1

Coping with the imposter: The role of mentoring and other coping skills among academic faculty

(FULL PAPER SUBMISSION)

Holly M. Hutchins, Ph.D.

Hilary Rainbolt

University of Houston

College of Technology

Houston, TX USA

hmhutchins@uh.edu

2

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Research exploring imposter phenomenon suggests that individuals who experience imposter tendencies reported increased levels of stress, lower work performance and satisfaction. Despite research on imposter phenomenon among early career professionals, few researchers have explored how individuals cope with the psychological stress resulting from questioning their professional legitimacy and expertise. The purpose of our study is to examine the events that trigger imposter tendencies among academic faculty, which coping skills were most effective at mitigating such experiences, and what types of institutional resources could be offered to support faculty struggling with imposter tendencies.

Design: We used Driscoll and Cooper’s (1994) critical incident technique to analyze faculty narratives (n=15) describing triggering events that caused imposter thoughts and feelings, coping skills used, and related outcomes.

Findings: We identified four specific incidents that triggered faculty imposter experiences, subsequent coping methods and outcomes, and perceived needs and resources around institutional support. We include rich faculty narratives representative of the main themes.

Practical/Social Implications: We position our results in the frame of Kegan’s (1982) identity work, noting that emergence of imposter tendencies are part of faculty identity formation. We offer specific suggestions to increase faculty awareness and institutional support in dealing with imposter thoughts and feelings.

Originality/Value: This is the first study to identify specific coping outcomes of academic faculty who reported experiencing imposter tendencies, their perceived utility of applied coping skills, and perception of institutional support and resources to address stress.

KEYWORDS: stress coping, imposter phenomenon, social support, mentors

3

Coping with the Imposter:

The role of mentoring and other coping skills among academic faculty

Increased attention to the imposter phenomenon, described as persistent thoughts of

inadequacy and inability to internalize successes despite evidence to the contrary, suggests that

many professionals experience imposter thoughts at some point in time (Kets de Vries, 2005).

Most research exploring imposter tendencies have occurred among early career academics and

professionals, notably graduate students and medical residents, as they embark on the

challenging experience of developing early career identities. Research among such professionals

has primarily focused on identifying the prevalence of imposter thoughts and significant

correlates such as increased depression and anxiety (Chrisman, Pieper, Clance, Holland, &

Glickhauf-Hughes 1995; McGregor, Gee & Poset, 2008; Oriel, Plane & Mundt, 2004; Ross &

Krukowski, 2003, burnout (Legassie, Zibrowski & Goldszmidt, 2008) and psychological

distress (Henning, Ey & Shaw, 1998). Curiously, research examining imposter tendencies among

academic faculty is less prevalent despite their increasing work demands of research, service and

teaching.

While both conceptual and empirical studies on imposter phenomenon are on the rise,

few studies have moved past identifying the existence and predictors of imposter tendencies to

report effective coping skills described by participants to address their imposter experiences.

Attention to academic faculty is even scarcer despite the complexity of developing a faculty

identity, and the need to understand effective coping methods to interrupt the imposter cycle. To

extend the research on faculty experiences with imposter tendencies, we examine the events that

trigger imposter tendencies, which coping skills were most effective at mitigating such

4

experiences, and what types of university resources could be offered to support faculty struggling

with imposter tendencies.

RATIONALE & STUDY SIGNIFICANCE

We position our study of how faculty cope with imposter tendencies in the context of the critical

junctures representative of an emerging professional identity. According to Kegan (1982),

identity development can occur in five distinct stages each marked by punctuated moments of

change between the faculty members’ understanding of her professional role and the experiences

faced in daily work (Jarvis-Selinger, Pratt & Regehr, 2012). Kegan’s identity stages move on a

continuum from dependency and “acting a role” to one of more autonomy and internalizing of

“being a role”, or in the case of our study, being a faculty member. Jarvis-Selinger and her

colleagues apply Kegan’s model to describe how medical residents develop their professional

identity as part of their competency development (how well they perform to prescribed

competencies) to how they develop a tacit understanding of being a physician. The researchers

note that advanced stages of identity development include individuals seeing themselves and

being viewed others as “embodying their profession…and consolidate(ing) who they are in

relation to their community of practice.” (2012, p. 2).

For the current study, we posit that academic faculty begin to question their legitimacy as

members of the academy as they experience critical junctures or discontinuities (Erikson, 1982)

in their own identity development formation experience as they understand what it means to be a

faculty member. Erikson (1982) describes such experiences as resulting from a series of

punctuated crisis events, resulting in increased psychological distress and cognitive dissonance

as an individual has to recalibrate their understanding of their role to alleviate the stress.

Examples of crises relevant to academic faculty may include significant role changes (e.g.

