Impostor Phenomenon and Psychological Well-Being: The Moderating Roles of John Henryism and School Racial Composition Among Black College Students

Abstract

The impostor phenomenon (IP), or erroneous cognitions of intellectual incompetence, is a risk factor for poor psychological adjustment among Black emerging adults. Grounded in Lazarus and Folkman’s Stress and Coping Framework, the current study investigated John Henryism’s active coping and institutional racial composition as moderators of the association between IP and indicators of psychological well-being among 266 Black students (77% women; M_age = 19.87) attending predominately White institutions (PWIs) and historically Black colleges/universities (HBCUs). Hierarchical moderation regression analyses revealed that IP was associated with decreases in well-being indicators among students attending PWIs and HBCUs. Moreover, students who attended PWIs and reported higher levels of John Henryism (+1 SD) were most vulnerable to increases in social anxiety, particularly at higher levels of IP. Results suggest that the interaction between IP, John Henrysim, and institutional racial composition may negatively influence psychological well-being. We discuss how these findings can be used to inform clinical and educational practices to best support Black college students.

In ²⁰¹⁶, approximately two million Black students enrolled in college in the United States. When coupled with data suggesting that Black college student enrolment increased from 12% to 14% from 2000 to ²⁰¹⁶ (de Brey et al., 2019), it is clear that many Black emerging adults are pursuing a college education. Despite this progress, Black college students are expected to negotiate a litany of unique stressors as they actively forge their identities in the context of racism both within and beyond the institutions they attend (Hope et al., 2015). Many Black college students contend with racial discrimination, isolation and alienation, hostile campus climates, limited institutional resources, interpersonal race-related stressors (e.g., racial group conformity and race-related achievement concerns), and concerns of family/community disconnect (Greer, 2008; Negga et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2016). Although the salience of these stressors may vary for Black students attending predominantly White Institutions (PWIs) versus historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), the impostor phenomenon (IP), or erroneous self-perceptions of intellectual incompetence (Clance & Imes, 1978), may be a shared consequence for students in both contexts. Indeed, IP has been implicated as a risk factor for poor psychological adjustment among Black students attending PWIs and HBCUs (Austin et al., 2009; Bernard et al., 2017).

Considering the relevance and negative psychological implications of IP among Black emerging adults, scholars have begun to elucidate culturally pertinent individual and contextual factors that may influence the association between IP and well-being. One such individual factor is John Henryism, defined as an “individual’s self-perception that they can meet [the] demands of their environment through hard-work and determination” (James et al., 1983, p. 263). Although John Henrysim may buffer against negative mental health outcomes in the face of stress (Bronder et al., 2014), the high effort and determination associated with this active coping strategy may unintentionally reinforce negative attributions associated with IP, and in turn, increase risk for poor psychological adjustment (Bernard & Neblett, 2018). Furthermore, as evidence suggests that IP may be particularly salient within settings that are predominantly non-Black (Bernard et al., 2017; Peteet et al., 2015) the racial composition of the institution that Black college students attend may serve as an important contextual determinant of IP and subsequent psychological adjustment. To this end, there is evidence to suggest that an individuals’ self-worth may be related to the racial and ethnic diversity within their academic environment (Seaton & Yip, 2009). Thus, consistent with research suggesting that John Henryism and institutional racial composition may serve as notable moderators of the relationship between stress and health (Hill & Hoggard, 2018; Seaton & Yip, 2009), the current study examined these variables as moderators of the link between IP and indicators of psychological well-being among Black college students attending PWIs and HBCUs.

Impostor Phenomenon

IP is defined as the internalization of maladaptive cognitions of intellectual incompetence experienced by high achieving individuals (Clance & Imes, 1978). Despite objective markers of success and achievement, individuals experiencing IP have an intense fear of failure and a negative perception of their intellecutal capabilities (Clance et al., 1995). Those high in IP have difficulty internalizing success, and frequently attribute achievements to external factors (e.g., luck, good fortune) as opposed to internal ability. Consequently, individuals who endorse high levels of IP work hard to counteract fears that their self-perceived sense of fraudulence will one day be confirmed and exposed by others (Clance & Imes, 1978).

Over the past three decades, scholars have investigated the relevance of IP within a variety of different contexts (see Bernard & Neblett, 2018^; Bravata et al., 2019, for a review), with the majority of work being conducted within predominately White samples. Within this body of scholarship, IP has been linked to numerous indices of negative psychological adjustment outcomes including increases in social and performance anxiety (Chrisman et al., 1995), perfectionistic concerns of making mistakes (Thompson et al., 2000), and lower self-esteem (Sonnak & Towell, 2001).

