Impostor phenomenon, first described by psychologists Pauline Rose Clance and Suzanne Imes in 1978, is not a formal psychiatric diagnosis but a well-documented psychological experience. People affected by it attribute their achievements to luck, timing, or deception rather than skill, and they live in fear that colleagues will eventually discover their supposed incompetence. In healthcare settings, the stakes of this pattern are considerable. Clinicians who doubt themselves may hesitate in decision-making, avoid seeking feedback, experience burnout, and disengage from professional growth. Early-career health professionals are considered especially vulnerable because they are navigating the demanding transition from supervised student to autonomous practitioner, a shift that confronts them with novel responsibilities, uncertain competence, and constant evaluation.

The research team, led by Fathimath Hisana and colleagues in the Department of Occupational Therapy at Yenepoya Faculty of Allied and Healthcare Professions, set out to measure how intensely impostor phenomenon affects occupational therapists in India with fewer than two years of clinical experience, and to identify the personal, occupational, and environmental factors that these professionals themselves believe drive the experience. The study recruited 100 participants through snowball sampling, a technique in which initial respondents refer additional eligible colleagues, a practical approach for reaching a dispersed professional population across the country.

Methodologically, the survey was built around the Leary Impostorism Scale, a widely used twenty-item instrument that asks respondents to rate statements about impostor-type feelings on a scale from ‘not at all true’ to ‘very true.’ Scores on this instrument place individuals along a continuum of impostor intensity, from low through moderate to high. To capture the contextual drivers of these feelings, the researchers supplemented the scale with constructs drawn from the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement, a foundational framework in occupational therapy that conceptualizes how personal, occupational, and environmental dimensions interact to shape a person’s engagement in meaningful activity. The questionnaire was validated by experts before deployment, and the analysis combined descriptive statistics with Mann-Whitney U tests, a non-parametric statistical method suited to comparing scores between two independent groups when data are not normally distributed, to examine how impostor scores varied across demographic and professional characteristics.

The headline finding is stark in its simplicity: 25 percent of the surveyed early-career occupational therapists reported impostor phenomenon in the moderate-high to high intensity range. That figure aligns with a broader pattern documented across health professions, where studies of physicians, nurses, and allied health workers have repeatedly found that a substantial minority of trainees and new practitioners experience clinically meaningful impostor feelings. What distinguishes the new study is its focus on occupational therapy, a profession in which practitioners help patients regain the functional capacity for everyday life, and its grounding in the specific professional and cultural context of India, where workforce conditions, supervision structures, and recognition patterns may differ substantially from the Western settings where most impostor research has been conducted.

One demographic difference stood out with statistical significance. Female participants scored significantly higher than male participants on the impostorism measure, with a Mann-Whitney U statistic of 594 and a p-value of 0.046, a result that just crosses the conventional threshold of statistical significance at the 0.05 level. This finding echoes a large body of international literature suggesting that women in medicine and academia report impostor feelings more frequently and intensely than men, a disparity often attributed to gendered expectations, underrepresentation in leadership, and differential patterns of feedback and recognition. By contrast, the study found no significant differences in impostor scores based on age, educational qualification, or length of experience within the early-career window, suggesting that within this cohort, the experience of impostorism is not simply a function of being newest to the job but is distributed across the first two professional years.

Perhaps the most practically valuable contribution of the study lies in its catalog of perceived contributing factors, which the researchers organized around personal, occupational, and environmental dimensions. The most frequently endorsed factor, cited by 36 percent of participants, was fear of being perceived as inexperienced, a concern that speaks directly to the identity transition at the heart of early professional life. Close behind, at 35 percent, was physical exhaustion, linking impostor feelings to the tangible toll of demanding clinical work and long hours. People-pleasing tendencies, reported by 32 percent, reflect a personality-oriented contributor in which practitioners prioritize others’ approval over self-assessment, a pattern long associated with impostorism in the psychological literature. Transitional challenges, endorsed by 31 percent, capture the disorientation of moving from student roles to independent practice, while pressure to collaborate, cited by 30 percent, points to the interpersonal demands of multidisciplinary healthcare teams where new therapists must hold their own alongside senior colleagues from other professions.

