Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Role of Impostorism in STEM Persistence

By Karen W Tao, Alberta M. Gloria. Psychology of women quarterly, 2018

87 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Impostor phenomenon or “impostorism” refers to the experience of high-achieving individuals (particularly women) who, despite being successful, attribute their accomplishments to luck, and fear being exposed as frauds. In the current study, we examined the association between impostorism and graduate student self-efficacy, perceptions of the research-training environment, and attitudes toward academic persistence of 224 women completing a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)-related doctoral degree. As hypothesized, participants who identified more strongly with impostor characteristics reported a lower sense of self-efficacy, more negative views of their academic context, and more pessimistic outlooks toward attaining their doctorate. However, results from a multiple mediation analysis revealed that women’s levels of self-efficacy and perceptions of their doctoral environment accounted for the effects of impostorism on their attitudes about academic persistence. Also, the relation between impostorism and persistence attitudes strengthened as numerical representation of women in a STEM program increased. Results illuminate the potential role STEM departments can have on students’ persistence by developing early opportunities for research collaborations and fostering an early sense of accomplishment. Parents and teachers might also draw from our findings to develop strategies to inoculate younger students from the insidious effects of gender-based stereotypes. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/page/pwq/suppl/index

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3336aabee583f740b2258df515e41a7291fe46e6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

  1. Kathryn M. Kroeper
  2. M. Murphy
  3. Elizabeth A. Canning
  4. J. LaCosse

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

  1. Kathryn M. Kroeper
  2. M. Murphy
  3. Elizabeth A. Canning
  4. J. LaCosse

In Sociology and Political Science

  1. J. LaCosse
  2. M. Murphy

Citations in the corpus