A Psychometric Evaluation of the Harvey Imposter Phenomenon Scale

Hellman, Chan M.; Caselman, Tonia D.

doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8302_10

Cited by 20 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison, a HIPS four-factor model was presented with moderate correlations however subscale alphas were not reported (Fried-Buchalter, 1992). In an adolescent sample, Hellman and Caselman (2004) reported an alpha of 0.70 for the original 14 items. However, following factor analysis, an alpha of 0.80 was reported for a better fitting 11-item two factor model (self-confidence and impostor phenomenon) for the HIPS.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the use of a 16-item CIPS which resulted in a theoretically preferred three factor model, the 20-item one factor model of the CIPS continues to be used and a total score is calculated for individuals who complete the measure. By comparison, the HIPS has been validated thrice using factor analysis for scale validation resulting in a two factor model (Edwards et al, 1987; Hellman and Caselman, 2004) and a third time, for construct validation against the fear of success/failure resulting in a four factor model (Fried-Buchalter, 1992). Similar to the CIPS, an overall total score continues to be calculated on the HIPS rather than subscale scores to reflect the multidimensional definition of the measure as postulated by Harvey (1981).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, problematic interpretations of correlation coefficients did not provide convincing arguments to establish discriminant validity of the impostor phenomenon with other constructs and to assert the strengths of the CIPS over the PFS (Chrisman et al, 1995). Furthermore, instances of low internal consistency for the HIPS and the questionable stability of impostorism as measured by 14 items in a one factor model, rather than 11 items in a better fitting two factor solution did not provide convincing arguments for the HIPS being the gold standard either (Hellman and Caselman, 2004). These findings did not provide sufficient evidence to establish the CIPS nor HIPS as a gold standard measure of the impostor phenomenon.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impostor Phenomenon Measurement Scales: A Systematic Review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impostor phenomenon is a pervasive psychological experience of perceived intellectual and professional fraudulence. It is not a diagnosable condition yet observed in clinical and normal populations. Increasingly, impostorism research has expanded beyond clinical and into applied settings. However, to date, a systematic review examining the methodological quality of impostorism measures used to conduct such research has yet to be carried out. This systematic review examines trait impostor phenomenon measures and evaluates their psychometric properties against a quality assessment framework. Systematic searches were carried out on six electronic databases, seeking original empirical studies examining the conceptualization, development, or validation of self-report impostor phenomenon scales. A subsequent review of reference lists also included two full-text dissertations. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were specified to select the final 18 studies in the review sample. Of the studies included, four measures of the impostor phenomenon were identified and their psychometric properties assessed against the quality appraisal tool—Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale, Harvey Impostor Scale, Perceived Fraudulence Scale, and Leary Impostor Scale. The findings often highlighted that studies did not necessarily report poor psychometric properties; rather an absence of data and stringent assessment criteria resulted in lower methodological ratings. Recommendations for future research are made to address the conceptual clarification of the construct's dimensionality, to improve future study quality and to enable better discrimination between measures.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impostor Phenomenon Measurement Scales: A Systematic Review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The factor structure of the instrument is still in debate. A four-factorial (Fried-Buchalter, 1992 ), a two-factorial (Hellman and Caselman, 2004 ), and a three-factorial structure with the dimensions impostor, unworthiness, and inadequacy (Edwards et al, 1987 ) have been suggested. Despite the multidimensionality, the HIPS does not calculate subscale values but a total score (Mak et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Impostor-Profile—Is There a General Impostor Characteristic?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Impostor-Profile (IPP) is a six-dimensional questionnaire measuring the Impostor Phenomenon facets. This study aims to test (a) the appropriateness of a total score, (b) measurement invariance (MI) between gender, (c) the reliability of the IPP, and (d) the convergent validity of the IPP subscales. The sample consisted of N = 482 individuals (64% female). To identify whether the scales of the IPP form a total score, we compared four models: (1) six correlating subscales, (2) a general factor model, (3) a second-order model with one second-order factor and six first-order factors, and (4) a bifactorial model with six group factors. The bifactorial model obtained the best fit. This supports the assumption of a total impostor score. The inspection of structural validity between gender subgroups showed configural, metric, and partial scalar MI. Factor mean comparisons supported the assumption that females and males differ in latent means of the Impostor Phenomenon expressions. The omega coefficients showed sufficient reliability (≥0.71), except for the subscale Need for Sympathy. Overall, the findings of the bifactor model fit and construct validity support the assumption that the measurement through total expression is meaningful in addition to the theoretically formulated multidimensionality of the Impostor Phenomenon.

show abstract

“…Os instrumentos para medir a síndrome do impostor são facilmente encontrados na literatura internacional [e.g., Impostor Phenomenon (IP; Clance & Imes, 1978), Harvey Impostor Phenomenon Scale (HIPS; Harvey & Katz, 1985), Impostor Test (IT; Clance, 1985), Perceived Fraudulence Scale (PFS; Kolligian & Sternberg, 1991)]. Embora essas medidas estejam comumente correlacionadas entre elas (Leary, Patton, Orlando, & Funk, 2000), algumas reúnem muitos itens (e.g., a PFS se compõe de 51 itens), enquanto outras apresentam problemas psicométricos (e.g., HIPS), como inadequação de itens (Hellman & Caselman, 2004) ou coeficientes baixos de consistência interna (Chrisman, Pieper, Clance, Holland, & Glickauf-Hughes, 1995).…”

Section: Medindo a Síndrome Do Impostorunclassified

Escala Clance do Fenômeno do Impostor: Adaptação Brasileira

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumo A Síndrome do Importor (SI) reflete dúvidas sobre conquistas e capacidades pessoais na ausência de evidências externas que reforcem tal percepção. Este estudo objetivou adaptar ao contexto brasileiro a Escala Clance do Fenômeno do Impostor (ECFI), reunindo evidências de sua validade fatorial e consistência interna. Dois estudos foram realizados. No Estudo 1, participaram 201 estudantes universitários (M idade = 22,5, DP = 5,04; 71,6% mulheres) e, no Estudo 2, participaram 252 estudantes de pós-graduações (M idade = 30,4 DP = 6,18; 75% mulheres). Todos os participantes responderam a ECFI e perguntas demográficas. Análises fatoriais exploratórias (AFEs) foram realizadas em ambos os estudos, indicando uma estrutura unifatorial, que explicou entre 46,3% (Estudo 1) e 57% (Estudo 2) da variância total, apresentando consistência interna (alfa de Cronbach) acima de 0,90. Concluiu-se que a ECFI é uma medida psicometricamente adequada, que poderá ser usada em estudos futuros para compreender a dimensão geral da síndrome do impostor e seus correlatos.

show abstract

A Psychometric Evaluation of the Harvey Imposter Phenomenon Scale

Cited by 20 publications

References 24 publications

Impostor Phenomenon Measurement Scales: A Systematic Review

Impostor Phenomenon Measurement Scales: A Systematic Review

Examining the Impostor-Profile—Is There a General Impostor Characteristic?

Escala Clance do Fenômeno do Impostor: Adaptação Brasileira

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About