Increasingly, scholars have begun examining IP among racial and ethnic minority samples. This growing body of research suggests that Black emerging adults may be particularly vulnerable to cognitions of intellectual incompetence (Cokley et al., 2017), in part, because they are expected to simultaneously negotiate stressors pertaining to academic expectations, social roles and relationships, and negative race-related experiences within the academy (e.g., racial discrimination, negative stereotypes, isolation, marginalization; Cokley et al., 2013). Pressures to navigate these stressors may lead to an internalized sense of otherness and inferiority, concerns about negative evaluations from others, and a compulsive need to prove one’s ability at both PWIs and HBCUs (Austin et al., 2009; Peteet et al., 2015). In light of this evidence, research has noted that a reconceptualization of IP may be warranted to more accurately capture the racialized nature of this construct for Black students as they may anchor their experiences of IP within the context of underrepresentation and marginalization within the academy and in-group and out-group expectations (Stone et al., 2018).

In light of this aforementioned literature, it is perhaps not surprising that IP has been argued to have a pronounced negative impact on the mental health of Black emerging adults (Cokley et al., 2017; Peteet et al., 2015). In line with this assertion, cross-sectional and longitudinal literature has linked IP to poor psychological adjustment outcomes including increases in psychological distress, anxiety and depressive symptoms, interpersonal sensitivity, and decreases in self-esteem (Austin et al., 2009; Bernard et al., 2017; Cokley et al., 2017; Lige et al., 2017; McClain et al., 2016; Peteet et al., 2015). Given the considerable evidence documenting the psychological risk conferred by IP, it is crucial to highlight the individual and contextual factors that may influence this association.

Impostor Phenomenon, John Henryism, and Psychological Well-Being

One such individual factor that may influence the association between IP and well-being is John Henryism. Although not exclusive to Black individuals, John Henryism has been found to be more prevalent among Black individuals relative to their White counterparts (Bennett et al., 2004; Neighbors et al., 2007). Within the Black community, John Henrysim may be used more frequently as a means to negotiate race-related stressors and negative messages that devalue what it means to be Black in broader society (Jones et al., 2019; Matthews et al., 2013). While scholars have documented the noxious effects of John Henryism on physical health (e.g., Bronder et al., 2014^; Volpe et al., 2020), the link between John Henryism and psychological functioning remains an important and underexplored area of examination for the mental health of Black emerging adults.

The relatively scant body of literature examining John Henryism in the context of psychological well-being have provided mixed results. John Henryism may have a positive impact on mental health by promoting hard work, determination, and a sense of control or mastery over one’s environment (e.g., Kiecolt et al., 2009). Indeed, John Henrysim has been argued to reduce perceptions of stress (Haritatos et al., 2007), which may also decrease the risk of negative mood symptoms (Neighbors et al., 2007). In line with these hypotheses, high levels of John Henryism have been linked to increases in self-esteem (Stevens-Watkins et al., 2014) and reductions in depressive symptoms and psychological distress among Black men and women (Bronder et al., 2014; Hill & Hoggard, 2018; Kiecolt et al., 2009; Matthews et al., 2013). Interestingly, perceptions of control and mastery over one’s environment has also been linked to lower feelings of anxiety (Gallagher et al., 2014) and lower maladaptive perfectionistic tendencies (Sassaroli et al., 2008). Thus, within the context of IP, higher levels of John Henryism may assuage negative psychological outcomes by promoting a sense of mastery and control in stressful situations via a “single-minded determination to succeed” (James, 1994, p. 169).

However, it is also possible that the utilization of John Henryism as a primary coping strategy in the face of chronic stress may increase vulnerability for suboptimal psychological adjustment. To this end, researchers have argued that sustained high effort coping may compromise mental health as the effort and energy needed to cope with chronic stress may deplete psychological resources over time (Matthews et al., 2013). In fact, chronic use of John Henryism in situations where the root cause of stress cannot be changed or addressed, such as negative academic stereotypes toward Black students and race-based mistreatment, may lead to a deterioration of health (Greer & Brown, 2011; Neighbors et al., 2007). As noted by Booth and Jonassaint (2016), reliance on John Henryism to overcome stressors within contexts that provide limited resources or support may actually increase risk for negative health outcomes. Research by Hudson et al. (2015) supports this assertion, as the authors found higher endorsements of John Henryism to be associated with greater odds of depression. Furthermore, it has been argued that sole reliance on active coping strategies such as John Henryism in the face of race-related stress may compromise self-esteem and self-concept over time (Perry et al., 2012). Thus, within the context of the current study, chronic reliance on active coping could perpetuate misattributions of success (e.g., “I only achieved this goal because of the excessive amount of time I put into it”), which could increase risk for poor psychological well-being.

