Nicola Cragg
BA (Hons) Primary Teaching Studies 5-11 with recommendations for QTS.
Dr Thomas J. Dunn
Senior Lecturer in Psychology
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the presence of imposter phenomenon (IP) within teacher training students, as well as compare the levels of IP between training courses. It also sought to determine links between social anxiety, self-handicapping, self-efficacy, and competitiveness with IP, as well as whether self-handicapping mediated the relationship between social anxiety and IP. Participants were recruited from two training courses (n=79), based at a UK HE institution and responded to a battery of psychometric scales. Results indicated that a number of character traits were related to IP and also that self-handicapping played a mediatory role in the relationship between social anxiety and IP.
Introduction
Imposter phenomenon (IP) is a widespread construct experienced by approximately 70% of the world’s population at least once in their life (Harvey & Katz, 1985). IP characterised by feelings of self-doubt, intellectual inadequacy and anticipated failure (Clance & Imes, 1978). Imposters tend to attribute their success to external factors such as luck and help from others rather than their abilities. They develop a belief that they are not intelligent, capable, or creative and consequently experience a feeling of phoniness (Clance & Imes, 1978; Hoang, 2013). IP was a term first coined by Clance and Imes (1978) when investigating the experiences of high achieving women. Since then, IP has been documented within a large range of the population including those working in health care, accountancy, marketing, education and law (Parkman, 2016).
IP has been linked with a number of psychological and emotional difficulties including maladaptive behaviours, anxiety, depression, self-criticism, neuroticism and emotional exhaustion (Bernard, Dollinger & Ramaniah, 2002; McGregor, Gee & Posey, 2008; Sakulku & Alexander, 2011; Clark et al., 2014; Sonnak & Towell, 2001). It has also been shown to affect academic and job performance, job satisfaction, and can lead to higher levels of burnout (De Vries, 2005; Hutchins, 2015; Sims, 2017). Regarding education, students’ assessment of teachers who experience IP is generally lower than teachers who do not experience IP, suggesting IP can impact an educator’s ability to teach (Brems, Baldwin, Davis & Namyniuk, 1994). IP may also inhibit professional development through reduced voluntary undertaking of training and educational courses (Vinnicombe & Singh, 2002). It has been argued that this is because imposters believe they are not worthy of further training or that participation increases their chances of being ‘found out’ by peers, a concept which appears especially common in women (Vinnicombe & Singh, 2002).
IP has been well documented in students across a range of higher education courses including, psychology, nursing and doctoral programmes (Ferrari & Thompson, 2006; Gibson-Beverly & Schwartz, 2008; Parkman, 2016; Craddock, Birnbaun, Rodriguez, Cobb & Zeeh, 2011). Within higher education, research has shown that IP can be experienced by faculty members as well as students, most prominently by non-tenured staff (Hutchins, 2015). This suggests that development and experience of IP may be affected by job security. Research has also shown that IP is experienced by educators working with younger students such as within primary and secondary schools.
IP has been explored within both teachers and students independently (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017), however there is minimal literature exploring the experiences of students currently undertaking the transition from student to teacher, performing in both roles simultaneously. A large proportion of teacher training students have a strong notion of teacher identity (Malderez, Hobson, Tracey & Kerr, 2007) and research shows that the majority of trainee teachers believe that they must undergo a transition from ‘non-teacher’ to ‘teacher’ at some point during their training course (Malderez et al., 2007). This suggests that trainee teachers, especially towards the start of their course, may have a pre-occupation with their status as ‘student’ and/or ‘teacher’, resulting in an awareness of fulfilling a role they may not feel ‘entitled’ to (Malderez et al., 2007). Trainee teachers are surrounded by more experienced colleagues which may emphasise the disparity across roles as ‘learner’ and ‘teacher’ (Polach, 2004; Lane, 2015). Entering unfamiliar environments in which trainee teachers’ expectation is uncertain, has been suggested to increase feelings of being an ‘imposter’ (Polach, 2004; Lane, 2015). Furthermore, increasing time in school-based placement and training has been suggested to result in less contact with students’ social network, which have been shown to exacerbate IP-related feelings such as isolation, depression and self-doubt (Murphy, Blustein, Bohlig & Platt, 2010; Lane, 2015). In general, the literature suggests that trainee teachers may be highly susceptible to experiencing IP owing to the nature of the transition from ‘student’ to ‘teacher’. Additionally, the switching of such roles, and therefore feelings of IP, may be magnified during a period of placement, where a trainee teacher is faced with fulfilling both roles concurrently and may have reduced access to their typical social network.
