Transition Experiences in MD–PhD Programs

Chakraverty, Devasmita; Jeffe, Donna B.; Tai, Robert H.

doi:10.1187/cbe.17-08-0187

Cited by 24 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the role of others was evident only while describing how gender identity added to the impostor feelings among women who received disparaging comments from peers and colleagues. Recent research has described the value of forming closed-mentorship networks or triads among undergraduates, new or advanced graduate students/postdocs and faculty members to provide advice, psychosocial support and mentorship (Aikens et al, 2016(Aikens et al, , 2017Chakraverty et al, 2018). As a follow-up to this research, interviews in Phase 2 of the larger study focus on the role of peers, mentors and advisers in perpetuating the impostor phenomenon.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Impostor phenomenon in STEM: occurrence, attribution, and identity

Chakraverty

2019

SGPE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-This study aims to explore different themes related to impostor phenomenon, as experienced by graduate students and postdocs in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields. Design/methodology/approach-Open-ended survey responses from 120 US-based participants from 40 states and Washington, D.C., describing an occasion when they felt like an impostor, were analyzed thematically. Findings-Following content analysis, three themes emerged: occurrence, attribution and identity. While impostor-like feelings were experienced as early as high school or college, the majority experienced it during PhD application, on being admitted to a PhD program and throughout PhD training. The people experiencing impostor phenomenon attributed their achievements and success to others (other's name, prestige, or connections, other's mistake, other's lies or misrepresentation, or other's kindness) or self (self-inadequacy, pretense, luck or self-doubt) rather than their own hard work or ability. Gender-based and race/ethnicitybased identity also shaped the experiences of the impostor phenomenon. Research limitations/implications-Open-ended survey responses varied in length and level of detail. Responses provided a one-time snapshot of a memory related to impostor-feelings that stood out, not indicating if the feeling persisted or evolved with time. The findings are not generalizable over a larger population. Originality/value-This study identified multiple themes related to the impostor phenomenon not investigated before, enriching existing research while also providing methodological rigor for the development of follow-up studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Impostor phenomenon in STEM: occurrence, attribution, and identity

Chakraverty

2019

SGPE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It needs an understanding of how the tensions and complications of Black identity relate to training experiences in STEM fields and how race-based impostor phenomenon could shape individual interaction with faculty, mentors, and peers. While designing professional development programs for Blacks is one way of supporting them, research shows that developing closed-mentorship triads could be another way of support (Chakraverty et al, 2018). Although used in undergraduate life science education (Aikens et al, 2016(Aikens et al, , 2017, mentoring triads of PhD students, postdocs, and faculty from the same or related research group could be beneficial for STEM trainees.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although used in undergraduate life science education (Aikens et al, 2016(Aikens et al, , 2017, mentoring triads of PhD students, postdocs, and faculty from the same or related research group could be beneficial for STEM trainees. Academic transitions are especially vulnerable points for STEM trainees when they may be at a risk of feeling alienated (Chakraverty et al, 2018;Dabney et al, 2016) or feeling like impostors (Chakraverty, 2020b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impostor Phenomenon Among Black Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scholars in STEM

Chakraverty¹

2020

IJDS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: This study examined experiences related to the impostor phenomenon among Black doctoral and postdoctoral scholars in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Background: Research on the impostor phenomenon is usually focused on undergraduates, especially for Blacks, with sparse research on Black doctoral and postdoctoral scholars. This phenomenon was originally investigated among Whites. Due to fewer studies on Blacks, culturally-relevant understanding of the impostor phenomenon is limited. Methodology: This study used surveys and interviews (convergent mixed-methods) to examine the impostor phenomenon among U.S.-based doctoral and postdoctoral scholars (together referred to as “trainees”) in STEM. Participants took a survey (that used the Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale or CIPS to individually compute impostor phenomenon scores) and a one-on-one, semi-structured interview. Survey (with CIPS scores) and interview data were converged from the same participants, who were recruited from a national conference focused on minorities in STEM (convenience sampling). Using constant comparative method and analytic induction, interview-data were categorized into themes. Contribution: Findings documented race-based impostor-experiences, possibly culturally relevant to other groups of underrepresented minorities (URMs). Findings have implications for research, policy, and practice. These include future initiatives to broaden participation in STEM careers among the underrepresented groups, support those who might experience this phenomenon and transition challenges in academia, and create greater awareness of the challenges trainees face based on their background and life experiences. Findings: Surveys indicated moderate to intense impostor phenomenon among 15 participants at the time data were collected. Interviews with the same participants found six themes linked to the impostor phenomenon: 1) Being the only-one, 2) Lack of belonging, 3) Stereotyping, micro-aggression and judgment, 4) External appearances, 5) Feeling like the “diversity enhancers,” and 6) Complications of intersecting identities. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should consider the tensions and complications of Black identity and how it ties to training experiences in STEM as well as how race-based impostor phenomenon could shape an individual’s interaction with faculty, mentors, and peers. This knowledge could be helpful in designing professional development programs for Blacks. Recommendation for Researchers: Study findings could have research implications on the way doctoral and postdoctoral training is reimagined to be more inclusive and welcoming of diversity across multiple axes of gender, race/ethnicity, class, first-generation status, ability, sexual orientation, and country of origin, among others. Impact on Society: Black trainees could be vulnerable to leaving STEM fields due to their underrepresentation, lack of critical mass, racial discrimination, and other unpleasant experiences. Conversations around training, development, and means to address psychological distress could focus on culturally-relevant experiences of the impostor phenomenon. Future Research: Future research could look at the experiences of other underrepresented groups in STEM such as Native Americans and Hispanics as well as among faculty of color and individuals from other fields beyond STEM.

show abstract

“…While navigating the preclinical, research, and clinical phases of training, MD-PhD students face unique challenges different from MD-only or PhD-only students (Chakraverty et al, 2018). More MD-PhD than MD students anticipate or experience challenges to balancing training and family life (Kwan et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More MD-PhD than MD students anticipate or experience challenges to balancing training and family life (Kwan et al, 2017). Students also find that the tripartite model of MD-PhD dual-degree programs in the U.S. and Canada creates challenges, having to navigate two transitions between training phases (Bossé et al, 2011;Chakraverty et al, 2018), which most students in MD-only or PhD-only programs do not experience. Among the challenges experienced by MD-PhD students having to transition between the phases are time away from the clinical environment, which could impact students' preparedness for clinical clerkships (Goldberg & Insel, 2013) as well as a lack of desired mentoring (especially mentoring by MD-PhD faculty), a perceived lack of curricular integration and of awareness of phase-specific cultural differences, and difficulties assimilating with other trainees during the research-and clinical-training phases, who are not from their original cohort of peers (Chakraverty et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Reasons That U.S. MD-PhD Students Enter and Leave Their Dual-Degree Programs