5

doctoral student to junior faculty, a mid-career or senior faculty to an administrator role), or in

more episodic experiences like handling a unique situation with a student, being challenged by a

colleague or student, or not achieving the same kinds of research successes as they had as a

student. All of these may undermine the perception of who or what a successful faculty member

is or should be, thus causing them to question their own professional legitimacy. As the faculty

member experiences more stress given these crisis events, s/he begins to question whether they

are really good-, smart-, proficient-, etc. enough to be a faculty in the academy. The insidious

nature of imposter thoughts is in the persistent nagging voice that begs the question “who am I to

be here?” The focus on coping is a response to interrupt such cognitive and emotional

disequilibrium, and can provide useful information in understanding how to best address faculty

who struggle with imposter thoughts.

Our study of coping attempts made by faculty in dealing with imposter thoughts and

feelings expands the current literature of the imposter phenomenon in several ways. Imposter

studies have primarily focused on the experiences of graduate students and medical professionals

(primarily nurses and residents) and very little to university academic faculty or medical faculty.

In a pilot study exploring faculty imposter tendencies and coping skills, Hutchins’ (2014) found

that faculty used more adaptive coping (seeking social support, using humor, positive

reinforcement) that maladaptive (drinking, excessive working, ignoring). Faculty in her study

noted the particular benefit of mentors helping to challenger their cognitive distortions around

attributing success to external sources, affirming the normalcy of imposter thoughts, and offering

support to challenges thoughts of inadequacy. However, given the small sample size, a larger

more diverse sample is needed to provide stronger evidence of coping skills used.

6

Exploring how faculty cope with the resulting stress produced by imposter thoughts can

also help universities understand the individual factors impacting faculty satisfaction, retention,

and advancement. Parkman and Beard (2008) discuss the increased risk of losing top talent

(ironically those most at risk for experiencing imposter tendencies) because of persistent

imposter concerns. That is, given imposters relentless pursuit of success, tempered by their

inability to accept recognition when success is achieved, often leads them to experience

increasing levels of stress and decreased work satisfaction over time. When faculty leave, the

institution loses not only their tacit and explicit knowledge, but also organizational resources

invested in the faculty. One of the more cited imposter coping methods is seeking social support

(in the form of a mentor or peer groups) in helping faculty adjust to stressors resulting from

identity formation, and has gained increasing attention in the imposter research as an important

form of normalizing concerns around professional legitimacy (Emmerick, 2004). Thus, our study

offers insight into coping skills that have implications at both the individual faculty and

university organizational levels, as well as contributing to the emergent research areas around

social support as form of coping.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Although the imposter coping literature focuses on cognitive behavioral approaches in mostly

clinical settings, evidence of actual use in non-clinical settings is limited. In our review of the

related literature, we examine faculty coping skills used to address stress (in general) and to

imposter tendencies with specific attention to the role of mentors and other social support

resources. Seeking sources of social support (i.e., mentoring, peer group support) is a

recommended and often used form of coping by faculty experiencing stress and is consistent in

the research focused on imposter tendencies (cf. Henning, Ey & Shaw, 1998; Huffstutler &

7

Varnel, 2006; Watson & Betts, 2010; Wilson, Valentine & Pereira, 2002); however, these studies

lack evidence of actual use or success. In our review, we explore literature around the effects of

stress on faculty and how the negative effects of stress tie to the imposter phenomenon.

Causes of Faculty Stress

Research on faculty stress has increased in the last decade, notably given the heightened

complexity of work responsibilities and demands (Trower, 2010). Faculty now perceive having

greater stress in their profession as a result of teaching, research, and service expectations than

what was otherwise perceived as a low stress job by their predecessors (cf. Gillespie, Walsh,

Winefield, Dua, & Stough, 2001; Iqbal & Kokash, 2011; Thomas & Lankua, 2009; Pololi &

Knight, 2005). In our review of literature around faculty stress and coping we have identified

emergent causes of stress for faculty. Specifically, faculty perceived a range of job functions as

stressful, most commonly around insufficient recognition or reward for their work, promotion

and tenure, experiences when they questioned their professional identity around scholarly

activity (such as research and publication expertise) and around teaching and student interactions

(Gillespie, et al, 2001).

Iqbal and Kokash (2011) identified specific faculty perceptions of stress and the coping

strategies used in Saudi Arabia universities. Their study focused on faculty stress that stemmed

from student interactions and faculty questioning their own professional identity. Student

interactions concern a large portion of early career faculty work and not understanding how to

council or advising students on a research path or which courses to enroll can be very stressful. A

faculty’s professional identity is how they come to understand research, the professional norms

of their institution, and how they fit into those roles and responsibilities (Reybold, 2003). The

8

idea of an academic’s professional identity is often formed as a doctoral or graduate student,

which is why we so often see these individuals identify with the imposter phenomenon.

