Sorry for the delay in the response.

I am in general disagree with my supervisor´s hypothesis but I was forced to include this interpretation of my data in a published paper and in my Phd. It was frustrating. I chose to study science because of the freedom for developing my own ideas and I realyze that reality it´s a little sadder.

Hello,

Recently I have an accepted publication in an international journal. One of the figures in the manuscript presents an hypothesis that is practicaly the same as one published in a paper of my advisor two years ago. That paper does not have many citations, and I dont fully agree with that hypothesis, but my advisor suggested (mandatory suggestion) that I included the figure and an explanation of his hypothesis in the text.

I am finishing my PhD and we had a lot of discussions about this disagreement.
I am very glad that I finally got my first paper published, but I feel kinda frustrated about being forced to publish things that I am not totally agree only because he is my advisor and he is one of the co-authors of the paper.

Have you ever been in a similar situation? Is this a normal practice among Doctoral Advisors?

Hello, I am new to the forum.

OnTopic:

I think you MUST stay positive. I am finishing my phd, so you are in the same situation as me.

In all these years I have learned that academic career is sometimes a lonely path and many times you don´t get support except from yourself.

In your message you numbered all negative aspects. Try to focus on the positive aspects that you have developed in your PhD time and use them to decide your further decisions.

If you find frustrating the academic career path, then is natural to start a uncertainty time until you find the right place to make a meaningful work.

Best wishes!