We are looking for new people to join our committee. We are friendly and committed group so do please get in touch. For more information email

• 0 comments

Boreout is a workplace issue characterised by low engagement, lack of meaning, and limited growth opportunities (Rothlin & Werder, 2008), and can affect anyone in the workforce, including early career researchers. This blog explores how boreout can impact mental health professionals, especially those new to academia, and provides practical strategies for preventing it. Understanding boreout is essential for mental health practitioners and researchers to maintain both personal well-being and career fulfilment.

What is Boreout?

While burnout has been recognised as a significant workplace issue for decades, boreout remains less understood. The term “boreout” was first introduced by Rothlin & Werder (2008) as a psychological state marked by low arousal and dissatisfaction due to a lack of stimulating work. Early career researchers may be especially vulnerable due to the often solitary, repetitive nature of research work, and the general lack of clear pathways for career advancement. According to Gallup’s 2021 State of the Global Workplace report, 80% of employees are not engaged at work, resulting in $8.1 trillion per year of lost productivity (Gallup, Inc., 2021).

Research has highlighted boreout as a significant mental health concern in workplaces, affecting productivity, motivation, and well-being (van Hooff & van Hooft, 2014). This is an important issue for mental health professionals to consider since the mental strain of boreout can lead to symptoms of depression and anxiety, ultimately impacting both personal and professional lives (Ozsungur, 2020).

Boreout in Early Career Researchers

Early career researchers often enter the field of mental health with a passion for contributing to meaningful change. However, they may encounter challenges that can lead to boreout. Stock (2015) suggested three main forms in which boreout can manifest:

1. Crisis of Meaning: Boreout often arises when individuals feel their work does not have a direct impact. Academic research can sometimes feel disconnected from real-world outcomes, especially when projects continue for years with little visible progress.
2. Job Boredom: Unlike clinical work, which involves direct contact with patients, research can sometimes involve long periods of data entry, literature reviews, or grant applications, leading to job boredom. Van Hooff & van Hooft (2014) discuss how boredom at work often stems from repetitive tasks, which can result in counterproductive work behaviours and reduced mental well-being.
3. Crisis of Growth: Early career researchers may find themselves in environments where growth opportunities are limited. When clear career advancement pathways are lacking, it can lead to frustration and a sense of stagnation, which may ultimately intensify the feelings of boreout (Stock, 2015).

Harju and Hakanen (2014) examined job boredom in 87 Finnish workplaces, finding that the lack of challenging and meaningful work can lead to disengagement. Their study highlighted that the experience of boreout increases the rates of job turnover and the desire to retire early, as well as an increase in self-rated ill-health and symptoms of stress. These findings pave the way for further research into boreout specifically among early career researchers, who face unique challenges like securing project funding, navigating the job insecurity of short-term contracts, striving to publish in high-impact journals, and balancing the demands of work with personal well-being. Although specific resources for addressing boreout in early career researchers are currently limited, general strategies may still be beneficial.

Addressing Boreout in Early Career Researchers

Addressing boreout involves a multifaceted approach that includes both personal strategies and institutional changes. Here are some suggestions for mental health professionals and early career researchers:

1. Personal Strategies: Researchers can fight boreout by diversifying their tasks and seeking meaning in their day-to-day work. This may include pursuing collaborative projects, setting smaller, achievable goals, and actively engaging in professional development opportunities.
2. Workplace Interventions: Institutions should consider creating more supportive and dynamic work environments for researchers. Some institutions, for example, offer health and wellness programs like yoga, sport, or crafts classes, which not only promote wellbeing but also foster connections within the work community. In terms of working interventions, this could involve offering cross-disciplinary projects, mentorship programs, and clear pathways for career progression. Promoting job crafting (i.e., where individuals modify their jobs to better align with their interests) has also been shown to reduce boreout (Harju and Hakanen, 2016).
3. Implications for Mental Health Practice: Mental health professionals, especially those involved in academic settings, should be aware of boreout as a mental health concern. Incorporating mental health support, such as counselling services and support groups, could provide researchers with the tools they need to manage stress and prevent boreout.

Conclusions: The Need for Awareness and Action

Boreout is a serious mental health concern affecting early career researchers, with impacts on both wellbeing and productivity. Institutions can help mitigate this by fostering environments that encourage engagement, growth, and a strong sense of purpose. Although establishing this sense of purpose can be challenging, for both the institution and researcher, it is essential for long-term wellbeing. As researchers advance through their careers, institutions should explore ways in which to help them maintain and nurture their sense of purpose. By supporting both personal and professional development, we can create a healthier, more fulfilling environment for all within the research community.