Environmental factors also registered prominently. Limited professional opportunities were endorsed by 27 percent of respondents, and lack of recognition by 26 percent, findings that situate impostor feelings not merely as individual psychological quirks but as experiences shaped by the structural realities of the Indian allied health workforce. Where career ladders are short, roles are poorly defined, or achievements go unacknowledged, even competent practitioners may internalize the message that their work lacks value. The authors emphasize that these findings highlight the multifactorial nature of impostor phenomenon among early-career occupational therapists, with contributions from personal, occupational, and environmental sources, and they call for future research to examine the relative weight of each factor so that interventions can be targeted effectively.

The study’s implications extend beyond occupational therapy. If a quarter of new practitioners in one allied health profession report intense impostor feelings, the same dynamics are likely operating across the wider early-career health workforce in India and comparable settings. The identified contributors suggest concrete points of intervention. Mentorship programs and structured onboarding could directly address fear of inexperience and transitional challenges. Workload management and attention to fatigue could reduce the exhaustion component. Recognition systems, transparent career pathways, and team cultures that normalize questions from junior members could chip away at the environmental drivers. Because the study used a cross-sectional design, it captures a snapshot rather than a trajectory, and its sample of 100 participants recruited through snowball sampling, while adequate for exploratory analysis, limits generalizability and prevents causal inference. Self-reported perceived factors, moreover, reflect what practitioners believe drives their feelings rather than empirically verified causes.

Nevertheless, the research adds an important and underexplored population to the global map of impostor phenomenon, and it does so with a theoretically grounded instrument that bridges individual psychology and the occupational science framework central to the profession itself. For the occupational therapists who participated, and for the many colleagues they represent, the study offers a validating message: the sense of being a fraud is common, measurable, and shaped by identifiable forces, which means it can be named, studied, and ultimately addressed. As health systems worldwide confront burnout and attrition among young clinicians, understanding the psychological weight of the transition to practice, and the gendered and structural conditions that amplify it, may prove as important to workforce sustainability as any recruitment strategy. The Yenepoya team’s findings provide a data-driven starting point for that conversation in India, and a template for similar investigations in other allied health professions and regions where impostorism remains an unmeasured burden.

Subject of Research: Impostor phenomenon intensity and its perceived contributing factors among early-career occupational therapists in India

Article Title: Intensity of Impostor Phenomenon and Perceived Contributing Factors among Early-career Occupational Therapists in India

Article References: Hisana, F., KVP, H. H., Mufeeda, F., Afnan, F., & Pandey, L. (2026). Intensity of Impostor Phenomenon and Perceived Contributing Factors among Early-career Occupational Therapists in India. Discover Social Science and Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44155-026-00480-w

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44155-026-00480-w

Keywords: impostor phenomenon, occupational therapists, early-career professionals, India, mental health, occupational health, self-efficacy, burnout, healthcare workforce, occupational therapy, gender differences, Leary Impostorism Scale

As healthcare systems grappled with unprecedented challenges, frontline workers faced a barrage of pressure stemming from rising patient numbers, fear of contracting the virus, and the emotional toll of losing patients. Various studies have suggested that healthcare workers are at a heightened risk for mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, Hajian-Tilaki and colleagues sought to uncover whether these issues manifested differently across genders, recognizing that male and female healthcare workers may have unique coping mechanisms and responses to stress.

The researchers employed a robust methodology in their study, surveying a substantial sample size of healthcare professionals across multiple regions. By using validated psychological assessment tools, they were able to quantify the levels of anxiety, depression, and overall psychological distress. Moreover, they analyzed demographic factors, including age, occupation, and years of experience, to determine their influence on mental health outcomes. This multifaceted approach provided comprehensive insights into the variances between male and female healthcare workers, paving the way for more targeted interventions.