Chakraverty¹,

Jeffe

Dabney

et al. 2020

IJDS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: In response to widespread efforts to increase the size and diversity of the biomedical-research workforce in the U.S., a large-scale qualitative study was conducted to examine current and former students’ training experiences in MD (Doctor of Medicine), PhD (Doctor of Philosophy), and MD-PhD dual-degree programs. In this paper, we aimed to describe the experiences of a subset of study participants who had dropped out their MD-PhD dual-degree training program, the reasons they entered the MD-PhD program, as well as their reasons for discontinuing their training for the MD-PhD. Background: To our knowledge, the U.S. has the longest history of MD-PhD dual-degree training programs dating back to the 1950s and produces the largest number of MD-PhD graduates in the world. Integrated dual-degree MD-PhD programs are offered at more than 90 medical schools in the U.S., and historically have included three phases – preclinical, PhD-research, and clinical training, all during medical-school training. On average, it takes eight years of training to complete requirements for the MD-PhD dual-degree. MD-PhD students have unique training experiences, different from MD-only or PhD-only students. Not all MD-PhD students complete their training, at a cost to funding agencies, schools, and students themselves. Methodology: We purposefully sampled from 97 U.S. schools with doctoral programs, posting advertisements for recruitment of participants who were engaged in or had completed PhD, MD, and MD-PhD training. Between 2011 and 2013, semi-structured, one-on-one phone interviews were conducted with 217 participants. Using a phenomenological approach and inductive, thematic analysis, we examined students’ reasons for entering the MD-PhD dual-degree program, when they decided to leave, and their reasons for leaving MD-PhD training. Contribution: Study findings offer new insights into MD-PhD students’ reasons for leaving the program, beyond what is known about program attrition based on retrospective analysis of existing national data, as little is known about students’ actual reasons for attrition. By more deeply exploring students’ reasons for attrition, programs can find ways to improve MD-PhD students’ training experiences and boost their retention in these dual-degree programs to completion, which will, in turn, foster expansion of the biomedical-research-workforce capacity. Findings: Seven participants in the larger study reported during their interview that they left their MD-PhD programs before finishing, and these were the only participants who reported leaving their doctoral training. At the time of interview, two participants had completed the MD and were academic-medicine faculty, four were completing medical school, and one dropped out of medicine to complete a PhD in Education. Participants reported enrolling in MD-PhD programs to work in both clinical practice and research. Very positive college research experiences, mentorship, and personal reasons also played important roles in participants’ decisions to pursue the dual MD-PhD degree. However, once in the program, positive mentorship and other opportunities that they experienced during or after college, which initially drew candidates to the program was found lacking. Four themes emerged as reasons for leaving the MD-PhD program: (1) declining interest in research, (2) isolation and lack of social integration during the different training phases, (3) suboptimal PhD-advising experiences, and (4) unforeseen obstacles to completing PhD research requirements, such as loss of funding. Recommendations for Practitioners: Though limited by a small sample size, findings highlight the need for better integrated institutional and programmatic supports for MD-PhD students, especially during PhD training. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore if other programmatic aspects of MD-PhD training (other than challenges experienced during PhD training, as discussed in this paper) are particularly problematic and pose challenges to the successful completion of the program. Impact on Society: The MD-PhD workforce comprises a small, but highly trained cadre of physician-scientists with the expertise to conduct clinical and/or basic science research aimed at improving patient care and developing new diagnostic tools and therapies. Although MD-PhD graduates comprise a small proportion of all MD graduates in the U.S. and globally, about half of all MD-trained physician-scientists in the U.S. federally funded biomedical-research workforce are MD-PhD-trained physicians. Training is extensive and rigorous. Improving experiences during the PhD-training phase could help reduce MD-PhD program attrition, as attrition results in substantial financial cost to federal and private funding agencies and to medical schools that fund MD-PhD programs in the U.S. and other countries. Future Research: Future research could examine, in greater depth, how communications among students, faculty and administrators in various settings, such as classrooms, research labs, and clinics, might help MD-PhD students become more fully integrated into each new program phase and continue in the program to completion. Future research could also examine experiences of MD-PhD students from groups underrepresented in medicine and the biomedical-research workforce (e.g., first-generation college graduates, women, and racial/ethnic minorities), which might serve to inform interventions to increase the numbers of applicants to MD-PhD programs and help reverse the steady decline in the physician-scientist workforce over the past several decades.

show abstract

Transition Experiences in MD–PhD Programs

Cited by 24 publications

References 30 publications

Impostor phenomenon in STEM: occurrence, attribution, and identity

Impostor phenomenon in STEM: occurrence, attribution, and identity

The Impostor Phenomenon Among Black Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scholars in STEM

Exploring Reasons That U.S. MD-PhD Students Enter and Leave Their Dual-Degree Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About