MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117816418 · doi:10.28945/4670

PhD Imposter Syndrome: Exploring Antecedents, Consequences, and Implications for Doctoral Well-Being

2020· article· en· W3117816418 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Sverdlik, Nathan C. Hall, Lynn McAlpine

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of doctoral studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBelongingnessPsychologyPerceptionSample (material)Clinical psychologyDepression (economics)Social psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.197
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainIncentives
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations82
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of doctoral studiesSame topicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesFrench-language works237,207