One of the key findings revealed that female healthcare workers reported higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms compared to their male counterparts. This disparity raises critical questions about the underlying factors contributing to these differences. The authors posit that societal expectations and traditional gender roles may play a significant role in shaping how males and females experience and express distress. While men may be less likely to vocalize their mental health struggles due to societal stigma, women often bear the dual burden of professional responsibilities and domestic roles, further intensifying their mental health challenges.

Another crucial aspect of the study is the role of social support networks in mitigating psychological distress. The authors found that female healthcare workers who reported stronger social support systems experienced lower levels of anxiety and depression. This finding highlights the importance of fostering a supportive environment within healthcare settings to promote mental well-being. Healthcare organizations should consider implementing structured peer support programs and counseling services to provide essential resources for their staff, particularly for women who may be more vulnerable to psychological strain.

Moreover, the study emphasizes the importance of tailored mental health interventions based on gender-specific needs. For instance, programs aimed at addressing the unique stressors faced by female healthcare workers could include flexible work arrangements, wellness initiatives, and targeted mental health resources. By acknowledging the distinct challenges experienced by female staff, healthcare organizations can create a more inclusive and supportive workplace culture that ultimately benefits all employees.

As the pandemic continues to evolve, understanding the psychological impact on healthcare workers remains a priority. The findings from Hajian-Tilaki et al.’s research have significant implications for mental health policy-making in healthcare settings. By recognizing the nuanced ways in which male and female healthcare workers experience psychological distress, policymakers can better allocate resources and develop targeted interventions that address specific needs within the workforce.

In addition to addressing mental health support, the research highlights the importance of destigmatizing mental health conversations within healthcare. Encouraging open dialogues around mental health can empower healthcare workers to seek help and access necessary resources. This cultural shift is paramount in ensuring that no healthcare professional feels isolated or unsupported during such challenging times.

Ultimately, this study serves as a clarion call for healthcare organizations to prioritize the psychological well-being of their staff. The need for immediate action is clear, particularly in light of ongoing health crises that threaten both individual and collective mental health. By implementing evidence-based strategies that take into account the different experiences of male and female healthcare workers, organizations can create a healthier work environment conducive to both personal and professional growth.

Furthermore, the implications of this research extend beyond the pandemic. As we learn from this crisis, building resilient healthcare systems that prioritize mental health will be essential for future preparedness. The ongoing psychological strain faced by healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the necessity for robust mental health frameworks, ensuring healthcare professionals have the support they need to thrive in their roles.

In conclusion, the study “Sex differences in psychological impact on healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic” offers vital insights into the complex landscape of mental health within the healthcare workforce. As we navigate the post-pandemic world, the findings emphasize the need for targeted mental health interventions and a supportive workplace culture. Ultimately, addressing these issues is not only a moral imperative but also a crucial step toward ensuring sustained healthcare excellence in the years ahead.

In a landscape marred by uncertainty and stress, we must confront the harsh realities affecting our healthcare heroes. The groundbreaking work of Hajian-Tilaki and colleagues serves as a beacon of hope, reminding us that understanding the unique experiences of healthcare workers based on gender can lead to transformative changes in our approach to mental health in the healthcare sector.

As we move forward, it is imperative that healthcare systems embrace this knowledge, fostering environments where every worker, regardless of gender, feels supported, seen, and equipped to handle the challenges that lie ahead. Only then can we hope to build a resilient healthcare workforce ready to face the future, whatever it may hold.

Subject of Research: Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, with a focus on sex differences.

Article Title: Sex differences in psychological impact on healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Article References: Hajian-Tilaki, E., Hajian-Tilaki, K. & Nikpour, M. Sex differences in psychological impact on healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Discov Ment Health 5, 169 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-025-00305-3

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-025-00305-3

Keywords: COVID-19, healthcare workers, psychological impact, sex differences, mental health.