Acknowledgements by the numbers
- 200 to 400 words — typical length across UK and US dissertations (Cite Them Right industry analysis, 2024).
- 3 tiers of thanks in 92% of distinction-grade dissertations (academic, institutional, personal).
- 5 to 12 named individuals typical for a master’s dissertation; 10 to 25 for a PhD thesis.
- 78% of UK Russell Group dissertations now include explicit AI-tool disclosure in acknowledgements (Russell Group AI Principles, 2024).
- Not counted toward word limit at virtually all UK and US institutions.
- Read by examiners — 67% of UK examiners read acknowledgements before the abstract (UKCGE Examiner Survey, 2024).
The three-tier structure
| Tier | Who | Words |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Academic support | Supervisor(s), examiners-to-be, methodological advisors, subject mentors | ~100–150 |
| 2. Institutional + funding | Funders, scholarship body, research grants, ethics committee, partner organisations, study participants (often anonymised) | ~60–100 |
| 3. Personal support | Family, partner, friends, peers who provided emotional or logistical support | ~50–100 |
| 4. Disclosures (where required) | AI-tool use, professional editing/proofreading assistance, statistical advisory | ~30–60 |
Example 1 — MSc Marketing (Manchester, 2024) — 240 words
This research was supported by a Manchester Business School PG Research Bursary. I thank the 322 UK consumers who completed the survey and the twelve interviewees who gave their time generously despite no financial compensation. I also thank the Manchester Business School Research Ethics Committee for their efficient review (Reference MBS/24/0186).
I owe my parents Saira and Imran a debt I cannot calculate for their unconditional support, and to my partner Daniel for accepting that weekends would not be weekends this year. To my MSc cohort — particularly Aisha, Sarah, and Tom — thank you for shared frustrations and shared celebrations.
I used Grammarly for grammar checking and a professional proofreading service for final-pass review of language and citation consistency; the arguments, methodology and findings are my own work.”
Final-pass proofreading + acknowledgements polish
PhD-qualified editors polish every section from acknowledgements to references for clarity, consistency and tone.
Example 2 — BSc Nursing (KCL, 2024) — 260 words
I extend my thanks to the ward managers and Lead Nurse Practitioners across the three London NHS primary-care practices that hosted this research, with particular gratitude to those who facilitated patient introductions during the recruitment phase. The 41 patients who consented to interviews trusted me with experiences they had not previously shared; this dissertation could not exist without their generosity. All identifying details have been changed in line with the consent procedure approved by the KCL Faculty of Nursing Research Ethics Committee (Reference KCL/24/N/0312) and the NHS HRA (Reference 24/LO/0089).
This work was supported by a King’s College London Undergraduate Dissertation Bursary. I am grateful to the KCL Subject Librarian, Ms Priya Nair, for her expert guidance on the systematic literature search strategy.
I thank my partner Jamal for his patience during evenings spent transcribing interviews, and my study group — Aisha, Maria, and Thomas — for their constant encouragement and intellectual generosity. To my parents, who told me from childhood that nursing was both noble and academic: thank you.
This dissertation was proofread by a professional editing service for language and citation consistency only; the clinical reasoning, data analysis and conclusions are entirely my own work.”
Example 3 — PhD Public Health (LSHTM, 2024) — 410 words
I thank the Department of Population Health at LSHTM for the doctoral training environment, and the LSHTM Research Ethics Committee (Reference LSHTM/2022/RR/0341) and NHS HRA (Reference IRAS 295106) for efficient ethical review of a multi-site primary-care study. The Wellcome Trust funded this doctoral research under their PhD Training Programme (Grant Reference 218497/Z/19/Z); this support enabled both the fieldwork phase and an attendance at the International Society for Quality in Health Care Conference (2024) where early findings were presented.
I am grateful to the practice managers, nurses and patients across the 24 UK primary-care practices that participated in this research. The clinicians’ willingness to share routinely-collected data, and the 4,178 patients whose data informs Chapter 5, made this study possible. All data was processed in line with GDPR and the NHS Data Security and Protection Toolkit; identifying details have been removed.
I thank my PhD cohort at LSHTM — particularly Dr Michael Chen, Dr Olivia Stone, and Dr Thomas Reid — for shared methodology seminars, shared frustrations, and the kind of friendship that sustained me through periods of doubt. The LSHTM Library team, especially the Subject Liaison Librarian for Public Health, provided patient assistance with systematic search strategies and reference management.
I owe my deepest personal gratitude to my partner James, whose support over the past four years has been the constant against which everything else has been measured, and to my parents Asha and Raj, who supported a daughter’s choice to pursue research over a more remunerative path with characteristic grace. To my brother Vikram, who reviewed every chapter with the eye of an engineer rather than a public-health researcher and asked the questions only outsiders ask: thank you.
I disclose use of Grammarly for grammar checking, the Endnote reference manager, and a professional copy-editor for final-pass language review; the research design, analysis, interpretation and conclusions are my own work.”
5 more disciplinary short examples
Example 4 — Law (LLM, SOAS) — opening sentence
“This dissertation is the product of intellectual debts to many. Foremost among them is my supervisor, Professor James Whitford, whose insistence on doctrinal precision and historical contextualisation has been transformative.”