Concerning stress outcomes, Thomas and Lankau (2009) examined how role stress to be

the primary link to burnout and stress among faculty. Role stress, similar to faculty professional

identity, has been linked to miscommunication or uncertainty of job functions, conflict, or a

combination. Consistent with Hobfall’s conservation-of-resources (COR) theory, when job

demands (administrative roles, more teaching) and uncertainty increased, faculty perceived that

their resources (grant funding, opportunities for tenure) were depleting, thus making them more

susceptive to such burnout. Thomas and Lankau (2009) proposed that burnout from role stress

could be decreased when social support like mentoring and career support were increased and

steady with faculty relationships.

Faculty Coping with Stress

Within the research, authors discovered coping mechanisms faculty engaged in when they

encountered stress. The most commonly used coping tools appear across several studies, and

include receiving job feedback from department chairs, recognition of achievements,

communication with deans and chairs for faculty to set yearly goals, the development of a

support network including a mentoring program and training (Hill 2004; Iqbal & Kokash (2011).

Collectively, faculty employed a number of coping mechanisms to alleviate job stress, including

seeking exercise and physical activity (i.e., yoga), spending time with their families, seeking

social support, socialization and entertainment, time management and spirituality, (Gillespie, et

al, 2001; Iqbal & Kokash, 2011; Thomas & Lankua, 2009).

9

Mentoring and Social Support

While faculty mentoring as a developmental resource has been found to increase

perceived job satisfaction, overall career satisfaction, lower stress associated with managing job

demands, and reduced burnout (Abouserie 1996; Emmerik, 2003; 2004), it has not been fully

explored as a coping skill among faculty who struggle with imposter tendencies. Zorn (2005)

suggested that a lack of mentoring can actually accentuate imposter tendencies among faculty

given that the academic climate can be highly competitive, espouse “disciplinary nationalism”

(highly specialized fields that don’t value interdisciplinary work, p. 1), promote scholarly

isolation, and regard publications and grants over the scholarly process. She also challenged the

idea that only early career faculty (i.e., faculty within their first six years on the tenure-track)

experience imposter feelings and suggested that it can also occur among mid and senior career

faculty. Additionally, Palepu and colleagues (1998) found that faculty with mentors rated their

research preparation (described as working on research and grant success) higher given their

mentoring support than those who did not have a mentor. Mentors could assist mentees “through

development functions …in clarifying their work roles so that they perceive fewer role stressors

and experience more positive attitudes,” (Thomas & Lankua, 2009, p.421).

In examining mentoring forms (formal, informal, mentoring groups), Pololoi and Knight

(2005) found that peer group mentoring offered numerous benefits, including empowerment, the

involvement of multiple areas of expertise, and development of personal awareness (Pololi &

Knight, 2005). The authors also found that while informal mentoring is often more productive,

they assert that often it is only accessible to a small number of faculty that have strong social

networks (Pololi & Knight, 2005) which may limit faculty that feel isolated based on number or

similarity. However, the creation of formal dyadic mentoring programs allows faculty to have

10

access to and gain support, motivation, and a peer who often invests in one another’s ideas

(Pololi & Knight, 2005; Thomas & Lankau, 2009). Taken together, there is a compelling basis

for the role of social support, often in form of a mentoring relationship(s), in helping faculty

manage stress, role conflict, and assisting in the development their professional identity

formation.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Our study is part of a much larger comparative data set of faculty experiences with imposter

tendencies. In the primary study, Hutchins and Rainbolt (2015) found that faculty (n=312)

reported moderate levels of imposter tendencies (based on the Clance IP scale, 1985) which were

statistically correlated with performance (r = -.42) and burnout (r = .51). Faculty also reported

using more adaptive coping skills (i.e., seeking social support, using humor, positive

reinforcement), and relied more on coping resources that provided emotional and instrumental

support. Specifically, faculty who reported confiding in mentors (n=80) perceived that these

disclosures helped to normalize their imposter concerns (r =.46, p<.01).

In the present study, we take a more qualitative approach to exploring the discontinuities

or events that trigger imposter tendencies and which coping skills were most effective at

mitigating such experiences using a critical incident technique (CIT). Critical incident technique

involves the study of significant instances of an activity as experienced or observed by the

research participants (Butterfield, Borgen, Amundson, & Maglio, 2005; Flanagan, 1954), and has

been used in replace of quantitative scales of coping as a way to simultaneously link the specific

coping responses used to the actual source of reported stress (Driscoll & Cooper, 1994).

11

We chose CIT as a way to capture the stories and experiences of faculty experiencing a particular

episode that triggered imposter thoughts, and to explain how they coped with the experience. As

previously discussed, imposter research has been limited in scope by focusing mostly on

identifying the existence, predictors and correlates, and outcomes of imposter phenomenon with

fewer studies examining actual coping methods. Critical incident technique was appropriate in

this research context because the knowledge sought was particular to a set of individuals (e.g.,

academic faculty) who had reported experiences with imposter tendencies in our survey study.