Training course
There are several routes that students can take in order to earn Qualified Teacher Status in the UK (QTS). The two main routes include completing an undergraduate primary education degree with QTS or a Post-Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE). There is no research currently comparing experiences of IP across these two routes into teaching. Both courses involve extended school-based placements, with a minimum of 120 days required to qualify, although this is undertaken in more concentrated doses by those on the PGCE course (Prospects, 2018; Bishop Grosseteste University, 2019a; Bishop Grosseteste University, 2019b). Those undertaking a PGCE may be particularly vulnerable to IP for a number of additional reasons. A PGCE is a short one-year course (Prospects, 2018; Bishop Grosseteste University, 2019c) and students are given little time to adjust and therefore for IP to decrease. Additionally, experiencing a role change quickly may impact the ‘quality’ of transition and lead to low self-regulation and consequently high IP (Sims, 2017). Alternatively, the undergraduate primary education degree is a longer course, spanning three years (Bishop Grosseteste University, 2019c), which allows for a more gradual increase in responsibilities and experience. This could potentially lead to lower instances of experiencing IP compared with the PGCE training course (Bertram, Mthiyane & Mukeredzi, 2013).
Character traits
The extant literature within education has focused on exploring the diversity and prevalence of IP (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017), however it is important to determine the potential links between IP and character traits. Identification of predictive traits can be used to inform intervention and support strategies and reduce dropout rates within training programmes and in school development (Parkman, 2016). There are several traits that have as yet not been directly examined as predictors of IP, but ones which have a theoretical basis for being investigated. In particular, the interrelations between traits (such as the role of mediator variables) should be assessed to provide a more multifaceted understanding of the mechanisms behind experiencing IP as a trainee teacher.
Research shows that imposters believe they cannot fulfill the expectations of their peers or ideal image of a friend, partner or family member and so avoid social time due to fear of being ‘found out’ (Hoang, 2013). Social anxiety may feed into such beliefs, as it is characterised through an excessive fear of negative judgement by peers, fear of making a mistake and social avoidance and distress (Crome, Grove, Baillie, Sunderland, Teesson & Slade, 2015; Pabian & Vandebosch, 2016). Imposters feel as if they put on a false front socially, deceiving the world into believing they are good people, while they believe themselves to be selfish, hostile and mean (Hoang, 2013). Thus, an increase in fear of negative judgement (i.e., social anxiety) may feed into IP in three ways: i) by reducing engagement with growthand development, thus failing to overcome feelings of self-doubt and intellectual inadequacy, ii) increasing the anticipation of failure and thus enhancing feelings of being an imposter, and iii) avoiding work-based social contexts due to anxiety and thus reducing exposure to potentially disconfirmatory imposter-upholding information.
Research also points to the potential mediatory role of self-handicapping between social anxiety and IP. Self-handicapping is a cognitive strategy employed to help protect an individual’s self-esteem by creating barriers to limit performance which can deflect attention away from an individual’s ability, should performance be deemed as inadequate (Midgley & Urdan, 2001; Schwinger, Wirthwein, Lemmer & Steinmayr, 2014). Methods of self-handicapping include procrastination, reduced effort, little or no practise/revision, fatigue and physical symptoms (Martin, Marsh & Debus, 2001; Urdan & Midgley, 2001). Self-handicapping has been shown to be used by individuals to modulate social anxiety (Snyder, Smith, Augelli, & Ingram, 1985). Snyder and Smith (1982) argue it may aid in reducing social anxiety by way of: (1) controlling attributions (made by oneself or others) concerning performance so as to discount the self-relevant implication of poor performance and augment the self-relevant implications of success, (2) avoiding the threatening evaluative situation entirely, or (3) maintaining existing environmental conditions that maximize positive self-relevant feedback and minimize negative self-relevant feedback (p.107).