Impostor Phenomenon, Institution Racial Composition, and Psychological Well-Being

One important contextual factor to consider in the association between IP and psychological well-being is the racial composition of the institution students attend. While Black students may report similar levels of stress regardless of the racial composition of their university (Greer & Brown, 2011), the stressors that these students negotiate may differ as a function of whether they attend a PWI or HBCU (Greer, 2008; Hurtado et al., 2011). For example, at PWIs, Black students may be more likely to report discriminatory experiences, perceive more hostile campus climates, and endorse lower feelings of support from their institution, relative to their HBCU peers (e.g., Campbell et al., 2019^; Smith et al., 2016). IP research conducted at PWIs suggests that chronic exposure to negative race-related experiences that emphasize one’s minoritized and marginalized status may play a central role in intensifying cognitions of intellectual incompetence, thus increasing risk for poor psychological adjustment (Bernard et al., 2017; Cokley et al., 2017).

To be sure, negative race-related interactions are also significant sources of stress among students attending HBCUs (Greer, 2008; Greer & Brown, 2011). However, Black students attending HBCUs may also negotiate more stressors stemming from within-group interactions (e.g., social and relational functioning), familial concerns (e.g., guilt and pressure to meet high academic expectations), and limited financial resources resulting in fewer academic/professional opportunities (Palmer et al., 2010; Watkins et al., 2007) compared with their PWI peers. Among students attending HBCUs, the accumulation of such stressors can negatively affect psychological well-being (K. M. Smith et al., 2014) and contribute to impostor cognitions (Austin et al., 2009). Although stress may look different at HBCUs and PWIs, research suggests that IP is a notable determinant for Black students’ well-being in both contexts.

Guiding Theoretical Framework

Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) transactional model of stress and coping (TMSC) anchored our investigation of the interplay between IP, John Henryism, institutional racial composition, and psychological well-being. In this theory, stress is defined as the relationship between person and environment (stimuli) that is perceived by individuals to exceed their resources. Appraisal is the process which leads individuals to perceive situations as stressful or not (e.g., as a threat or a challenge). Moreover, appraisal can be distinguished as primary (which centers on evaluating potential for harm) or secondary (which centers on evaluating whether one is capable of navigating this harm). Finally, coping is defined as emotions, cognitions, and behaviors that represent attempts to ameliorate or overcome stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). The TMSC argues that if the individual’s appraisal of the person-environment dynamic (i.e., potential stress) is that of threat, their well-being may be compromised. In the context of the current study, IP represents a proximal consequence of the stress that Black students face, particularly when, due to the aforementioned experiences of discrimination, the college environment serves as a threat to one’s feelings of competence. Notably, in our study, institutional racial composition (e.g., PWI vs. HBCU) serves as a contextual factor that may impact either the primary or secondary appraisal processes. Last, John Henryism serves as a critical individual coping strategy that may not only mitigate the impact of IP as a stress response in the short-term, but may also have long-term implications for well-being.

The Current Study

Three limitations constrain the present understanding of the associations among IP, John Henryism, institutional racial composition, and psychological well-being. First, with the exception of research by Austin et al. (2009), a paucity of empirical literature has examined the relevance of IP among Black students attending HBCUs. Thus, the salience and psychological implications of IP among students attending HBCUs remains unclear. Second, literature examining John Henryism in the context of mental health has done so largely with respect to depressive symptoms (e.g., Hill & Hoggard, 2018^; Hudson et al., 2015). However, as referenced previously, there is evidence to suggest that John Henryism may have wider implications for other domains of psychological functioning (e.g., anxiety, maladaptive perfectionism, self-esteem; Kiecolt et al., 2009^; Sassaroli et al., 2008^; Stevens-Watkins et al., 2014). Elucidating whether John Henryism may extend to influence other mental health domains, particularly within the context of IP, remains important for clinical practice and educational policy. Third, despite research suggesting that active coping and school diversity may influence the experience of, and response to, stress among students of color (Hill & Hoggard, 2018; Seaton & Douglass, 2014), few studies have taken these important individual and contextual factors into account when exploring the psychological implications of IP. The current study aims to address these gaps in the literature.

The purpose of this study is to examine the modd school diversity may influence the experiencerating roles of John Henryism and institutional racial composition on the relationship between IP and three psychological well-being indicators (i.e., social anxiety, self-esteem, and maladaptive perfectionism). We examine these well-being indicators in accordance with previous investigations, which document strong associations between these indicators and IP (Cokley et al., 2018; Lige et al., 2017; Thompson et al., 2000). Our primary aim was to examine the unique moderating roles of John Henryism and institutional racial composition on the relationship between IP and psychological well-being. Consistent with the TMSC framework and literature linking John Henryism with positive mental health outcomes, we predicted that the association between IP and psychological well-being would be stronger for participants with lower levels of John Henryism. As research suggests that students attending HBCUs report greater social and academic support, more positive perceptions of campus climates, and fewer race-related stressors than that of their PWI peers (Greer, 2008; Palmer et al., 2010), we predicted a stronger association between IP and negative psychological well-being for participants attending PWIs compared with HBCUs. Given the absence of studies examining how active coping may differ as a function of one’s own context, we also investigated the interplay between institutional racial composition and John Henryism as an exploratory aim.