NB this blog has been peer-reviewed

References

• Gallup, Inc. (2021). State of the global workplace: 2021 report. Gallup, Inc. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx
• Harju, L., Hakanen, J., & Schaufeli, W. (2014). Job boredom and its correlates in 87 Finnish organizations.
  Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 56(9). https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000000248
• Harju, L., Hakanen, J., & Schaufeli, W. (2016). Can job crafting reduce job boredom and increase work
  engagement? A three-year cross-lagged panel study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 95-96, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.07.001
• Ozsungur, F. (2020). The effects of boreout on stress, depression, and anxiety in the workplace. Business &
  Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(2), 1391-1423. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i2.1460
• Rothlin, P., % Werder, P. R. (2008). Boreout!: Overcoming Workplace Demotivation. Kogan Page. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wjYlNQAACAAJ
• Stock, R. M. (2015). Is Boreout a Threat to Frontline Employee’s Innovative Work Behavior? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(4), 574-592.
• van Hooff, M.L., & van Hooft, E. A. (2014). Boredom at work: proximal and distal consequences of affective work-related boredom. J Occup Health Psychol, 19(3), 348-359. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036821

Author

Eliza joined the Social, Genetic & Developmental Psychiatry Centre at King’s College London in early 2024 as a Research Assistant on the Landscaping International Longitudinal Datasets project. The project aims to identify and review longitudinal datasets worldwide and bring attention to areas that could be enriched. Eliza obtained a Bachelor of Psychology (Honours) at Deakin University, Melbourne, during which she completed a thesis focusing on the impacts of childhood trauma on mental health. Eliza has also contributed to research at Deakin exploring the effects of screen time on the psychosocial development of young children, as well as on the mental health of Australian Defence Force personnel and veterans.

Imposter syndrome is a pertinent issue in academia. The phenomenon was first defined by Clance and Imes (1978) as an experience of feeling inadequate in one’s work or academic setting, and undeserving of rewards, promotions, and recognition. Furthermore, research has shown that university students with high levels of imposterism are more likely to report low self-efficacy, which is defined as a belief one holds about their ability to succeed (Pákozdy et al., 2023). This lack of self-confidence in their own abilities frequently leads to stress and anxiety, therefore these individuals strive to minimise both by working longer and harder, and adopting perfectionist behaviours (Holden et al., 2021). Imposter syndrome can be especially pronounced for women (Muradoglu et al., 2022) and racialised groups (Ayorech, 2021) during their early career, as institutions often lack representation and lack spaces where diversity and inclusivity are prioritised and welcomed (Ayorech, 2021).

A recent article from May 2023 titled “The imposter phenomenon and its relationship with self-efficacy, perfectionism and happiness in university students” (Pákozdy et al., 2023) sheds light on this pressing issue. This blog aims to summarise the key findings of the article, discuss its strengths and limitations, evaluate its evidence, and provide a personal perspective on how this evidence can inform practice and future research.

Summary of Pákozdy et al., 2023

Pákozdy et al., (2023)’s article explores the association between imposter syndrome and happiness, maladaptive perfectionism, and self-efficacy in university students. Specifically, the authors were interested in whether this association differed between male and female students, given that research has shown that women are more likely to experience imposterism than men (Muradoglu et al., 2022). An online survey was completed by 261 students from universities across the world, such as the United Kingdom, Mexico, Portugal, United States, and Poland. The students were recruited either via the survey platform (www.prolific.co) or via a convenience sample at the home institution. The authors found that, unsurprisingly, high imposterism amongst these students was related to low self-efficacy and low happiness. Individuals with high imposterism were also more likely to exhibit high perfectionism, agreeing to statements such as “It is important to me to be perfect in everything I attempt”. Additionally, consistent with previous research, women reported higher levels on average of both imposter syndrome and perfectionism compared to men.

Some key findings include:

• Imposter syndrome in university students is linked to negative outcomes such as lower self-confidence in their own abilities, lower happiness, and maladaptive perfectionist behaviours.
• Female university students reported higher levels of imposter syndrome and perfectionism compared to their male counterparts.
• The negative impact of maladaptive perfectionism on happiness is fully mediated by imposter syndrome, suggesting that interventions targeting imposter syndrome may have positive effects on wellbeing in students.