The employment of self-handicapping behaviours to lessen social anxiety may have subsequent effects for feelings of being an imposter. Self-handicapping may limit performance for fear of failure, thus protecting potential self-esteem threat and reducing social anxiety, and in doing so could limit addressing feelings of inadequacy and ultimately maintain (or at least prolong) feelings related to IP. Furthermore, research has shown that there is a significant connection between self-handicapping and self-esteem (a construct linked to IP) in which individuals with higher self-esteem display lower levels of self-handicapping (Pulford, Johnson & Awaida, 2005; Clark et al., 2014; Topping & Kimmel, 1985). Evidence suggests moderate to high handicapping (e.g., procrastination) can be found in 50% of trainee teachers (Balkis & Duru, 2009). Thus, it may be the case that engaging in self-handicapping behaviours may increase the chances of experiencing feelings of being an ‘imposter’.
Owing to the core role of self-related beliefs concerning performance in IP, it is important to examine related traits. For example, self-efficacy regards an individual’s perception of their ability to complete a task or reach a goal successfully (Ng, Ang & Chan, 2008; Jansen, Scherer & Schroeders, 2015). Therefore, individuals with higher levels of self-efficacy may experience feelings related to IP less frequently. Self-efficacy also correlates with several characteristics related to IP including neuroticism, self-confidence and self-esteem (Bernard et al., 2002; Clark et al., 2014; Ng et al., 2008).
Multiple authors highlight that environments where IP is frequently observed tend to be highly competitive, such as education and academia (Clark et al., 2014; Zorn, 2005; Hutchins, 2015; Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017). Parkman (2016) points out that there has been much anecdotal evidence in the form of blogs and commentary from faculty (Bahn, 2014; Gravois, 2007; Kasper; 2013; Webb, 2013) to support the notion that highly competitive working environments ‘create a setting conducive to feelings of self-doubt and fraudulence’ (Hutchins, 2015, p.4). There is also existing indirect evidence which shows competitiveness-related traits such as Type A Behaviour Pattern (TABP), impatience, hostility, being work-orientated (Hayes & Davies, 1993), and the continuous endeavour to exceed previous performances (Schubert, 2013) are related to IP.
The current study
Thus, the aims for this study are as follows:
To determine the extent to which trainee teachers experience IP during the school-based placement component of their training.
To compare the experiences of IP within trainee teachers undertaking different training routes, primarily the undergraduate primary education degree with QTS and the PGCE.
To determine how well the experience of IP within teacher training students can be predicted by self-efficacy, self-handicapping, social anxiety and competitiveness.
To determine the mediatory role of self-handicapping in the relationship between social anxiety and IP.
Method
Design
A cross-section design was used incorporating a battery of psychometric scales to measure self-efficacy, social anxiety, self-handicapping and competitiveness, and the dependent variable IP. Questions regarding the demographics of the participants were also included (e.g. age, gender, and which qualification the participant was currently undertaking).
Participants
Convenience sampling was used to recruit the participants (n=79; female = 81%; mean age = 25.24 [SD=3.56]). Inclusion criteria required that participants were currently undertaking a teacher training course (PGCE, Primary education BA (Hons)) at the time of data collection and undertaking a school-based placement.
Materials
IP was measured using a short form of the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale (CIPS; Clance, 1985). This is a 10 item, 5-point Likert scale (‘not at all true’ to ‘very true’) in which a higher total score indicates higher experience of IP, with scores ranging from 10-50 (Clance, 1985). The CIPS has been validated by numerous studies (α=.96) and has been shown to be highly correlated with IP-related constructs (Holmes, Kertay, Adamson, Holland & Clance, 1993; Chrisman, Pieper, Clance, Holland & Glickauf-Hughes, 1995).
