Four studies examine the faculty–student relationship as a mechanism through which students ascertain their place in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Studies 1 and 2 use experimental methods to demonstrate STEM faculty who behave communally, relative to independently, increase undergraduates’ belonging and interest in STEM roles through anticipation of greater role-specific support (i.e., support that emphasizes guiding students through structures and activities of field-specific roles). Study 3 then examined the consequences of role-specific support for undergraduates’ belonging and interest in STEM. Students anticipated more belonging and interest in STEM roles when faculty provided high levels of role-specific support. Finally, STEM doctoral students’ perception of role-specific support from faculty related to their belonging and future identification in STEM fields (Study 4). Taken together, these studies demonstrate the importance of students’ construals of role-specific support from faculty, and how faculty behavior signals role-specific support, with benefits for student involvement in STEM.
AllenJ.SmithJ. L.ThomanD. B.WaltersR. W. (2018). Fluctuating team science: Perceiving science as collaborative improves science motivation. Motivation Science, 4(4), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000099
2.
BakanD. (1966). The duality of human existence. Rand McNally.
3.
BelangerA. L.JoshiM. P.FuestingM. A.WeisgramE. S.ClaypoolH. M.DiekmanA. B. (2020). Putting belonging in context: Communal affordances signal belonging in STEM. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219897181
CalarcoJ. M. (2020). A field guide to grad school: Uncovering the hidden curriculum. Princeton University Press.
6.
CanningE. A.MuenksK.GreenD. J.MurphyM. C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. Science Advances, 5(2), eaau4734. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4734
7.
CheryanS.SiyJ. O.VichayapaiM.DruryB. J.KimS. (2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM?Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(6), 656–664. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611405218
8.
ClarkE. K.FuestingM. A.DiekmanA. B. (2016). Enhancing interest in science: Exemplars as cues to communal affordances of science. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(11), 641–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12392
9.
ClarkS. L.DyarC.MaungN.LondonB. (2016). Psychosocial pathways to STEM engagement among graduate students in the life sciences. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(3), Article 45. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0036
10.
CohenG. L.GarciaJ. (2008). Identity, belonging, and achievement: A model, interventions, implications. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(6), 365–369. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-8721.2008.00607.x
11.
CrispG.CruzI. (2009). Mentoring college students: A critical review of the literature between 1990 and 2007. Research in Higher Education, 50(6), 525–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9130-2
12.
DasguptaN.ScircleM. M.HunsingerM. (2015). Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(16), 4988–4993. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1422822112
13.
DiekmanA. B.BrownE. R.JohnstonA. M.ClarkE. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1051–1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610377342
14.
DiekmanA. B.SteinbergM.BrownE. R.BelangerA. L.ClarkE. K. (2017). A goal congruity model of role entry, engagement, and exit: Understanding communal goal processes in STEM gender gaps. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(2), 142–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316642141
15.
EaglyA. H.NaterC.MillerD. I.KaufmannM.SczesnyS. (2020). Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist, 75(3), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000494
16.
FolbergA. M.KercherK.RyanC. S. (2020). The hidden role of dominance in career interests: A bifactor analysis of agentic and communal goal orientations. Sex Roles, 83, 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01104-1
17.
FuestingM. A.DiekmanA. B. (2017). Not by success alone: Role models provide pathways to communal opportunities in STEM. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(2), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216678857
18.
GoodC.RattanA.DweckC. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026659
19.
HaberM. G.CohenJ. L.LucasT.BaltesB. B. (2007). The relationship between self-reported received and perceived social support: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39(1–2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9100-9
20.
HallW.SchmaderT.AdayA.CroftE. (2019). Decoding the dynamics of social identity threat in the workplace: A within-person analysis of women’s and men’s interactions in STEM. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(4), 542–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618772582
21.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
22.
HerrmannS. D.AdelmanR. M.BodfordJ. E.GraudejusO.OkunM. A.KwanV. S. (2016). The effects of a female role model on academic performance and persistence of women in STEM courses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38(5), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2016.1209757
23.
Holt-LunstadJ.SmithT. B.LaytonJ. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLoS Medicine, 7(7), e1000316. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316
LondonB.RosenthalL.LevyS. R.LobelM. (2011). The influences of perceived identity compatibility and social support on women in nontraditional fields during the college transition. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33, 304–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2011.614166
26.
MargolisE. (2002). The hidden curriculum in higher education. Routledge.
27.
MasterA.CheryanS.MeltzoffA. N. (2017). Social group membership increases STEM engagement among preschoolers. Developmental Psychology, 53(2), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000195
28.
MorganC.IsaacJ. D.SansoneC. (2001). The role of interest in understanding the career choices of female and male college students. Sex Roles, 44(5/6), 295–320. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010929600004
29.
MurphyM. C.SteeleC. M.GrossJ. J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18(10), 879–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x
30.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Effective mentoring in STEMM: Practice, research, and future directions: Proceedings of a workshop–in brief. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24815
31.
National Science Foundation Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19304/digest
32.
PaglisL. L.GreenS. G.BauerT. N. (2006). Does advisor mentoring add value? A longitudinal study of mentoring and doctoral student outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), 451–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-9003-2
33.
PerezT.CromleyJ. G.KaplanA. (2014). The role of identity development, values, and costs in college STEM retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 315. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034027
34.
Purdie-VaughnsV.SteeleC. M.DaviesP. G.DitlmannR.CrosbyJ. R. (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 615–630. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.615
35.
RiggJ.DayJ.AdlerH. (2013). Emotional exhaustion in graduate students: The role of engagement, self-efficacy and social support. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 3(2), 138. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v3n2p138
36.
RobnettR. D.NelsonP. A.ZurbriggenE. L.CrosbyF. J.ChemersM. M. (2018). Research mentoring and scientist identity: Insights from undergraduates and their mentors. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0139-y
37.
SchwarzerR.JerusalemM. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In WeinmanJ.WrightS.JohnstonM. (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.
38.
ShinJ. E. L.LevyS. R.LondonB. (2016). Effects of role model exposure on STEM and non-STEM student engagement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(7), 410–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12371
39.
SteinbergM.DiekmanA. B. (2018). Considering “why” to engage in STEM activities elevates communal content of STEM affordances. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.10.010
40.
StoutJ. G.DasguptaN.HunsingerM.McManusM. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021385
41.
SyedM.ZurbriggenE. L.ChemersM. M.GozaB. K.BearmanS.CrosbyF. J.ShawJ. M.HunterL.MorganE. M. (2019). The role of self-efficacy and identity in mediating the effects of STEM support experiences. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 19(1), 7–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12170
42.
TenenbaumH. R.CrosbyF. J.GlinerM. D. (2001). Mentoring relationships in graduate school. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59(3), 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1804
43.
ThomanD. B.ArizagaJ. A.SmithJ. L.StoryT. S.SoncuyaG. (2014). The grass is greener in non-science, technology, engineering, and math classes: Examining the role of competing belonging to undergraduate women’s vulnerability to being pulled away from science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(2), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684313499899
44.
WaltonG. M.BradyS. T. (2017). The many questions of belonging. In ElliotA. J.DweckC. S.YeagerD. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation, second edition: Theory and application (2nd ed., pp. 272–293). Guilford Publications.
45.
ZimetG. D.DahlemN. W.ZimetS. G.FarleyG. K. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