Strengths and Limitations of the Research

This study has a comprehensive approach in examining multiple psychological constructs and their interrelations among university students. The use of well-established scales, a large-scale online survey, and robust statistical analyses lends credibility to the findings. Furthermore, by highlighting the unique challenges faced by women, the article provides valuable insights into the intersection of gender and professional identity. Future studies could investigate female students’ exposure to gender stereotypes and/or gender discrimination, and the development of imposterism and perfectionism. These results may shed light on why women are disproportionately affected compared to men, providing higher education institutions with information on how to remove the barriers that women may experience.

However, the study has some limitations. For instance, the cross-sectional design means that causality cannot be established. While the study shows a correlation between imposter syndrome and negative outcomes, it cannot definitively state that imposter syndrome causes these outcomes. Longitudinal studies would be beneficial to track changes over time and provide a clearer picture of the cause-and-effect relationship. Furthermore, the reliance on self-reported data could introduce bias, as individuals may underreport or overreport their feelings and experiences. The study also did not include gender minority groups, such as transgender young people, therefore the findings may not generalise to these groups. Finally, although the survey reached students from a variety of universities across the globe, the majority (67%) came from European universities. Additionally, because the sample includes a convenience sample, there is underrepresentation from universities in the Global South and North America. This means the findings may not be generalisable to the general student population.

Commentary on the Evidence

The evidence presented in the article highlights the importance of addressing imposter syndrome within university settings, and particularly in female students. The negative associations with self-efficacy and happiness indicate that imposter syndrome can significantly reduce a student’s academic and personal wellbeing. To address this, academic institutions could promote a growth mindset, emphasising that intelligence and abilities can be developed through effort and perseverance. It may be helpful to also implement mentorship programs that provide support and guidance, particularly for women, and foster inclusive environments where diverse perspectives are valued and respected.

There have been a number of attempts to address imposter syndrome in university students. For example, MIT and California Technology have implemented support programs and myth-debunking programs about belonging, which helps students recognise and reduce imposter syndrome tendencies. Various workshops and books serve as resources on beating imposter syndrome, such as the Center for Creative Leadership’s book titled “Beating the Imposter Syndrome” (Mount and Tardanico, 2014) or, and the University of Oxford’s “Common Approach to Support Student Mental Health” program (www.ox.ac.uk/students), which includes workshops on tools to approach perfectionism and imposter syndrome.

A Personal Perspective

As an early-career researcher in developmental psychology at King’s College London, I have felt imposter syndrome frequently. There are high expectations to produce the best quality work, which can be stressful, especially when surrounded by highly accomplished colleagues. However, the collaborative and supporting nature of my team prevents me from experiencing this anxiety in isolation, and we foster a great sense of camaraderie in our office. For example, when I first joined the team, I felt pressure to make a good first impression and worked hard to complete my work quickly. My colleagues recognised my anxiety and assured me I had set unrealistic expectations, joking about how I did not have to worry about my performance. We often have coffee breaks and team outings together, which has created a tight-knit team where open discussions and shared experiences are encouraged. They have been instrumental in reducing these feelings of isolation and self-doubt.

Finally, rejection is a common experience in academia, and may come from journal publishers, job and grant applications, and supervisors. For example, before receiving an offer from King’s College London to work as a research assistant, I had been rejected from countless jobs over the course of several months. I found that having open and honest conversations about these rejections with early-career researchers have helped me to understand that I was not alone, and it is a normal part of academic life.

This personal experience highlights the importance of creating supportive networks within academic institutions. By fostering a culture of openness and collaboration, we can help mitigate the effects of imposter syndrome and empower early-career researchers, especially women early-career researchers, to thrive.

Conclusion

Imposter syndrome is a significant and common barrier to success and well-being for many early-career academics, particularly women. The article “The Imposter Phenomenon and its Relationship with Self-Efficacy, Perfectionism, and Happiness in University Students” provides valuable insights into this issue, highlighting the need for change in academic culture. By promoting a growth mindset, implementing mentorship programs, and fostering supportive environments, we can create a more supportive academic culture. To tackle imposter syndrome, we may need to further adopt an intersectional lens to tackle structural inequalities in institutions, as imposter syndrome is also a particular issue within minority groups.

NB this blog has been peer-reviewed

References

• Ayorech, Z. (2021) Intersectionality in academia – the edit blog, The EDIT Blog. Available at: https://blogs.kcl.ac.uk/editlab/2021/03/08/intersectionality-in-academia/ (Accessed: 18 June 2024).
• Clance, P.R. and Imes, S.A. (1978) ‘The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention.’, Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15(3), pp. 241–247. doi:10.1037/h0086006.
• Holden, C.L. et al. (2021) ‘Imposter syndrome among first- and continuing-generation college students: The roles of perfectionism and stress’, Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 25(4), pp. 726–740. doi:10.1177/15210251211019379.
• Introducing a common approach to student mental health at Oxford (2023) University of Oxford. Available at: https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/news/2023-05-30-introducing-common-approach-student-mental-health-oxford (Accessed: 10 June 2024).
• Mount, P. and Tardanico, S. (2014) Beating the Impostor Syndrome. Center for Creative Leadership.
• Muradoglu, M. et al. (2022) ‘Women—particularly underrepresented minority women—and early-career academics feel like impostors in fields that value brilliance.’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(5), pp. 1086–1100. doi:10.1037/edu0000669.
• Pákozdy, C. et al. (2023) ‘The imposter phenomenon and its relationship with self-efficacy, perfectionism and happiness in university students’, Current Psychology, 43(6), pp. 5153–5162. doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04672-4.

About the author

Pauline studied BSc in Biomedical Sciences – Neuroscience at King’s College London. Throughout the BSc, she worked as a Research Assistant in Global Mental Health at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, developing, testing, and implementing depression interventions in low- and middle- income countries. Pauline then completed a MSc in Psychological Research at the University of Oxford, researching how antidepressants impact affective learning under distinct environmental conditions. Pauline is passionate about developmental psychology and data-driven methodologies for research, as well as making data more discoverable from low- and middle- income countries.

Loneliness is a significant and often overlooked issue among early career researchers (ECRs). Loneliness is defined as a subjective feeling of distress, resulting from perceptions of unfulfilling or inadequate social connection (Matthews et al., 2016). This phenomenon can have profound implications for both personal well-being and professional development. Recent studies have highlighted the prevalence of loneliness among academics, particularly those in the early stages of their careers (Moran et al., 2020)(Ellard et al., 2022), suggesting that this issue warrants serious attention from both research and policy perspectives.

Wellcome Trust’s report on researchers’ experiences of research culture

The Wellcome Trust (2020) published a report in 2020 on researchers’ experiences of research culture (Moran et al., 2020). The authors conducted a literature review, followed by in-depth qualitative interviews with researchers from the United Kingdom (UK), workshops in England and Scotland, and a quantitative survey that was open worldwide of over 4,000 researchers in various stages of their careers. The report identified that ECRs often experience high levels of isolation and loneliness, which can be exacerbated by the competitive and solitary nature of academic work. For example, many early-career researchers found that they often had to prioritise their research over personal relationships, which may require leaving behind their friends or their partner. This impact on personal relationships was found to lead to social isolation and loneliness, which was most significantly felt by ECRs. “I have felt the most isolated I ever have in my life in this PhD”, confessed an anonymous interviewee.

“The report identified that ECRs often experience high levels of isolation and loneliness, which can be exacerbated by the competitive and solitary nature of academic work.”

Furthermore, the Wellcome study found that isolation and loneliness manifested in various ways and shifted according to the researcher’s situation. The nature of work is often structured for individual task completion, which may be more compatible with certain personality types than others. In addition, heightened competitive research environments can prevent camaraderie and reduce the sense of community in the workplace. Finally, the study highlighted that there is often a lack of agency and support for addressing issues when problems arise or where psychological well-being is concerned. This seemed particularly apparent in doctoral students, where working independently with long working hours and being unable to raise concerns with supervisors or peers lead to feelings of isolation during their PhD. To support this, the online survey revealed that 70% of junior researchers believed a research career was lonely and isolating.

These findings are supported by a study by Janta et al., (2014), where the authors investigated loneliness and social isolation in doctoral students around the world. The researchers analysed an online forum, which aimed to support previous, current, and prospective postgraduate students to exchange ideas online. Specifically, Janta et al., (2014) analysed approximately 35 threads across 122 pages that mentioned loneliness. Findings revealed that loneliness was a part of many doctoral students’ experiences. For example, one participant, a doctoral student, wrote: “I am 100% alone day and night, all the time. I am alone in my office all day.” Overall, whilst some students expressed contentment with their progression, their lack of social connection and belonging to a social group resulted in loneliness and even depression.