Self-efficacy was measured using the General Self Efficacy Scale (GSES; Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1995). This is a 10 item, 4-point Likert scale in which higher scores indicate a higher level of self-efficacy. Each item is scored from 1-not at all true to 4-exactly true, the total score ranges from 10-40. The scale has been shown to produce reliable results across a range of cultures and languages including in Germany (.89≤α≤.94), Poland (.86≤α≤.90) and South Korea (α=.86) (Luszczynska, Scholz & Schwarzer, 2005). GSES has also been shown to be reliable in terms of construct, convergent, and discriminant validity (Schwarzer et al., 1999).
Social anxiety was measured using the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale – self report (LSAS-SR; Liebowitz, 1987; Rytwinski, Fresco, Heimberg, Coles, Liebowitz, Cissell & Hofmann, 2009). LSAS-SR uses 24 items to assess fear and avoidance which are measured from one to four (1-no fear to 4-severe fear; 1-no avoidance to 4-severe avoidance). When both fear and avoidance scores are combined, they can range from 48 to 192, with a higher score indicating higher levels of social anxiety (Rytwinski et al., 2009). LSAS-SR consists of two subscales, measuring responses to social interaction situations (11 items) and performance situations (13 items) (Heimberg, Horner, Juster, Safren, Brown, Schneier & Liebowitz,1999). Test-retest reliability for the scale is good for both the fear and avoidance measures individually (r=0.79; r=0.83 respectively) as well as the scale as a whole (r=0.83) (Baker, Heinrichs, Kim & Hofmann, 2002).
Self-handicapping was measured using the short form of the Self Handicapping Scale- Shortened (SHS-S; Strube, 1986). The shortened version consists of only 10 items and has a high recorded internal consistency (α=.7) (Strube, 1986). Each item is scored using a 6-point Likert scale, from 1-disagree a lot to 6-agree a lot. Total scores range from 10 to 60, with higher scores indicating higher levels of self-handicapping.
Competitiveness was measured using the Revised Competitiveness Index (RCI; Houston, Harris, McIntire & Francis, 2002). This is a 14-item scale which comprises of 2 subscales. The first subscale contains 9 items and measures an individual’s enjoyment of competition (Houston et al., 2002). The second subscale consists of 5 items and measures contentiousness. Both subscales possess high levels of validity (α=.93, α=.82 respectively) and have acceptable test-retest reliability (r=.85, r=.78; Harris & Houston, 2010). The RCI is measured using a 4-point Likert scale, with each item marked from 1-very false to 4-very true. Scores range from 14 to 56, with higher scores indicating higher levels of competitiveness. The validity of this scale is supported by a number of previous studies (Krägeloh, Medvedev, Webster, Henning, Hill & Booth, 2019; Luchner, Houston, Walker, & Houston, 2011).
Procedure
The survey was distributed in 2019 to teacher training students through an online university portal. During the period in which the questionnaire was available for completion, 79 trainee teachers responded from both PGCE and undergraduate courses. SPSS version 26 was used to analyse the data.
Results
Please see Table 1 for descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations for each variable as well as all intercorrelations. Significant but weak correlations were indicated between each variable (see Table 1). In terms of level of agreement to the series of statements that relate to IP (Clance, 1985), 22% of teacher trainees’ average score equated to ‘very true’/ ‘often true’, 48% equated to ‘often true’/‘sometimes true’, 26% equated to ‘sometimes true’/‘rarely true’, and 4% equated to ‘rarely true’/‘not at all true’.
Multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine whether IP was predicted by self-efficacy, self-handicapping, social anxiety, competitiveness, and training course, whilst controlling for age and gender. A significant regression was found (F (7,70) =6.13, p<.001, R2=.38), suggesting that the model explained 38% of variance within IP. Self-handicapping, social anxiety and training course were significant predictors of IP, while competitiveness, self-efficacy, gender and age were non-significant predictors (see Table 2).
Using Baron and Kenny’s (1986) recommended criteria for mediation, a further model was specified to test whether self-handicapping had an indirect effect on experiencing IP. The results showed a significant relationship between social anxiety and self-handicapping (path a), self-handicapping and IP (whilst controlling for social anxiety, path b), and between social anxiety and IP (whilst controlling for self-handicapping, path c) (see Figure 1). Importantly the model also shows a significant indirect effect of social anxiety, via self-handicapping, on IP (path c’). The model indicates that 29% of the variation in IP is accounted for by an individual’s level of social anxiety directly and the manner with which social anxiety impacts self-handicapping behaviours.
Discussion
The current research sought to expand the literature on the psychological construct termed IP. It aimed to develop the conceptual understanding of this emerging multifaceted construct within the context of teacher training environments, as well as empirically testing theoretically derived traits that may account for variation in the experiencing of feelings associated with IP.
Experiences thought to comprise IP (Clance, 1985) were considered ‘sometimes true’ to ‘very true’ by 70% of the teacher trainee sample. This is in line with previous research which suggests most people in the general population will experience feelings associated with IP at least once in their lifetime (Harvey & Katz, 1985). Importantly, the results show that 22% of teacher trainees reported IP-related statements to be ‘very true’ of their experience, which suggests nearly a quarter of individuals training to become teachers encounter high levels of IP and therefore may be more susceptible to drop out and lower student assessments of their future teaching ability (Brems, Baldwin, Davis & Namyniuk, 1994; Parkman, 2016). This is in line with previous research that found 29% of newly qualified librarians (equitable to training levels) reported high levels of IP (Clark et al., 2014).
The current study also tested the hypothesis that students on training courses where they have longer to adapt and ‘transition’ from ‘student’ to ‘teacher’ will be less likely to experience IP, compared to students on shorter courses. This hypothesis was supported with the current findings whereby higher levels of IP were observed by individuals enrolled in the PGCE course compared with the QTS-aligned degree (e.g., BA in Primary Education). This finding has important implications as it suggests shorter teacher training courses might do well to focus an element of training on discussing the importance of combating feelings of self-doubt, intellectual inadequacy and anticipated failure. The mere fact of acknowledging the potential to experience self-perceived fraudulence during training may help reduce their persistence.
The findings related to teacher trainee character traits showed social anxiety and self-handicapping to be significant predictors of IP. This is partially in line with previous work that shows social anxiety to be related to IP (Kolligian & Sternberg, 1991). It has been argued that social anxiety may feed into such beliefs, as it is characterised through an excessive fear of negative judgement by peers, fear of making a mistake and social avoidance and distress (Crome, Grove, Baillie, Sunderland, Teesson & Slade, 2015; Pabian & Vandebosch, 2016). Thus, an increase in fear of negative judgement, core to social anxiety, may increase a trainee teacher’s experience of IP. Additionally, it was hypothesised that social anxiety may contribute to IP via an indirect route by way of increasing the use of self-handicapping behaviours. The findings provide evidence to support this and suggest behaviours employed to modulate feelings of social anxiety (e.g., procrastination, reduced effort) may inadvertently increase feelings associated with IP (e.g., self-doubt, phoniness, and intellectual inadequacy). This is an important contribution to the field as it provides a basic model for beginning to understand the interrelated nature, and thus potential explanatory mechanisms, of constructs that underpin IP.
Prior anecdotal evidence in the form of blogs and commentary from faculty (Bahn, 2014; Gravois, 2007; Kasper; 2013; Webb; 2013), support the notion that highly competitive working environments ‘create a setting conducive to feelings of self-doubt and fraudulence’ (Hutchins, 2015, p.4). This hypothesis was tested by examining the relationship between competitiveness and IP. The findings of the current study suggest that for individuals in the process of training at least, there is no association between competitiveness and IP. This could potentially be accounted for by the fact that both pathways (PGCE and QTS-aligned degrees) although offering placements, do not induce the same feelings of competition as might be present in a work-placed setting. It is also possible that an individual’s self-perceived level of competitiveness may need to interact with a certain working environment to impact IP. In other words, the competitive nature of the individual and the competitive nature of the environment may work together to produce experiences common to IP.