Our sample involved faculty at a large urban, research intensive academic university and

faculty at a medical teaching university (n=314) in the south-central region of the United States.

Faculty (n=15) were recruited from their participation in the survey and volunteered to

participate in follow-up interviews. Participants were 60 percent women, 67 percent were

affiliated with the academic research institution, with the majority in the rank of associate

professor (n=10) and in a STEM discipline (87 percent). Although Flanagan’s (1954) CIT

approach includes five steps, we instead used Driscoll and Cooper’s (1994) adaptation of the

Flanagan model (antecedents, responses, consequences) to explore the stress-coping process in

work settings given the strong support found in our survey between imposter tendencies and

emotional exhaustion (burnout). Emotional exhaustion represents the stress dimension of burnout and

often manifests itself by increased fatigue, depression, emotional and cognitive distancing from work

resulting in adverse work outcomes such as satisfaction and performance (Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter,

2001).

Our interview protocol included four demographic items (name, rank, time in rank,

discipline), and five questions that solicited a description of the imposter incident, coping

responses and related outcomes (specific questions are included in the Results section). We also

asked about participant’s perspectives on institutional resources that could support faculty who

12

struggled with imposter tendencies. Interviews lasted approximately 45 minutes and were audio-

recorded by the first author. Consistent with content analysis procedures noted by Butterfield et

al. (2005) based on Flanagan’s directions, we organized and reviewed the data manually. We

then reviewed all the interview data to get a general sense of the comments, identified and

grouped key words and phrases to identify first-order categories, and ultimately identified and

confirmed major themes.

RESULTS

Our results are organized around Driscoll and Cooper’s (1994) antecedents-responses-

consequences framework for describing coping skills for stress-related incidents (as we define

faculty experiences with imposter thoughts and feelings).

Antecedent Imposter Incidents

To explore the critical incident, we asked participants to explain a time when they felt like an

imposter, and what was it about the situation that caused the imposter thoughts and feelings. In

asking these questions, we were looking for a definitive incident or episode in their career that

initiated their imposter thoughts. As noted in Table 1, four main incidents emerged that provoked

imposter feelings among faculty in our sample.

Several participants described specific situations where their expertise was questioned

either by students (class or content expertise), colleagues (specialization expertise) or their own

self-limiting thoughts about their subject matter knowledge. While imposters usually have more

internal struggle with their own sense of legitimacy, we did hear from several participants that

their imposter thoughts were often triggered by overt comments by colleagues who either did not

respect their area of expertise or training. One participant described how his colleagues often

questioned his preparation to be in the doctoral program: “I think the times that I did (feel

13

imposter thoughts) were related to external sources. In other words, other colleagues in my

specialty and outside of my specialty actually, with more people within my specialty, doing the ‘I

am better than you and you don’t need to be here.” Consistent with imposter’s having a difficult

time internalizing success (Clance, 1978; Whitman & Shanine, 2012), a few faculty also spoke

about their uneasiness with accepting their own success (e.g. grant award, publication) or being

asked to serve as an expert on a panel or an interview request. For example, one participant felt

they only experienced imposter thoughts around promotions or successes:

“I can remember it occurring just when I was offered the position, and was able to start as an assistant professor and I found it difficult to internalize that I was taking on that position. I had a lot of self-doubt a lot of feeling like I couldn’t do it. Promotions, successes. It has happened weirdly around successes.”

Another participant expressed uneasiness with the title of ‘expert’ in their field: “We’re asked to

speak at conferences and it’s just that title ‘expert’ that makes me pause a little bit every time.”

Participants also reported questioning their research expertise around developing and

submitting scholarly work or grants, handling negative reviews or rejections, and during their

probationary period in working toward promotion and/or tenure. As consistent with prior work,

most of these experiences were noted in the faculty member’s early career as tenure-track

assistant professors, however many noted that they continue to experience imposter thoughts in

the associate rank. Participants overwhelmingly described these instances as “creating pressure”

for them to perform or demonstrate expertise that they doubted having enough of. Finally, a few

faculty also reported they would experience imposter tendencies when engaging in social

comparison with their colleagues around accomplishments or areas of expertise, noting that this

was especially true in competitive departmental climates.

14

Applied Coping Responses & Perceived Outcomes

After participants described a specific incident that triggered their imposter thoughts, we asked

them to describe what, if any, coping mechanisms they used in an attempt to lessen the resulting

stress (i.e., imposter thoughts) and to what extent these were perceived as successful. Driscoll

and Cooper (1994) emphasize the importance of having participants specify what they did as a

response to the stressful event and to what extent these impacted the stress response. Participants

described several coping responses to address the psychological distress associated with

experiencing imposter thoughts, with the majority of these including more adaptive coping skills

such as seeking or receiving social support, challenging cognitive distortions, and using positive

affirmations. Only a few participants noted maladaptive coping methods such as excessive

alcohol or working harder.