Method

Participants

Participants were recruited from four public Southeastern institutions in the United States (two PWIs, two HBCUs). The overall sample originally comprised 272 Black students. After duplicate or incomplete cases were excluded, the final sample comprised 266 students (M_age = 19.89, SD = 1.68), with a majority identifying as female (77%, n = 203) and none identifying a non-binary gender. Approximately equal numbers of students in the sample attended a PWI (51%, n = 135) as attended a HBCU (49%, n = 131).

Participants attending PWIs had an average age of 19.84 years (SD = 1.39; age range = 17–25). Approximately 34% of participants from PWIs were seniors, 31% were juniors, 23% were sophomores, and 11% were first-year students. The majority of students were not first-generation college students (67%), and their self-reported cumulative average was a “B” (M_gpa = 3.22; SD = 0.52). While the median reported socioeconomic status (SES) was “middle class,” 8% of participants reported family SES as poor, 24% as working class, 47% as middle class, and 22% as upper middle class. Participants attending HBCUs had an average age of 19.95 years (SD = 1.93; age range = 17–26). Of the participants attending HBCUs, 23% were seniors, 23% were juniors, 28% were sophomores, and 17% were first-year students. Most students were not first-generation college students (58%), and their self-reported cumulative average was a “B” (M_gpa = 3.03; SD = 0.60). The median reported SES was “middle class”; however, 4% of participants reported their family SES as poor, 34% as working class, 46% as middle class, 15% as upper middle class, and 2% as wealthy.

Procedures

Following institutional review board approval from each university where data were collected, interested participants were screened for eligibility. Students were required to self-identify as Black, be enrolled full-time as an undergraduate student at one of the four institutions, and be between the ages of 18 and 25 years. Eligible participants were sent a link to complete the online questionnaire, with self-report measures presented in the following order: sociodemographic information, IP, John Henryism, social anxiety, self-esteem, perfectionism, and minority status stress. The questionnaire took approximately 45 minutes to complete and participants were compensated with a $10 Amazon gift card.

Measures

Sociodemographic information.

Demographic data collected consisted of age, SES, and self-identified gender. SES was collected via a self-report measure anchored on 5-point scale with responses being rated from 1 (poor) to 5 (wealthy). These specific demographic variables were collected and used as covariates due to their empirically established association with IP cognitions.

Impostor phenomenon.

The Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale (CIPS; Clance, 1985) was used to assess cognitions of IP. The CIPS is a 20-item self-report measure that assesses the extent to which individuals experience impostor cognitions or worries. Responses on the CIPS are rated from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true), with a sample item being: “I often compare my ability with those around me and think they may be more intelligent than I am.” Total scores on the CIPS were utilized for analyses and are calculated by summing participant responses on all items, with higher scores suggestive of more intense impostor cognitions.

Studies utilizing the total scores of the CIPS within predominately Black samples have reported Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .91 to .93 (Bernard et al., 2017; Cokley et al., 2013), which is in line with the present study (α = .92). In terms of convergent validity, the CIPS has been found to positively correlate with other IP measures in addition to negative adjustment indicators such as depression and social anxiety (Chrisman et al., 1995). With respect to divergent validity, the CIPS has been shown to negatively correlate with indicators of self-esteem (Chrisman et al., 1995). In the current study, the CIPS was found to be positively correlated with measures of maladaptive perfectionism and social anxiety, and negatively associated with self-esteem measures. While there have been inconsistencies regarding the factor structure of the CIPS, researchers have largely taken a unidimensional total score approach wherein higher responses indicate more intense impostor cognitions (see Mak et al., 2019). This summative approach is supported by evidence that the one-factor model may be the most parsimonious for diverse samples (e.g., Simon & Choi, 2017). CFA was conducted in structural equation modeling framework with maximum likelihood estimation and correlated residuals using Mplus 8 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2017). CFA of the CIPS in the present sample indicated that the one-factor structure was an adequate fit to the data. More specifically, the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) model value (.06) was below cutoff criteria (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value (.08) was relatively low and within acceptable limits given model degrees of freedom (Taasoobshirazi & Wang, 2016). However, the comparative fit index (CFI) value (.88) was slightly lower than a .90 cutoff (Kline, 2005). Taken together, these indices were evaluated as indicative of overall acceptable fit in accordance with Marsh et al. (2004).

John Henryism.

The John Henryism Scale for Active Coping (JHAC; James et al., 1983) was used as an indicator of active coping. The JHAC is a self-report measure that asks participants to rate their degree of agreement with 12 statements related to active coping characteristics on a scale from 1 (completely false) to 4 (completely true). A sample item on the JHAC scale is as follows: “When things don’t go the way I want them to, that makes me work even harder.” Total scores on the JHAC were utilized within analyses and were calculated by summing participant responses on all items, with higher scores corresponding to more effortful coping.

Studies utilizing total scores on the JHAC scale have reported Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .61 to .96 (Fernander et al., 2003; Jones et al., 2019; Volpe et al., 2020), which is in line with the current study (sample α = .76). The JHAC has been found to positively correlate with other active coping strategies and be discriminable from Type A behavioral patterns, anger and hostility, and emotion-focused and behavioral disengagement coping strategies (see Fernander et al., 2003). CFA of the JHAC in the present sample (following the same procedure as described above for CIPS) indicated that the one-factor structure was an adequate fit to the data. More specifically, SRMR (.05) and RMSEA (.06) values were at or below cutoffs (Hu & Bentler, 1999), and the CFI value was relatively high (.90), indicating overall acceptable fit in accordance with Marsh et al. (2004).

Institutional racial composition.

Participants indicated the racial composition of their institution by selecting the college in which they attended. Four choices corresponding to the two PWIs and two HBCUs in which data were collected were provided.

Minority Status Stress.

The Minority Status Stress Scale (MSSS; Smedley et al., 1993) was used to capture experiences of minority status stress via 37 self-report items anchored on a 6-point Likert-type scale from 0 (does not apply) to 5 (extremely stressful). A sample item on the MSSS is the following: “White students and faculty expect poor academic performance from students of my race.” Total scores on the MSSS were utilized in the analyses and were calculated by summing participant responses on all items, with higher scores corresponding to higher levels of minority status stress.

Studies utilizing the MSSS scores among Black samples have documented Cronbach’s alphas of .93 to .97 (Greer & Brown, 2011; McClain et al., 2016), which is in line with the current study (sample α = .96). Initial principal component analysis indicated that the MSSS is composed of five underlying factors (i.e., social climate stress, interracial stress, racism and discrimination, within-group stress, and achievement stress; Smedley et al., 1993). Despite the multidimensional nature of the MSSS, scholars have reported high correlations between subscales (e.g., rs =.51; Greer, 2008) and have subsequently utilized an overall total score to address redundancy (Cokley et al., 2013; Greer & Brown, 2011). Therefore, we took this total score approach in the present study. Studies have documented an inverse relationship between the MSSS and academic performance (Greer & Chwalisz, 2007) and mental health (McClain et al., 2016) as indicators of discriminant validity. Evidence of convergent validity has been illustrated via a positive association between MSSS and college stress (Arbona et al., 2018). CFA of the MSSS in the present sample (following the same procedure as described above for CIPS) indicated that a one-factor structure was an adequate fit to the data. More specifically, SRMR (.04) was less than the .08 cutoff indicating good fit and the CFI (.96) value was above the .95 cutoff indicating good fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Although the RMSEA value (.08) was above the cutoff of .06, these indices were evaluated as indicative of overall acceptable fit when considered collectively in accordance with Marsh et al. (2004).

Maladaptive perfectionism.

Maladaptive perfectionism was measured with a subscale of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost et al., 1990). The FMPS is a 35-item self-report measure designed to measure six dimensions of perfectionism: Concern Over Mistakes, Personal Standards, Parental Expectations, Parental Criticism, Doubts about Actions, and Organization. We utilized the Concern Over Mistakes subscale as an indicator of maladaptive characteristics of perfectionism for several reasons. First, the Concerns Over Mistakes subscale is considered to be reflective of maladaptive concerns that equate mistakes to failure, in addition to beliefs that failure will lead to negative perceptions from others (Frost et al., 1990). Second, scholars suggest that higher scores on the Concerns Over Mistakes subscale have been associated with a higher risk for psychopathology (Frost et al., 1993). Third, the Concerns Over Mistakes subscale has been used as an independent indicator of maladaptive perfectionism in empirical research (Frost et al., 1995, 1997). The Concern Over Mistakes subscale consists of nine items and assesses negative reactions to mistakes, tendencies to construe mistakes as equal to failure, and beliefs that failure will lead to disrespect from others. A sample item on the Concerns Over Mistakes subscale is: “People will probably think less of me if I make a mistake.” Total scores on the Concerns Over Mistakes were utilized in the analyses and were calculated by summing participant responses on all items of this subscale, with higher scores corresponding to higher levels of concern over making mistakes, a key element of maladaptive perfectionism.

For Black samples, scholars have reported a Cronbach’s alpha of .88 for the Concern Over Mistakes subscale scores (Castro & Rice, 2003), which is consistent with the current study (sample α = .90). The multidimensional factor structure of the FMPS has been successfully replicated with diverse samples (e.g., Latinx; Gavino et al., 2019). The Concern Over Mistakes subscale has been found to positively correlate (e.g., r = .55) with other indicators of maladaptive perfectionism such as Discrepancy scores on the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised (Slaney et al., 2001), providing evidence for convergent validity (e.g., Sironic & Reeve, 2015). In contrast, the Concern Over Mistake subscale has been found to weakly correlate with indicators of internally driven perfectionism, such as the High Standards dimension of the Almost Perfect Scale-Revised, providing support for discriminant validity (Sironic & Reeve, 2015). CFA of the Concern Over Mistakes subscale in the present sample indicated that the one-factor structure was an adequate fit to the data. More specifically, the SRMR value (.05) was below the cutoff (Hu & Bentler, 1999), the CFI value (.91) was relatively high, and the RMSEA value (.12) was slightly higher than desired but was within acceptable limits given degrees of freedom (Taasoobshirazi & Wang, 2016), indicating overall acceptable fit in accordance with Marsh et al. (2004).

Self-esteem.

Global self-esteem was assessed using the 10-item Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965). Participants rated the degree to which they agree with 10 statements (e.g., “I feel that I have a number of good qualities”) on a 4-point scale (1 = strongly agree to 4 = strongly disagree). A sample item on the RSES is: “I am able to do things as well as most other people.” Total scores on the RSES were utilized for the analyses and were calculated by summing participant responses on all items, with higher scores indicating higher levels of self-esteem.

With regard to reliability estimates of the RSES scores for Black samples, the estimate has been reported to be high (e.g., .90; Peteet et al., 2015), which is consistent with the current sample (α = .90). The RSES has been utilized as a unidimensional measure, with Schmitt and Allik (2005) finding that a one-dimensional model of the RSES produced the best fit in their large-scale study of the psychometric properties of the RSES across 53 nations. The RSES has been shown to positively correlate with other measures of self-esteem, establishing convergent validity and negatively correlate with indicators of neuroticism and depression (Kashdan et al., 2006), establishing its discriminant validity. CFA of the RSES in the present sample (following the same procedure as described above for CIPS) indicated that the one-factor structure was an adequate fit to the data. More specifically, the SRMR value (.05) was below the cutoff (Hu & Bentler, 1999), the CFI value (.91) was relatively high, and the RMSEA value (.11) was slightly higher than desired but within acceptable limits given the degrees of freedom (Taasoobshirazi & Wang, 2016), indicating an overall acceptable fit in accordance with Marsh et al. (2004).

Social anxiety.

The Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS; Mattick & Clarke, 1998) was used to measure social anxiety symptoms. The SIAS is a 20-item self-report measure that asks participants to indicate the degree to which they feel statements are true for them (1 = not at all to 4 = extremely). A sample item on the SIAS is: “I worry about expressing myself in case I appear awkward.” Total scores on the SIAS were utilized for the analyses and were calculated by summing participant responses on all items, with higher scores indicative of higher levels of social anxiety.

Previous researchers using the SIAS scores with a Black sample (Carter et al., 2014) reported a Cronbach’s alpha of .88, which is consistent with the internal reliability found in the current study (sample α = .93). Previous studies have found the SIAS to be strongly correlated with measures of social avoidance and distress, which has provided support for convergent validity (Heimberg et al., 1992). Furthermore, as evidence of discriminant validity, the SIAS is distinguishable from indicators of social phobia (Heimberg et al., 1992; Peters, 2000). CFA of the SIAS in the present sample (following the same procedure as described above for CIPS) indicated that the one-factor structure was an adequate fit to the data. More specifically, SRMR (.05), and RMSEA (.08) values were at or below the recommended cutoffs (Hu & Bentler, 1999). However, the CFI value (.89) was just slightly lower than the cutoff of .90, but this finding taken together with the other fit indices indicated that the one-factor model was overall acceptable in accordance with Marsh et al. (2004).

Analytic Strategy

Primary analyses were conducted in SPSS version 25.0. Data were evaluated for the presence of outliers and normality. All variables were found to be within acceptable limits and were determined to meet all assumptions for normality. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations for the demographic and key study variables were conducted first. Independent sample t tests were also performed to compare differences between key study variables. Hierarchical moderated regression analyses were then conducted to test the study hypotheses (controlling for age, SES, gender, minority status stress, and well-being indicators not used as central outcomes in a given model), wherein John Henryism and institutional racial composition were tested as independent and joint moderators, with IP as the predictor of well-being indicators. Consistent with findings from previous IP research (Bernard et al., 2017; Cokley et al., 2017), power for moderated regression analyses was set to 80% with an a priori effect size of R² = .13, which corresponds to a small to medium effect (Cohen, 1988). Using G*Power (Faul et al., 2009), it was determined that a minimum sample size of 216 was necessary to test the study hypotheses. Continuous predictor variables were centered to reduce multicollinearity between the main effects and interactions. Continuous covariates variables (i.e., age and SES) were also centered to facilitate analyses. The categorical variables, gender and institutional racial composition, were dummy coded to facilitate analyses, with “0” representing females and males with “1”; and for institutional status, PWI attendance was coded “0” and HBCU attendance was coded “1.” Preacher et al.’s interaction calculator was utilized to test the interactions between IP and psychological well-being (at ±1 SD for IP and John Henryism) and to test the simple slopes of the regression lines (Preacher et al., 2006).

To control for Type I error, we utilized the modified Bonferroni procedure (Holland & Copenhaver, 1988). This sequential procedure involves rank ordering p values from smallest to largest. Each p value is then compared against an adjusted critical alpha value that is computed by calculating α/k, where k equals the total number of statistical significance tests performed. For the next smallest p value, the critical alpha is α/(k − 1). This procedure is carried forth until the first statistically nonsignificant difference is found. At this point, all remaining differences are considered statistically nonsignificant. As our t tests involved the comparison of five different means, our initial p value was .05/5 = .01. With moderated regression analyses testing 14 variables, our initial alpha cutoff value was .05/14 = .003. This modified approach maintains Type I error rates at the .05 level and has greater power than the traditional Bonferroni procedure (Holland & Copenhaver, 1988; Jaccard, 1998, pp. 28–30).

Results

Descriptive Analyses

There were no missing data or evidence of multicollinearity among key variables, and the assumption of homoscedasticity was met for the respective analyses. Inspection of Levene’s test for equality of variances supported assumptions of homogeneity of variance among the key variables. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations are reported in Table 1.

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Correlations Among Study Variables (N = 266).

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1.Sex	—
2. Age	.16*	—
3. Socioeconomic status	.01	.08	—
4. Minority status stress	−.12	.09	−.06	—
5. Imposter phenomenon	−.11	−.04	.08	.40**	—
6. John Henryism	.13*	.09	−.11	−.16**	−.39**	—
7. College institution	.06	.02	−.03	−.40**	−.33**	.23**	—
8. Social Anxiety	.16*	−.14*	−.02	.33**	.52**	.32**	−.18**	—
9. Self-esteem	.12	.10	−.05	−.26**	−.60**	.53**	.17**	−.51**	—
10. Maladaptive Perfectionism	.03	−.10	.04	.34**	.53**	−.23**	−.21**	.43**	−.60**	—
M	0.23	19.89	2.79	2.33	2.98	4.14	0.49	2.35	3.81	2.67
SD	0.42	1.68	0.83	1.05	0.78	0.49	0.50	0.83	0.79	0.87

Note: For Sex, 0 = female and 1 = male; for College Institution, 0 = predominately White Institutions and 1 = historically Black colleges/universities. All continuous variables were mean centered.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

Results from independent sample t tests (see Table 2) illustrated that students at PWIs reported significantly higher IP scores (M_PWI = 3.24; SD = 0.73) than students at HBCUs (M_HBCU = 2.72; SD = 0.75). Students attending PWIs also reported lower levels of John Henryism (M_PWI = 4.03; SD = 0.48) than students at HBCUs (M_HBCU = 4.25; SD = 0.47). With respect to psychological well-being indicators, students at PWIs reported higher levels of social anxiety (M_PWI = 2.50; SD = 0.87) than students at HBCUs (M_HBCU = 2.20; SD = 0.76). Similarly, students at PWIs reported lower levels of self-esteem (M_PWI = 3.68; SD = 0.85) relative to students at HBCUs (M_HBCU = 3.94; SD = 0.71). Finally, students at PWIs reported higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism (M_PWI = 2.85; SD = 0.85) relative to students at HBCUs (M_HBCU = 2.49; SD = 0.85).

Table 2.

Results of t Tests and Descriptive Statistics for Study Variables by College Institution.

	College Institution
	PWI		HBCU
Outcome variable	M	SD	M	SD	t	df	d
Impostor phenomenon	3.24	0.73	2.72	0.75	5.61*	264	0.70
John Henryism	4.03	0.48	4.25	0.47	−3.84*	266	0.47
Social anxiety	2.50	0.87	2.20	0.76	3.01*	266	0.37
Self-esteem	3.68	0.85	3.94	0.71	−2.75*	266	0.34
Maladaptive Perfectionism	2.85	0.85	2.49	0.85	3.46*	266	0.42

Note: df = degrees of freedom; PWI = predominately White Institutions; HBCU = historically Black colleges/universities.

^*All p values, ranging from <.001 to .006, were less than the alpha value of the ordered Bonferroni correction which initially began at .01.

Moderated Regression Analyses

We present a summary of the moderated regression analyses in Table 3. Hypotheses were tested in Step 3 and the exploratory three-way interaction was tested in Step 4. In Step 1, demographic (age, gender, SES), psychological well-being indicators (social anxiety, self-esteem, maladaptive perfectionism), and minority status stress were entered into the model. In Step 2, we examined main effects of key predictor variables (IP, John Henryism, institutional racial composition), while controlling for variables entered in the previous step. In Step 3, two 2-way interaction terms (IP × John Henryism; IP × institutional racial composition) were examined beyond the variables in Steps 1 and 2. In Step 4, a three-way interaction term was entered (IP × John Henryism × institutional racial composition) while controlling for the variables in the previous steps.