References
Bahn, K. (2014). Women, academe, and impostor syndrome. Chronicle of Higher Education, 60(30), A5.
Balkis, M., & Duru, E. (2009). Prevalence of academic procrastination behavior among pre-service teachers, and its relationship with demographics and individual preferences. Journal of Theory & Practice in Education, 5(1).
Baker, S. L., Heinrichs, N., Kim, H. J., & Hofmann, S. G. (2002). The Liebowitz social anxiety scale as a self-report instrument: a preliminary psychometric analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40(6), 701-715.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Bernard, N. S., Dollinger, S. J., & Ramaniah, N. V. (2002). Applying the big five personality factors to the impostor phenomenon. Journal of personality assessment, 78(2), 321-333.
Bertram, C., Mthiyane, N., & Mukeredzi, T. (2013). ‘It will make me a real teacher’: Learning experiences of part time PGCE students in South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(5), 448-456.
Bishop Grosseteste University. (2019a). PGCE Primary 3-7. Retrieved from: https://www.bishopg.ac.uk/course/pgceprim37/
Bishop Grosseteste University. (2019b). PGCE Primary 5-11. Retrieved from: https://www.bishopg.ac.uk/course/pgceprim511/
Bishop Grosseteste University. (2019c). Primary education with QTS. Retrieved from: https://www.bishopg.ac.uk/course/primed/
Brems, C., Baldwin, M. R., Davis, L., & Namyniuk, L. (1994). The imposter syndrome as related to teaching evaluations and advising relationships of university faculty members. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(2), 183-193.
Chrisman, S. M., Pieper, W. A., Clance, P. R., Holland, C. L., & Glickauf- Hughes, C. (1995). Validation of the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65(3), 456-467.
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.
Clance, P. R. (1985). The Impostor Phenomenon: When Success Make You Feel Like a Fake. Bantam Books: Toronto.
Clark, M., Vardeman, K., & Barba, S. (2014). Perceived inadequacy: A study of the imposter phenomenon among college and research librarians. College & Research Libraries, 75(3), 255-271.
Craddock, S., Birnbaum, M., Rodriguez, K., Cobb, C., & Zeeh, S. (2011). Doctoral students and the impostor phenomenon: Am I smart enough to be here?. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(4), 429-442.
Crome, E., Grove, R., Baillie, A. J., Sunderland, M., Teesson, M., & Slade, T. (2015). DSM-IV and DSM-5 social anxiety disorder in the Australian community. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 49(3), 227-235.
Curtin, R., Presser, S., & Singer, E. (2000). The effects of response rate changes on the index of consumer sentiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 413–428.
Department for Education. (2016). School Workforce in England: November 2015. Retrieved from: https://assets.publishing.service. gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/533618/SFR21_2016_MainText.pdf
Department for Education. (2011). Teachers’ standards. Retrieved from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665522/Teachers_standard_ information.pdf
De Vries, M. F. R. K. (2005). The dangers of feeling like a fake. Harvard business review, 83(9), 108.
Ferrari, J. R. (2005). Impostor tendencies and academic dishonesty: Do they cheat their way to success?. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 33(1), 11-18.
Ferrari, J. R., & Thompson, T. (2006). Impostor fears: Links with self-presentational concerns and self-handicapping behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(2), 341-352.
Gibson-Beverly, G., & Schwartz, J. P. (2008). Attachment, entitlement, and the impostor phenomenon in female graduate students. Journal of College Counseling, 11(2), 119-132.
Gravois, J. (2007) You’re not fooling anyone. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(11), 1.
Harris, P. B., & Houston, J. M. (2010). A reliability analysis of the revised competitiveness index. Psychological reports, 106(3), 870- 874.
Harvey, J. C., & Katz, C. (1985). If I’m so successful, why do I feel like a fake?: The impostor phenomenon. St. Martin’s Press: UK.
Hayes, K. M. & Davies, S.F.D. (1993). Investigation of interpersonal flexibility, type A behavior pattern and the imposter phenomenon. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31, 323–325.
Heimberg, R. G., Horner, K. J., Juster, H. R., Safren, S. A., Brown, E. J., Schneier, F. R., & Liebowitz, M. R. (1999). Psychometric properties of the Liebowitz social anxiety scale. Psychological medicine, 29(1), 199-212.
Henning, K., Ey, S., & Shaw, D. (1998). Perfectionism, the impostor phenomenon and psychological adjustment in medical, dental, nursing and pharmacy students. Medical education, 32(5), 456-464.
Hoang, Q. (2013). The impostor phenomenon: Overcoming internalized barriers and recognizing achievements. The Vermont Connection, 34(1), 6.
Holmes, S. W., Kertay, L., Adamson, L. B., Holland, C. L., & Clance, P. R. (1993). Measuring the impostor phenomenon: A comparison of Clance’s IP Scale and Harvey’s IP Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 60(1), 48-59.
Houston, J., Harris, P., McIntire, S., & Francis, D. (2002). Revising the competitiveness index using factor analysis. Psychological Reports, 90(1), 31-34.
Hutchins, H. M. (2015). Outing the imposter: A study exploring imposter phenomenon among higher education faculty. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 27(2), 3-12.
Hutchins, H. M., & Rainbolt, H. (2017). What triggers imposter phenomenon among academic faculty? A critical incident study exploring antecedents, coping, and development opportunities. Human Resource Development International, 20(3), 194-214.
Jansen, M., Scherer, R., & Schroeders, U. (2015). Students’ self-concept and self-efficacy in the sciences: Differential relations to antecedents and educational outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 13-24.
Kasper, J., (2013, April 3). An academic with imposter syndrome. The Chronicle of Higher Education, electronic download 10.17.14
Kolligian Jr, J., & Sternberg, R. J. (1991). Perceived Fraudulence in Young Adults: Is There an ‘Imposter Syndrome’? Journal of personality assessment, 56(2), 308-326.
Krägeloh, C. U., Medvedev, O. N., Hill, E. M., Webster, C. S., Booth, R. J., & Henning, M. A. (2019). Improving Measurement of Trait Competitiveness: A Rasch Analysis of the Revised Competitiveness Index With Samples From New Zealand and US University Students. Psychological reports, 122(2), 689-708.
Lane, J. A. (2015). The imposter phenomenon among emerging adults transitioning into professional life: Developing a grounded theory. Adultspan Journal, 14(2), 114-128.
Luchner, A. F., Houston, J. M., Walker, C., & Houston, M. A. (2011). Exploring the relationship between two forms of narcissism and competitiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(6), 779- 782.
Luszczynska, A., Scholz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). The general self-efficacy scale: multicultural validation studies. The Journal of psychology, 139(5), 439-457.
Malderez, A., Hobson, A. J., Tracey, L., & Kerr, K. (2007). Becoming a student teacher: Core features of the experience. European Journal of Teacher Education, 30(3), 225-248.
Martin, A. J., Marsh, H. W., & Debus, R. L. (2001). Self-handicapping and defensive pessimism: Exploring a model of predictors and outcomes from a self-protection perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 87.
McGregor, L. N., 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, 36(1), 43-48.
Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. (2001). Academic self-handicapping and achievement goals: A further examination. Contemporary educational psychology, 26(1), 61-75.
Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. (1995). Predictors of middle school students’ use of self-handicapping strategies. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 15(4), 389-411.
Murphy, K. A., Blustein, D. L., Bohlig, A. J., & Platt, M. G. (2010). The college-to-career transition: An exploration of emerging adulthood. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88(2), 174-181.
