idea that neurodivergent individuals may be more prone to rejection sensitivity dysphoria: more experiences of real rejection, stigma and bullying,” she explained. “It’s useful to think about how we give feedback throughout the PhD journey and that a discussion about it [between student and supervisor] takes place.”
Rounding off her presentation, Professor Riby said that neurodivergence may be relevant to both supervisors as well as students, but that the key was to remember that every person is different. She also said that supervising a PhD is particularly challenging because (unlike undergraduate courses) each person’s area of study will also be different; however, it was important to ensure that “everything we do is neuroinclusive.”
A lively group discussion followed which was held under the Chatham House Rule.
You can watch the session recording, and access the slide deck below: