skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Social predictors of doctoral student mental health and well-being
Graduate students’ mental health and well-being is a prominent concern across various disciplines. However, early predictors of mental health and well-being in graduate education, specifically doctoral education, have rarely been studied. The present study evaluated both the underlying latent classification of individuals’ mental well-being and predictors of those classifications. Results estimated two latent classes of students’ mental health and well-being: one class with generally high levels of mental well-being and one with lower levels of mental well-being. Regression analyses showed that mentoring in the second year of doctoral study, certainty of choice in the third year, and both academic development and sense of belonging in the fourth year were positive predictors of membership in the higher mental well-being class. In contrast to some prior studies, demographic variables were not related to the identified well-being classifications. Regression analyses further showed that mental well-being was negatively related to participants’ number of publications and research self-efficacy, indicating a problematic relationship between scholarly productivity and confidence and well-being. These findings may be used to identify and provide targeted support for students who are at-risk for having or developing lower levels of mental well-being in their graduate programs.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1760894
PAR ID:
10415710
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Editor(s):
Miettunen, Jouko
Date Published:
Journal Name:
PLOS ONE
Volume:
17
Issue:
9
ISSN:
1932-6203
Page Range / eLocation ID:
e0274273
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Lin, Chung-Ying (Ed.)
    Background University students are increasingly recognized as a vulnerable population, suffering from higher levels of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and disordered eating compared to the general population. Therefore, when the nature of their educational experience radically changes—such as sheltering in place during the COVID-19 pandemic—the burden on the mental health of this vulnerable population is amplified. The objectives of this study are to 1) identify the array of psychological impacts COVID-19 has on students, 2) develop profiles to characterize students' anticipated levels of psychological impact during the pandemic, and 3) evaluate potential sociodemographic, lifestyle-related, and awareness of people infected with COVID-19 risk factors that could make students more likely to experience these impacts. Methods Cross-sectional data were collected through web-based questionnaires from seven U.S. universities. Representative and convenience sampling was used to invite students to complete the questionnaires in mid-March to early-May 2020, when most coronavirus-related sheltering in place orders were in effect. We received 2,534 completed responses, of which 61% were from women, 79% from non-Hispanic Whites, and 20% from graduate students. Results Exploratory factor analysis on close-ended responses resulted in two latent constructs, which we used to identify profiles of students with latent profile analysis, including high (45% of sample), moderate (40%), and low (14%) levels of psychological impact. Bivariate associations showed students who were women, were non-Hispanic Asian, in fair/poor health, of below-average relative family income, or who knew someone infected with COVID-19 experienced higher levels of psychological impact. Students who were non-Hispanic White, above-average social class, spent at least two hours outside, or less than eight hours on electronic screens were likely to experience lower levels of psychological impact. Multivariate modeling (mixed-effects logistic regression) showed that being a woman, having fair/poor general health status, being 18 to 24 years old, spending 8 or more hours on screens daily, and knowing someone infected predicted higher levels of psychological impact when risk factors were considered simultaneously. Conclusion Inadequate efforts to recognize and address college students’ mental health challenges, especially during a pandemic, could have long-term consequences on their health and education. 
    more » « less
  2. It is well-known that a significant population of doctoral students drop out of their graduate programs and face or develop significant mental health distress. Stress plays a role in exacerbating mental health distress in both engineering PhD programs and more broadly for university students in general. While rates of dropout for engineering students may not differ strongly from other disciplines, engineering students have been suggested to be less likely to seek help from university services for well-being concerns. In the first year of our three‐year NSF RFE project, we interviewed doctoral engineering students to identify major stressors present in the doctoral engineering experience at the present study’s focal institution. In the second year of our project, we had developed the Stressors for Doctoral Students Questionnaire - Engineering (SDSQ-E), a novel survey which measures the frequency and severity of these top sources of stress for doctoral engineering students. The SDSQ-E was designed using the results of first year interviews and a review of the literature on stress for doctoral engineering students. In year three, we completed analysis of the year 3 data and conducted further testing of the SDSQ-E. We also developed a discipline-general form of the survey, called the SDSQ-G. In October-December 2023, we administered these surveys to engineering PhD students as a subset of a large sample of graduate students at two institutions. Further, we tested the potential for the SDSQ-E to predict factors such as anxiety, depression, or intention to persist in doctoral programs. We broadly summarize these survey distributions including tests of the SDSQ-E for validity, fairness, and reliability. 
    more » « less
  3. A psychologically safe environment is characterized by people who feel safe to voice ideas and concerns, willingly seek feedback, have positive intentions to one another, engage in constructive confrontation, and feel safe to take risks and experiment. Outside of academia, psychological safety has been shown to impact creativity, work performance, and work engagement. In academic research environments, faculty have a major leadership role in cultivating a psychologically safe environment amongst their academic research teams. Effective graduate student mentoring, which includes both career and psychosocial support, is critical to the development and retention of talented engineers in the US workforce. There is a need to better understand how engineering departments can cultivate more inclusive, psychologically safe environments in which graduate students feel safe to engage in interpersonal risk-taking, especially in research settings. Guided by the Conservation of Resources theory, this project aims to address the following research question: What are the relationships between faculty advisor mentoring, doctoral student psychological safety, and the subsequent positive and negative outcomes for doctoral students? This work in progress paper presents the first quantitative phase of an explanatory mixed methods research design within the overarching project. The quantitative phase will address the following research aims: 1) Identify relationships between mentorship, psychological safety, and engineering doctoral student mental health, 2) Identify mentoring competencies that are predictive of research group psychological safety, and 3) Identify how different demographics experience mentoring and psychological safety in their research groups. Researchers developed a survey consisting of five pre-existing scales, four open-ended questions, and demographics questions. The scales include dyadic and team psychological safety, mentoring competency, mental health and well-being, and job stress. The survey was reviewed by graduate students outside of the participant pool at multiple institutions as well as an external advisory board panel and revised to improve clarity and ensure the selection of appropriate subscales. The survey will be administered via Qualtrics. Graduate students who have been enrolled in their doctoral program for at least one year and currently have a doctoral research advisor will be recruited to participate in the survey at four public, research-intensive institutions. The planned target sample size is 200-300 graduate students. This paper will present the design of the survey and preliminary survey results. As the first part of a larger mixed-methods study, the survey responses provide insight into graduate level engineering education and how doctoral students can be better supported. 
    more » « less
  4. Research demonstrates a growing mental health crisis in graduate education, which can contribute to productivity, departure, and well-being issues. To address this crisis and advocate for systemic change, this project explored faculty perceptions about graduate student mental health and how these perceptions intersect with direct action when student mental health challenges arise. We were guided by phenomenological inquiry to explore how faculty attitudes (n = 3) about mental health shape programmatic and individual decisions around supporting mental health. We thematically analyzed interviews discussing stress and mental health focused on faculty experiences. Faculty interviews demonstrated varying attitudes toward graduate student stress and mental health. Faculty desires to engage in discussions about stress or mental health were on a wide spectrum, often with work productivity guiding these discussions. Further, faculty highlighted levels of discomfort with engaging in discussions about mental health, especially with the students they work closest with. Findings indicate a need to foster faculty skill and comfort with engaging with students about their mental health while also providing clear institutional policies that support these actions to address the mental health crisis. 
    more » « less
  5. Faculty advisors play an integral role in the experiences of graduate students. Advisors serve in many different capacities for doctoral students: teachers, career guides, research mentors, and more. However, especially in engineering disciplines, faculty advisors often receive little to no training on how to serve as effective mentors. The training that faculty may receive is oftentimes lacking in how to provide psychosocial support, which is an important part of developing psychological safety in a team. A psychologically safe environment is one where an individual feels safe to be themselves and take risks without fear of negative consequences. In graduate engineering education, psychologically safe research environments enable students to be creative and innovative, which is a necessary part of the research process. The impact that psychological safety has on graduate students’ work outcomes and mental health and well-being needs to be more deeply explored to best support students throughout their degree programs and beyond. Psychological safety in a graduate student-advisor relationship can have positive or negative effects on student mental health and well-being as well as learning outcomes. We posit that faculty advisors serve as a resource to students and in turn influence psychological safety in student research environments, which impacts student outcomes. This paper is an update on an NSF RFE project started in 2023 that leverages mixed methods to combine a survey of graduate engineering students and two sets of interviews. We use Conservation of Resources theory to examine psychological safety in relationships between doctoral engineering students and their research advisor(s). We have completed data collection and begun analysis of the survey responses and the first set of interviews. The survey was completed by 469 doctoral engineering students across two R1 institutions. Results indicated that psychological safety was a mediator between mentoring skills and student mental health and well-being and work outcomes. Twenty-eight survey participants were invited to participate in explanatory interviews. Nineteen participants completed an explanatory interview during which they provided insights and additional context into answers they had provided on the survey. Participants were selected to stratify demographics and offer a broad range of advisor experiences. Interviewers provided participants with their responses to survey items and asked them why they selected the answer they did or for any examples of times when their survey response was representative or not of their overall advising relationship. Explanatory interview findings emphasized the variability of student experiences with advisor mentorship and related work outcomes. Additional narrative interviews are currently being conducted with participants who had previously completed the survey. These narrative interviews are designed to capture specific events and stories from students about critical moments in their relationships with their advisors and how advisor actions (or inaction) in these critical moments impacted their psychological safety and work outcomes, and how these experiences changed over time. We intend to interview 10-15 participants from the larger study in Fall 2024. Collectively, these results will inform training for faculty advising graduate students to create psychologically safe environments where students will thrive. 
    more » « less