Although various types of social support were described, faculty seemed to rely most on

emotional (listening, expressing empathy) and instrumental support (giving advice, making

suggestions) in an attempt to assuage the stress resulting from imposter thoughts and feelings as

noted in Table 2. One participant discussed the specific support from her mentor, noting how she

challenged her attributions about success and challenges noting

“I would present these problems to my mentor as you know these are some things I’m concerned I’m worried about or need help with these things. And she would be able provide me with you know, an outside set of eyes to say it’s not as bad as you think it is or here’s how you get through it or you know ‘I went through the same thing, here are some suggestions’.”

Imposter Frequency Among Colleagues & Institutional Support

Although not a specific part of Driscoll and Cooper’s (1994) CIT approach, we also asked

participants if they perceived imposter thoughts were experienced among their colleagues, and

the role their institution should have in providing support or resources to help them and their

15

colleagues address these issues. The majority of faculty (n=11) believed their colleagues did

experience imposter tendencies, but that most did not discuss these issue for fear of being

perceived as weak or less confident. As one faculty described:

...these are the kinds of things that we don’t really talk about because I think we feel what we feel, I don’t know if the right word is ashamed, but that is very private (and) you don’t want to tell other people that you’re unsure of yourself, or that you don’t think you can live up to the expectations.”

Some faculty perceived women and other minority faculty experience imposter thoughts more

than men. A Latino male faculty member expressed his own experience:

I think they are more common in colleagues that have had a non-traditional legacy, not in people who have had a legacy of academic achievement, who have multiple family members and multiple generations with high achievement, in higher education, even if they did not pursue an academic career. They are much less likely to talk about; I think it is more prevalent in people who have had journeys like mine, they are trailblazers in their families, they are the first in their families to go to college, to go to graduate school, to get a doctorate, to get a masters. When you are exploring new territory, I think it is a context in which these thoughts and feelings are much more prevalent. I think definitely women; we live in a society where women have a lot more to prove. Men are privileged in our society, even minority men. The whole debate about black and Latino men, but you still have more privilege if you are a man.” We also explored the role of institutions in identifying and addressing ineffective

stressors to ensure employee productivity and satisfaction. The majority of faculty did believe

the university should provide support in helping faculty deal with imposter thoughts specifically

around offering opportunities for support and resources. Faculty noted the need for mentoring

and small group discussions that helped normalize imposter concerns especially in understanding

the typical incidents that might trigger such feelings or thoughts and ways to challenge distorted

attributions of performance that imposters typically make (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2015; Lyden,

Chaney, Danehower & Houston, 2002; Stocker, 1986). Participants also noted the utility of

having small group discussions that make faculty and faculty advocates (e.g. chairs, mentors,

those responsible for faculty development) aware of signs that faculty may be experiencing

16

imposter tendencies, stress management training, and supporting a positive climate (in terms of

boosting collegial support rather than competitiveness). One faculty noted the importance of

institutional support:

“a broader effort to make sure everybody is aware, that something like this happens, that it can impact your productivity, that’s the key message. It’s terrible to think that some of my colleagues might be driven to psychological pain, but people who are in positions to make decisions do not care about that, you can’t hit them with that. Now if you say, there is lost productivity, and that faculty in this position is less productive. If there was a way to quantify it, how much lost productivity there is, the reaction then changes one of “This is costing us how much?”

Additional suggestions of support included one-one coaching and counseling sessions.

Despite offering the suggested resources, participants expressed ambivalence about whether they

would actually participate in any of the resources, citing “confidentiality” or a “fear of being

exposed” as reasons for their reluctance.

DISCUSSION & FUTURE IMPLICATIONS

As an extension of our larger study on faculty experiences of imposter tendencies, we examined

the events that trigger imposter tendencies, which coping skills were most effective at mitigating

such experiences, and what types of institutional resources could be offered to support faculty

struggling with imposter issues. Our results are mostly consistent with prior research on the

typical events or incidents that provoke imposter thoughts: overt or implied challenges to

expertise or professional legitimacy, external review experiences such as promotion and tenure

and engaging in scholarly activity (publications and grants), and general social comparison with

colleagues. Situated in Kegan’s (1982) identity development work, the reported incidents can be

indicative of the evolving sense-making faculty engage in understanding their role. For example,

two of our main themes—promotion and tenure, and scholarly activity—are highly evaluative

processes that help “define” faculty productivity and merit. As post-docs and tenure-track

17

professors, most faculty may have yet to separate the external validation of their identity—or as

Kegan (1982) calls “the socialized mind”—from their internal validation of their faculty role.

Relying almost exclusively on external validation to define their faculty identity can contribute

to increased vulnerability for experiencing imposter thoughts, especially when faculty experience

any type of setback or challenge to their professional legitimacy (e.g. unfunded grants, rejected

manuscripts, critical or unsupportive colleagues).

Viewing faculty experiences with imposter thoughts through the lens of identity

development may also help explain why faculty question their legitimacy and expertise even

when they experience successes. Since their identity has yet to be internalized and they lack a

filter for evaluating external messages concerning their worth, faculty may feel they are merely

“acting the part” of being a faculty member rather than truly embodying the role and expressing

confidence in their expertise. Kegan notes this as the fourth stage of identity development, where

individuals develop their own system of values and internal processes they use to evaluate and

reconcile external messages about their role. However, it is important to note that most of our

faculty mentioned experiencing imposter thoughts throughout their career, which is supportive of

the non-linear progression through identity stages and the shifting of professional identity work

based on both positive and negative experiences. As Jarvis-Selinger and her colleagues explain

about professional identity formation, “it (training to be a professional) may appear to be a

smooth, linear trajectory toward an end goal, (but) it is in reality a process of constructing and

abandoning a series of successive identities, each with its own set of roles, perspectives, rights

and responsibilities.” (2012, p. 3). As faculty members become aware of common situations that

may trigger them to question their professional legitimacy, the resulting stress might be lessened

18

as such experiences are normalized and can be viewed as opportunities for reflection and

learning rather than self-limitations and critiques.

Concerning how faculty coped with the specific incidents, our results definitively support

extant work around the importance of healthy self-directed and social support methods for

mitigating stress associated with imposter experiences (Carver, Scheier & Weintraub, 1989;

Driscoll & Cooper, 1982). Consistent across these coping approaches was the importance of

normalizing imposter tendencies and in challenging cognitive distortions around success and

challenges. Although personal support networks or professional counselors can assist with this

support, the more critical feedback may come from more proximal sources of what Jarvis-

Selinger and her colleagues call “socializing agents” (2012, p. 4) that can influence faculty

identity development. Such proximal sources (mentors, colleagues, department chairs) were

noted by the faculty in our sample as offering support that helped faculty regulate their

cognitions and emotions in making sense of their imposter thoughts and experiences. Such

agents, if made aware of the common incidents and useful coping methods, could be more

proactive in offering support especially to faculty groups that may be more vulnerable to

experiencing imposter tendencies involving questioning their professional legitimacy (e.g. early

career faculty, women faculty, faculty of color, and faculty that are first-generation academics).

Faculty also noted the important role institutional support can play in helping them

address the resulting stress resulting from imposter experiences included supporting mentoring

relationships, having small group discussions about imposter tendencies, and training chairs and

other “agents” about recognizing faculty stressors and offering support. Such support resources

could be built into faculty orientation (to increase self-awareness) and included in training

faculty mentors and other supporters (to help normalize imposter experiences), and offer

19

resources to help increase awareness of faculty identity issues. Clearly, the role of mentoring

emerged as a developmental resource that faculty cited as helping them moderate imposter

tendencies and one that they would like to see offered and supported by their institution. A

mentor can assist in assessing career goals and helping the mentee to strategize, helping reduce

work stress, burn out, and work-life balance. According to Hamlin and Sage (2011), mentoring is

seen as a core tool for human resource development professionals used in organizations for

career advancement, to create a learning environment within the organization, and job training

(especially for those new to a position). Although the majority of faculty support work has

focused on mentoring as an instrumental and emotional form of social support, Emmerik (2004)

also found that mentoring was correlated with career satisfaction and intrinsic job satisfaction,

areas that have been linked to influencing job retention.

In summary, how faculty cope with work stressors that involve questioning their

professional legitimacy and expertise is an important area of inquiry. Our research will serve as a

reference point for institutions preparing faculty—and the systems and processes that support

them—to address potential stressors as part of their identity development. Using a critical

incident method to explore faculty narratives, we identified common antecedents, coping

responses, outcomes, and institutional support to mitigate faculty stress associated with imposter

experiences.

20

References

Abouserie, Reda (1996) Stress, Coping Strategies and Job Satisfaction in University Academic Staff, Educational Psychology, 16(1), 49-56.

Berk, R.A.Phd, Berg, J. MS,RN, Mortimer, R. MS,MSEd,RN, Walton-Moss, B. DNS,RN, & Yeo, T.P. MSN,MPH,RN (2005). Measuring the Effectiveness of Faculty Mentoring Relationships. Academic Medicine, 80(1), 66-71.

