PhD Imposter Syndrome: Exploring Antecedents, Consequences, and Implications for Doctoral Well-Being
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Aim/Purpose: Research on doctoral students’ well-being suggests that an interplay of social and psychological factors, such as integration into the scholarly community and perceptions of self-worth, shape students’ experiences. The present research examined the role of these factors in the well-being of doctoral students. Background: Imposter syndrome has long been discussed both formally and informally as a prevalent experience of doctoral students. Existing research provides empirical support for the role of perceived belongingness to one’s scholarly community in maladaptive self-perceptions (i.e., imposter syndrome), as well as the role of imposter syndrome in doctoral students’ well-being. However, no studies to date have directly explored the extent to which imposter syndrome mediates the relationship between perceived belongingness and well-being in a single model. Methodology: The present research sought to evaluate perceived belongingness as a predictor of imposter syndrome and how imposter syndrome, in turn, predicts well-being (i.e., depression, stress, and illness symptoms) in doctoral students. Depression, stress, and illness symptoms were identified in the literature as the most prevalent well-being concerns reported by doctoral students and therefore were evaluated as the outcome variables in the present research. In line with previous research, we expected perceived belongingness to negatively predict imposter syndrome, and imposter syndrome, in turn, to positively predict depression, stress, and illness symptoms. Two studies evaluated the proposed model. Data for both studies was collected simultaneously (i.e., one large sample) with 25% of the sample randomly selected for Study 1 (cross-sectional) and the remainder included in Study 2 (longitudinal). In Study 1, we tested this hypothesis with a cross-sectional design and explored whether imposter syndrome was a significant mediator between perceived belongingness and well-being. In Study 2, we aimed to replicate and extend the results of Study 1 with a prospective design to further assess the directionality of the relationship from perceived belongingness to imposter syndrome and, in turn, the role of imposter syndrome in changes in depression, stress, and illness symptoms over a five-month period. Contribution: The present results represent evidence of the process by which doctoral students develop imposter syndrome and some of the consequences of imposter syndrome on doctoral well-being. Additionally, the present study includes a large-scale sample of international doctoral students across the disciplines, thus revealing the prevalence of imposter syndrome in the doctoral experience. Findings: Overall, the results of the present research provided support for our hypotheses. In Study 1, perceived belongingness was found to be a negative predictor of imposter syndrome that, in turn, predicted higher levels of depression, stress, and illness symptoms. Additionally, imposter syndrome was found to significantly mediate the relationship between perceived scholarly belongingness and the three outcome variables assessing psychological well-being. Study 2 further revealed perceived scholarly belongingness to negatively predict imposter syndrome five months later, with imposter syndrome, in turn, predicting increases in depression, stress, and illness symptoms in our doctoral student sample. Recommendations for Practitioners: Several recommendations are made for practitioner based on the present findings: First, by acknowledging the critical role of perceived social belongingness in students’ well-being, faculty and administrators can establish structures to better integrate students into their scholarly communities, and departments can foster a supportive social atmosphere for their doctoral students that emphasizes the quality of interactions and consultation with faculty. Second, information sessions for first-year doctoral students could highlight the prevalence and remedies of feeling like an impostor to normalize these otherwise deleterious feelings of inadequacy. Finally, professional development seminars that are typically taught in graduate programs could incorporate an explicit discussion of well-being topics and the prevalence of imposter syndrome, alongside other pragmatic topics (e.g., publishing protocols), to ensure that students perceive their departmental climate as supportive and, in turn, feel less like an imposter and better psychologically adjusted. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue exploring the various antecedents and consequences of imposter syndrome, specifically focusing on at-risk students, as well as the role of imposter syndrome in doctoral-level dropout. Impact on Society: Imposter syndrome is a harmful experience that can lead to a variety of life-altering outcomes, such as developing or intensifying a mental illness. Doctoral students, as society’s future researchers and high-skilled professionals, have a great impact on society as a whole, and efforts should be extended into maintaining doctoral students’ well-being in order for them to perform at an optimal level. The present research sheds light on one aspect of the doctoral experience that is detrimental to the well-being of doctoral students, thus informing doctoral students, advisors, and departments of one area where more resources can be allocated in order to facilitate the health, both physical and psychological, of their students. Future Research: Future research should explore additional outcomes to fully understand the impact of perceived belongingness and imposter syndrome on doctoral students. Some such outcomes may include academic performance (e.g., presentation/publication rates), motivation (e.g., perseverance vs. intention to quit), and more general psychological adjustment measures (e.g., satisfaction with life). Such research, in combination with the present findings, can help the understanding of the full impact of imposter syndrome on the academic and personal experiences of doctoral students and can contribute to psychologically healthier and more academically productive experiences for doctoral students as they navigate the myriad challenges of doctoral education.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».