Ng, K. Y., Ang, S., & Chan, K. Y. (2008). Personality and leader effectiveness: A moderated mediation model of leadership self-efficacy, job demands, and job autonomy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 733.
Pabian, S., & Vandebosch, H. (2016). An investigation of short-term longitudinal associations between social anxiety and victimization and perpetration of traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Journal of youth and adolescence, 45(2), 328-339.
Parkman, A. (2016). The imposter phenomenon in higher education: Incidence and impact. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 16(1), 51.
Pierrakeas, C., Xeno, M., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Vergidis, D. (2004). A comparative study of dropout rates and causes for two different distance education courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2).
Polach, J. L. (2004). Understanding the experience of college graduates during their first year of employment. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(1), 5-23.
Prospects. (2018). Routes into Teaching. Retrieved from: https:// www.prospects.ac.uk/jobs-and-work-experience/job-sectors/teacher-training-and-education/routes-into-teaching
Pulford, B. D., Johnson, A., & Awaida, M. (2005). A cross-cultural study of predictors of self-handicapping in university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(4), 727-737.
Rytwinski, N. K., Fresco, D. M., Heimberg, R. G., Coles, M. E., Liebowitz, M. R., Cissell, S. & Hofmann, S. G. (2009). Screening for social anxiety disorder with the self-report version of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. Depression and anxiety, 26(1), 34-38.
Sakulku, J., & Alexander, J. (2011). The impostor phenomenon. International Journal of Behavioral Science, 6(1), 75-97.
Schubert, N. (2013). The Imposter Phenomenon: Insecurity Cloaked in Success (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University).
Schwarzer, R., Mueller, J., & Greenglass, E. (1999). Assessment of perceived general self-efficacy on the Internet: Data collection in cyberspace. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 12(2), 145-161.
Schwinger, M., Wirthwein, L., Lemmer, G., & Steinmayr, R. (2014). Academic self-handicapping and achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 744.
Sims, J. D. (2017). A Phenomenological Examination of Imposter Phenomenon in Music Therapy Students (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas).
Singer, E., van Hoewyk, J., & Maher, M. P. (2000). Experiments with incentives in telephone surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 171–188.
Snyder, C. R., & Smith, T. W. (1982). Symptoms as self-handicapping strategies: The virtues of old wine in a new bottle. In G. Weary & H. L. Mirels (Eds.), Integrations of clinical and social psychology (pp. 104- 127). New York: Oxford University Press.
Snyder, C. R., Smith, T. W., Augelli, R. W., & Ingram, R. E. (1985). On the self-serving function of social anxiety: Shyness as a self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 970–980. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.48.4.970
Sonnak, C., & Towell, T. (2001). The impostor phenomenon in British university students: Relationships between self-esteem, mental health, parental rearing style and socioeconomic status. Personality and individual differences, 31(6), 863-874.
Stokking, K., Leenders, F., De Jong, J., & Van Tartwijk, J. (2003). From student to teacher: Reducing practice shock and early dropout in the teaching profession. European journal of teacher education, 26(3), 329-350.
Times Educational Supplement. (2007). Only the strong survive PGCE. Retrieved from: https://www.tes.com/news/only-strong-survive-pgce
Times Educational Supplement. (2017). Teacher shortage crisis deepens, new DfE figures show. Retrieved from: https://www.tes. com/news/teacher-shortage-crisis-deepens-new-dfe-figures-show
Topping, M. E., & Kimmel, E. B. (1985). The imposter phenomenon: Feeling phony. Academic Psychology Bulletin, 2, 213–226.
Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 115-138.
Vinnicombe, S., & Singh, V. (2002). Women-only management training: An essential part of women’s leadership development. Journal of Change Management, 3(4), 294-306.
Webb, J. (2013). My Impostor Syndrome. Chronicle Of Higher Education, 60(15), 72
Zorn, D. (2005). Academic Culture Feeds the Imposter Phenomenon. Academic Leader: The Newsletter for Academic Deans and Department Chairs 21, 1(8).
