MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4412476143 · doi:10.1145/3748665

Multi-Institutional Study on Impostor Phenomenon

2025· article· en· W4412476143 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueACM Transactions on Computing Education · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiquePerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesNational Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program
Mots-clésPhenomenonComputer scienceCognitive sciencePsychologyMathematics educationCognitive psychologyEpistemology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Motivation : In computing, Impostor Phenomenon (IP) has been viewed as a problem for many years, but little research has been done to show its prevalence. In 2020, IP in computing began to be explored at single institutions [ 68 ]. The results showed that IP is prevalent among undergraduate and graduate students in computing courses and that the rates of IP are higher for women. In 2022, these results were reaffirmed with a replication study including two institutions [ 82 ]. This is concerning due to the negative effects correlated with people who experience IP such as low self-esteem [ 19 , 37 ] and anxiety [ 21 , 38 ]. Objectives : This study aims to replicate these previous findings at a considerably larger scale to determine whether similar results are observed across institutions. To support future work, we conduct an exploratory analysis of student demographics, course factors, and institutional factors to gain insight into factors that may be associated with higher levels of IP among students. Methods : A survey consisting of Clance’s IP scale (CIPS) and questions on students’ demographic and background information was given at 18 institutions. Higher CIPS scores indicate more IP experiences. Differences in CIPS scores were analyzed based on students’ demographics and background information (gender, race/ethnicity, transfer status, and chosen degree program), course factors (introductory computing courses vs. non-introductory computing courses, upper- vs. lower-division), and institutional factors (size of the institution, public vs. private, teaching- vs. research-centric). Results : Our results are consistent with previous findings that IP is prevalent among students in computing courses and that women have significantly higher CIPS scores of IP than men in computing, and that traditionally marginalized race/ethnicity status in computing and chosen degree program do not have an observable impact. In terms of course factors, we do not see a difference in scores based on whether students are enrolled in a lower- or upper-division course. We see that students enrolled in introductory computing (CS1) courses have statistically significant higher scores than students outside of CS1 courses. In terms of institutional factors, students in computing courses at public institutions have statistically significantly higher scores than students at private institutions. Students at medium-sized institutions have statistically significantly higher scores than students at small or large institutions. We do not find any difference based on whether an institution is teaching- or research-centric. Discussion : These results suggest that IP is prevalent in computing courses across the entire curriculum and across different types of institutions. Differences in demographic groups are consistent with prior work in computing, specifically higher rates among women, suggesting IP may be worth further inquiry as a potential factor in the gender participation gap in computing.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,934
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,978

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,037
Tête enseignante GPT0,379
Écart entre enseignants0,342 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle