MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382654456 · doi:10.1145/3587102.3588779

"I Am Not Enough": Impostor Phenomenon Experiences of University Students

2023· article· en· W4382654456 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela Zavaleta Bernuy, Anna Ly, Brian Harrington, Michael Liut, Sadia Sharmin, Lisa Zhang, Andrew Petersen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhenomenonThematic analysisSet (abstract data type)PsychologyFear of failureComputer scienceQualitative researchSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent work has confirmed that computing students experience the Imposter Phenomenon (IP) at higher rates than reported in other disciplines. However, no work has examined what aspects of the university computing experience might lead to a higher rate of IP experiences. We aim to illustrate the IP experiences students have, identify common sources of these experiences, and document the effects of these experiences and how students respond to them. We asked undergraduate students to share recent experiences that illustrate their experiences with the IP. We conducted an inductive thematic analysis on these open-ended responses, resulting in a set of inter-connected themes. A significant fraction of students related stories about making comparisons with peers or observing peer behaviour that made them question their abilities. Students also spoke about holding unrealistic expectations learned from their peers or imposed by the environment. These experiences may be particularly acute for minority-affiliated students who may come to feel they do not belong. Ultimately, these IP experiences can lead to a loss of motivation or a cycle of failure that leads students to leave computing. The central role social comparisons play in IP experiences suggests that it is particularly important to foster communities where opportunities for comparison are reduced and where realistic expectations are explicitly set.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesFrench-language works237,207