The Intersection of Professional Identity Formation, Bias, and Marginalized Identities

Mitigating stereotypes and bias in professional identity formation for those with marginalized identities

“…While PIF itself may raise conceptual concerns, this work describes harm that comes from how these discussions take place. 21 …”

“…Recommendations from these works perpetuate harm in an effort to integrate REMPs within a profession that historically has excluded them using a framework that requires them to assimilate. 21 , 34 , 35 These issues extend beyond PIF-related texts but is particularly concerning given the increase in PIF literature related to REMPs. Addressing this now creates an opportunity to mitigate further harm during the ongoing focus on PIF in health professions.…”

“…Table 1 synthesizes the available literature of PIF in underrepresented groups including pharmacy, medicine, and physician assistants. 21 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 When studying PIF in REMP groups, it is critical to avoid stereotypes. Stereotyping learners while asking them to develop a professional identity can contribute to stereotype threat, where minoritized learners are subjected to high cognitive load and decreased academic focus as a means to avoid enacting a stereotype behavior.…”

“…One example includes: “Mentors should consider the limitation on assuming leadership positions because of stereotype threat by the student and lack of role models who may look like them. For example, a first-generation minoritized student (e.g., Hispanic, Latin/a, etc) student who is interested in a specialty area of pharmacy practice… and has no immediate/extended family in healthcare may need additional nurturing because they don't see themselves in such a role.” 21 …”

“…Another example that could be reframed is the claim that “Ethnic/racial minoritized students spend more energy on assimilation rather than career advancement which can lead to halting their post-graduate training because of stereotype threat or feeling they lack safety in their training environment. For example, a student who is not a US citizen but is interested in post-graduate training may be discouraged from applying to a program on the basis of their immigrant visa status or worry that letter writers may not highlight their capacity for success because differences are seen as a deficit rather than an asset.” 21 This example unintentionally places the blame on the student for spending energy on assimilation over career advancement. It can be interpreted as discrediting ethnically and racially minoritized students for not pursuing the post-graduate training versus calling out health systems, programs, and policies that uphold systemic racism that exclude applicants or make pursuing post-graduate training undesirable from a psychological safety lens.…”