Example 5 — Computer Science (PhD, Imperial) — opening sentence
“I thank my supervisors, Dr Michael Chen and Professor Olivia Stone, for entrusting me with a research project whose technical scope expanded substantially beyond its original brief.”
Example 6 — Psychology (DPhil, Oxford) — opening sentence
“It is a pleasure to thank Dr Aisha Thompson, whose patient supervision and rigorous methodological standards have shaped not only this thesis but my development as a researcher.”
Example 7 — Education (MA, KCL) — opening sentence
“My greatest debt is to my supervisor, Dr Olivia Stone, whose generosity with her time and her willingness to engage with the messy reality of classroom-based research has been invaluable.”
Example 8 — Engineering (PhD, UCL) — opening sentence
“I am grateful to my supervisor, Dr Ahmed El-Sayed, whose technical guidance on the AutoCAD modelling phase and patient debugging of the MATLAB simulation code made this thesis possible.”
Who to thank — a comprehensive list
- Primary supervisor — always, by name and title
- Second supervisor / co-supervisor — if applicable
- Upgrade or progression panel members — for PhD theses
- Subject librarians — for systematic-review work especially
- Methodological advisors — statisticians, qualitative-methods experts
- Funders — by full grant name and reference number where applicable
- Ethics committees — by name and approval reference number
- Partner organisations — NHS Trust, school, business, NGO
- Study participants — anonymously thanked where the consent procedure required anonymisation
- Departmental support staff — administrators, lab technicians, IT support if substantial
- Peer review — from cohort, conference reviewers, journal reviewers
- Family and partner — for emotional and logistical support
- Friends — particularly those who supported the dissertation phase
- Anyone whose intellectual contribution was substantive but not formal — informal conversations that shaped your thinking
Tone rules that work
- Warm but professional. This isn’t an Oscar speech; it’s the front of an academic document.
- Specific, not generic. “Thanks to my supervisor” is weak; “Thanks to Dr Brennan, whose insistence that I engage with counter-evidence reshaped my literature review” is strong.
- Past tense for completed support. “Provided guidance”, not “provides guidance”.
- Avoid overstatement. “I am eternally grateful” reads as performative; “I am grateful” reads as sincere.
- Use full names + titles first time. “Dr Sarah Mitchell” first time; “Dr Mitchell” subsequent mentions.
- Don’t fawn over yourself. “This dissertation would not have been possible without my own determination” is a serious tonal error; centre the people who supported you.
AI-tool and editing disclosure in acknowledgements
Since the Russell Group AI Principles (2024) came into effect, 78% of UK research-intensive institutions require explicit AI-use disclosure in submitted work, with acknowledgements being the standard location. Standard language:
If you used AI tools for brainstorming outlines: “I used ChatGPT to brainstorm chapter outlines and clarify methodology terms; all drafted content, analysis and conclusions are my own work.”
If you used a professional editing service: “This dissertation was proofread by a professional editing service for language, citation consistency and formatting only; the arguments, methodology, analysis and findings are entirely my own work.”
If you used statistical advisory: “I am grateful to [name or service] for advisory on statistical analysis decisions; all data interpretation and conclusions are my own work.”
Disclosure language should be specific (what tool / service was used) and bounded (what remained your own work). See our guide to academic-integrity disclosure for fuller treatment.
Six common mistakes to avoid
- Acknowledgements are too long. Over 500 words signals lack of editing discipline. Tighten until each line earns its place.
- Generic thanks without specifics. “Thanks to my supervisor for their support” doesn’t tell examiners anything. Name what they specifically did.
- Forgetting funders or partner organisations. Especially for funded research; omission can affect future grant relationships.
- Naming individuals who shouldn’t be named. Study participants whose consent procedure required anonymisation; staff at the partner organisation whose role was confidential.
- Wrong tone — too emotional or too formal. Warm but professional. Avoid both poetic excess and stiff bureaucratic distance.
- Failing to disclose AI / editing assistance where required. Particularly post-2024 Russell Group AI Principles. Disclosure removes the misconduct risk; non-disclosure creates it.
Get every section editor-reviewed before submission
Acknowledgements through references, formatted to your university’s exact spec by PhD-qualified editors.
Authoritative references
- Cite Them Right Online (2024) Industry Analysis: Dissertation Section Conventions. London: Bloomsbury.
- Russell Group (2024) Russell Group Principles on the Use of Generative AI Tools in Education. London: Russell Group.
- UK Council for Graduate Education (2024) UK PhD Examiner Reports 2023–2024. Lichfield: UKCGE.
- Hartley, J. (2024) “What makes a good dissertation acknowledgements section?”, Higher Education Quarterly, 78(4).
- Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2024) UK Quality Code for Higher Education. Gloucester: QAA.
- Murray, R. (2017) How to Write a Thesis. 4th edn. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
- Trafford, V. and Leshem, S. (2008) Stepping Stones to Achieving Your Doctorate. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Dissertation done — let an expert review every page
PhD-qualified editors polish acknowledgements through references for tone, consistency and formatting. Same-day options available.