Butterfield, L. D., Borgen, W. A., Amundson, N. E., & Maglio, A. T. (2005). Fifty years of the Critical Incident Technique: 1954–2004 and beyond. Qualitative Research, 5, 475-497.

Carver, C. S.; Scheier, M. F.; Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267-283.

Clance, P. R. (1985). The impostor phenomenon: Overcoming the fear that haunts your success. Atlanta, GA: Peachtree Publishers.

Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15(3), 241-247. doi:10.1037/h0086006

Chrisman, S.M.; Pieper, W.A.; Clance, P.R.; Holland, C.L.; Glickhauf-Hughes, C. (1995). Validation of the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65(3), 456-468.

Driscoll, M.P. & Cooper, C.L. (1994). Coping with work-related stress: A critique of existing measures and proposal for an alternative methodology. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 64, 343-354.

Emmerik, Hetty van I.J. (2003). For better and for worse, Adverse working conditions and the beneficial effects of mentoring. Career Development International, 9(4), 358-373.

Emmerik, Hetty van I.J.(2004). The more you can get the better Mentoring constellations and intrinsic career success. Career Development International, 9(6), 578-594.

Erikson, E.H. (1982). The Life Cycle Completed. New York: Wiley Publishing.

Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327-358.

Gillespie, N.A.; Walsh, M.; Winefield, A.H.; Dua, J. & Stough, C. (2001). Occupational stress in universities: staff perceptions of the causes, consequences, and moderators of stress. Work & Stress, 15(1), 53-72.

Hall, L.A. & Burns, L.D. (2009). Identity Development and Mentoring in Doctoral Education. Harvard Education Review, 79(1), 49-70.

21

Henning , K., Ey , S., & Shaw, D. (1998, September). Perfectionism, the impostor phenomenon and psychological adjustment in medical, dental, nursing and pharmacy students. Medical Education, 32(5), 456–464. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.1998.00234.x

Hill, N. (2004). The Challenges Experienced by Pretenured Faculty Members in Counselor Education: A Wellness Perspective. Counselor Education and Supervision. 44(2), 135-146.

Huffstutler, S.Y & Varnell, G. (2006). The imposter phenomenon in new nurse practitionergraduates.Topics in Advanced Practice Nursing eJournal, 6 (2), retrieved from http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/533648

Hutchins, H.M. (in press). Outing the Imposter: A study exploring imposter phenomenon among higher education faculty. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development.

Hutchins, H.M. & Rainbolt, H. (2015). Who wears the mask? Exploring imposter phenomenon, work outcomes and social support among academic and medical faculty. Academy of Human Resource Development Conference in the Americas. St. Louis, MO.

Iqbal, A. & Kokash, H (2011). Faculty Perception of Stress and Coping Strategies in a Saudi Private University: An Exploratory Study. International Education Studies, 4(3), 137-151. doi: 10.5539/ies.v4np137.

Jarvis-Selinger, S. PhD; Pratt, D.D. PhD & Regehr, G. PhD (2012). Competency Is Not Enough: Integrating Identity Formation Into the Medical Education Discourse. Academic Medicine, 87(9), 1185-1190.

Kegan, R. (1982). The Evolving Self: Problems and Process in Human Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kets de Vries, M. F. (2005). The dangers of feeling like a fake. Harvard business review, 83(9), 108.

Kumar, S., & Jagacinski, C.M. (2005). Imposters have goals too: The imposter phenomenon and its relationship to achievement goal therapy. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(2006), 147-157.

Legassie,J. MD; Zibrowski, E.M. MS & Goldszmidt, M.A. MD (2008). Measuring Resident Wellbeing: Imposterism and Burnout Syndrome in Residency. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(7), 1090-1094.

Lyden, J.A.; Chaney, L.H.; Danehower, V.C. & Houston, D.A. (2002). Anchoring, Attributions, and Self-Efficacy: An Examination of Interactions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 99-117.

22

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S.E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99-119

Maslach, C.; Schaufeli, W.B. & Leiter, M.P. (2001) Job Burnout. Annual Review of Psychology. 52 (1), 397-422.

McGregor, L., Gee, D.E., & Posey, K.E (2008). I feel like a fraud and it depresses me: The relation between the imposter phenomenon and depression. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36(1), 43-48.

Oriel, K., Plane, M. B., & Mundt , M. (2004). Family medicine residents and the impostor phenomenon. Family Medicine, 36(4), 248-252.

Palepu, A. MD MPH; Friedman, R.H. MD; Barnett, R.C. PhD; Carr, P.L. MD; Ash, A.S. PhD;Szalacha, L. EdM & Moskowitz, M.A. MD (1998). Junior Faculty Members’ Mentoring Relationships and Their Professional Development in U.S. Medical School. Academic Medicine, 73(3), 318-323.

Parkman, A. & Beard, R. (2008) Succession Planning and the Imposter Phenomenon in Higher Education. CUPA-HR Journal, 29-36.