Strengths and Limitations of the Research

The studies mentioned above provide a robust foundation for understanding the prevalence and impact of loneliness among ECRs. Their strengths lie in large sample sizes and the comprehensive nature of the studies, which encompass a wide range of academic disciplines and geographic regions. This broad scope ensures that the findings are widely applicable and relevant to various contexts within child and adolescent mental health.

However, there are limitations to consider. The reliance on self-reported data can introduce bias, as individuals may underreport or overreport their feelings of loneliness due to social desirability or stigma associated with mental health issues. Additionally, cross-sectional designs limit the ability to infer causality; longitudinal studies would be more effective in understanding the temporal relationship between academic pressures and loneliness.

Commentary on the Evidence

The evidence suggests that loneliness among ECRs is a pressing issue that requires targeted interventions. In practice, institutions could implement structured mentorship programs and peer support groups to foster a sense of community and belonging. Some universities have begun to implement such groups where students have been trained to address mental health and well-being issues amongst their students. For example, King’s College London in the UK launched their student-led “Campus Conversations” support group, which offers free weekly in-person activities, one-to-one conversations, well-being resources, and student skills workshops.

Furthermore, policy changes should focus on reducing the pressure and competition inherent in academic environments, promoting collaborative rather than competitive research cultures. Such policies have begun to be implemented. For example, as of January 2024, there are 11 research culture initiatives in the UK focused on ensuring a supportive, healthy, and inclusive research environment for researchers (Powell et al., 2024). Initiatives such as these are the first step to building a more positive research culture and could be implemented further across the globe with a focus on early-career researchers.

Future research could explore the long-term effects of loneliness on career trajectories and mental health outcomes among ECRs. Longitudinal studies could provide deeper insights into how loneliness evolves over time and identify critical periods where interventions may be most effective.

“In practice, institutions could implement structured mentorship programs and peer support groups to foster a sense of community and belonging.”

A Personal Perspective

As a research assistant in developmental psychology, I have observed firsthand the isolating effects of academic research. The solitary nature of data analysis and the pressure to publish can lead to feelings of disconnection from peers and mentors. Establishing regular check-ins with supervisors and participating in departmental social events have been crucial in mitigating these feelings. In my role, I have also seen how supportive networks can enhance productivity and well-being. Collaborative projects and informal peer discussions have not only improved my research skills but also provided a sense of camaraderie and mutual support.

Conclusion

In conclusion, addressing loneliness among ECRs is essential for fostering a healthy, productive academic environment. By leveraging evidence-based interventions and fostering a culture of support and collaboration, we can enhance the well-being and career satisfaction of ECRs.

NB this blog has been peer-reviewed

References

• Ellard, O.B., Dennison, C. and Tuomainen, H. (2022) ‘Review: Interventions addressing loneliness amongst university students: A systematic review’, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 28(4), pp. 512–523. doi:10.1111/camh.12614.
• Janta, H., Lugosi, P. and Brown, L. (2014) ‘Coping with loneliness: A netnographic study of doctoral students’, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(4), pp. 553–571. doi:10.1080/0309877x.2012.726972.
• Matthews, T. et al. (2016) ‘Social isolation, loneliness and depression in young adulthood: A behavioural genetic analysis’, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 51(3), pp. 339–348. doi:10.1007/s00127-016-1178-7.
• Moran, H. et al. (2020) ‘Understanding research culture: What researchers think about the culture they work in’, Wellcome Open Research, 5, p. 201. doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15832.1.
• Powell, J. et al. (2024) ‘Research Culture Initiatives in the UK’, UK Research & Innovation [Preprint]. https://www.ukri.org/publications/research-initiatives-in-the-uk-report/.

About the author

Pauline studied BSc in Biomedical Sciences – Neuroscience at King’s College London. Throughout the BSc, she worked as a Research Assistant in Global Mental Health at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, developing, testing, and implementing depression interventions in low- and middle- income countries. Pauline then completed a MSc in Psychological Research at the University of Oxford, researching how antidepressants impact affective learning under distinct environmental conditions. Pauline is passionate about developmental psychology and data-driven methodologies for research, as well as making data more discoverable from low- and middle- income countries.