Pololi, L. MBBS & Knight, S. PhD, RN (2005). Mentoring Faculty in Academic Medicine: ANew Paradigm? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 20(9), 866-870. Doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.05007.x

Reybold, L.E. (2008). Pathways to the Professorate: The Development of Faculty Identity in Education. Innovative Higher Education, 27(4), 235-252.

Ross, S. R., & Krukowski, R. A. (2003). The imposter phenomenon and maladaptive personality: Type and trait characteristics. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(3), 477-484.

Stocker, C. 1986. Imposter phenomenon: When even the most successful people a have gnawing feeling they’re fakes. Boston Globe, March 22, p. 16.

Thomas, C.H. & Lankua, M.J. (2009). Preventing Burnout: The effects of LMX and Mentoring on Socialization, Role Stress, and Burnout. Human Resource Management, 48(3), 417-432.

Trower, C.A. (2010, Summer) A New Generation of Faculty: Similar Core Values in a Different World. Peer Review, 12(3), 27-35.

Watson, G.C., & Betts, A.S. (2010). Confronting otherness: An e-conversation between doctoral students living with the imposter syndrome. Canadian Journal for New Scholars in Education, 3(1), 1-13.

Whitman, M.V. & Shanine, K. K.(2012). Revising the imposter phenomenon: How individuals cope with feelings of being in over their head. Research in Occupational Stress, 10, 177-212.

23

Wilson, P.P., Valentine, D. & Pereira, A. (2002). Perceptions of new social work faculty about mentoring experiences. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(2), 317-332

Zorn, D. 2005. Academic culture feeds the imposter phenomenon. Academic Leader, 25 (8), 1-8.

24

Appendices

Incidents that provoked imposter thoughts

(F) Resulting Imposter Thought or Feeling

(F) Career Stage

Situations where expertise was questioned (self, students, colleagues)

6 Doubting or lacking confidence in expertise

5 During their Entire Career – 5, As an Assistant Professor Entirely – 1

Working on research or grant proposals, submitting research and grants for review, receiving negative feedback or rejections for research and grants submissions

4 Questioning research or scholarly efficacy (difficulty getting research out for publication; handling rejection of articles or grant proposals)

3 As an early Assistant Professor – 2, During their Entire Career – 2

Concerns around working toward promotion and tenure

3 Questioned professional legitimacy

6 During their Entire Career – 2, As an Assistant Professor Entirely - 1

Comparisons to/among colleagues

2 Distorted comparisons to colleagues

4 During their Entire Career – 2

Table 1: Imposter Incidents, Resulting Thoughts/Feelings, Career Stage

25

Coping Mechanisms Used F Supporting QuotesSeeking social support:

Instrumental (7) Emotional (4) Network (3) Appraisal (1)

15 Instrumental: “That was tough at first, because I listened to the feedback and the suggestions from people who have done it longer and can see that the changes worked, and I am a lot more confident with that.”

Emotional:. I would present these problems to my mentor as you know these are some things I’m concerned I’m worried about or need help with these things. And she would be able provide me with you know, an outside set of eyes to say it’s not as bad as you think it is or here’s how you get through it or you know ‘I went through the same thing, here are some suggestions’.”

Correcting cognitive distortions; Validation of Successes

6 “I think it was just enough to go back and pull out some papers that I was proud of and go back and look at a grant that didn’t get funded and say yeah, do you still like this idea, yeah I do”

“For me, if I can sit down and list it out, I could see that’s actually something. So, if I can sit down and write it out, I can see oh, that’s something I’ve done. That’s something I try to have my graduate students do is self-rate their successes”

Engaged in maladaptive behaviors (excessive alcohol consumption, work)

5 “I actually go do extra work afterwards, to see can I still do that? Is my game still there? Convincing myself after the fact that I didn’t just lie to the students, or that I’m not a sham”

“Occasionally, I go out with a colleague who drinks too much and we drink too much, it is a hard job.”

Positive affirmation and self-talk

4 “Engaging in a lot of self-talk, so being clear that I am proud of the work that I have done, even if it doesn’t measure up in terms of numbers”

“… trying to focus on the other parts of my life that are important to me and recognizing that I really am only one person I can only do so many things at once. That I earned tenure here and that somebody recognized my accomplishments and that perhaps this particular point in my life is not going to be where I am producing the most in terms of external measurement of my success

Table 2. Reported Coping Methods

26

Table 3. Institutional Support

Institutions Role in Support

F Participation Requirements

F Desired Support F

Should play some role

9 Confidentiality: “Who else was in the room”

7 Mentoring, small group discussions

13

Unsure of role 6 Support and mentoring relationships

6 Training, Coaching, Counseling, General

awareness discussions (competitive dept. climate,

stress management)

8

.