Table 3.

Moderated Regression Analyses Predicting Psychological Well-Being From Sociodemographic, Culturally Relevant, and Contextual Factors (N = 266).

variables	β	SE (B)	sr2	ΔR2
Social Anxiety
Step 1				.32*
Sex	−0.09	0.11	.01
Age	−0.04	0.03	<.01
SES	−0.03	0.05	<.01
MSS	0.19*	0.04	.01
PCOM	0.15*	0.06	.03
Self-Esteem	−0.35*	0.07	.08
Step 2				.04*
IP	0.27*	0.07	.04
JH	−0.06	0.10	<.01
College	0.04	0.09	<.01
Step 3				.02
IP × JH	0.11	0.12	.01
IP × College	−0.06	0.13	<.01
JH × College	−0.11	0.19	<.01
Step 4				.02*
IP × JH × College	−0.23*	0.24	.02
Self-Esteem
Step 1				.44*
Sex	0.10	0.09	.01
Age	−0.03	0.02	<.01
SES	−0.03	0.05	<.01
MSS	0.00	0.04	<.01
PCOM	−0.48*	0.05	.18
SA	−0.29*	0.05	.07
Step 2				.15*
IP	−0.26*	0.06	.04
JH	0.32*	0.07	.08
College	−0.08	0.07	.00
Step 3				.02*
IP × JH	0.07	0.09	<.01
IP × College	0.18*	0.10	.01
JH × College	−0.01	0.15	.00
Step 4				.01
IP × JH × College	−0.12	0.19	.01
Maladaptive Perfectionism
Step 1				.43*
Sex	0.16*	0.10	.02
Age	−0.11*	0.02	.01
SES	0.04	0.05	<.01
MSS	0.19*	0.04	.02
Self-Esteem	−0.49*	0.06	.20
SA	0.13*	0.06	.02
Step 2				.03*
IP	0.19*	0.07	.02
JH	0.15*	0.10	.01
College	−0.02	0.09	<.01
Step 3				.01
IP × JH	−0.09	0.12	.01
IP × College	0.09	0.12	<.01
JH × College	0.02	0.19	<.01
Step 4				.00
IP × JH × College	−0.03	0.24	<.01

Note: SE = standard error;sr = semipartial squared coefficients; SES = socioeconomicstatus; PCOM = Maladaptive Perfectionism; MSS = Minority Stress Status; IP = Impostor Phenomenon; JH = John Henryism.

^*All p values (ranging from < .001 to .010) were less than the alpha value of the ordered Bonferroni correction which initially began at .003.

Social anxiety.

In predicting social anxiety, Steps 1, 2, and 4 were statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections. At Step 1, the omnibus test was statistically significant, F(6, 257) = 20.25, p < .001, adjusted R² = .31, as well as some of the individual covariates for social anxiety: (a) minority status stress (β = .19, p = .001), (b) self-esteem (β = −.35, p < .001), and (c) maladaptive perfectionism (β = .15, p = .027). These data suggests that higher levels of social anxiety was associated with increased minority status stress, lower levels of self-esteem, and higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism. At Step 2, the omnibus test was still significant, F(3, 254) = 5.82, p = .001, ΔR² = .044, adjusted R² = .34. However, only IP was statistically significant at the main effect level, (β = .27, p < .001) based on the Bonferroni correction (p < .003), indicating that higher levels of IP were associated with elevations in social anxiety. However, IP, John Henryism, and institutional racial composition as a variate accounted for an additional 4% of the variance in social anxiety. The omnibus test at Step 3 was not statistically significant, F(3, 251) = 2.36, p = .072, ΔR² = .017, adjusted R² = .35, and neither were either of the two-way interactions terms. The omnibus test was statistically significant in the final step, F(1, 250) = 8.92, p = .003, ΔR² = .021, adjusted R² = .37, specifically the three-way interaction between IP, John Henryism, and institutional racial composition (β = −.23, p < .003).

Simple slope analyses were conducted to interpret this interaction. Effects were plotted at low (SD = −1), mean (SD = 0), and high (SD = +1) levels of IP. The slope representing the association between IP and social anxiety was positive and significantly different from zero only for participants attending PWIs who endorsed higher levels of John Henryism (+1 SD; b = .88; p < .001). As shown in Figure 1, students attending PWIs who reported elevated levels of John Henryism also reported the highest levels of social anxiety at higher levels of IP. The slope representing the association between IP and social anxiety was not significantly different from zero for any other subsample.

Figure 1.

Three-way interaction among Impostor Phenomenon (IP), John Henryism, and institutional racial composition predicting social anxiety.

Note: The association between IP and social anxiety for Black college students attending predominately White institutions and historically Black colleges/universities at 1 standard deviation below and above the mean for John Henryism (N = 266).

Self-esteem.

In predicting self-esteem, Steps 1 through 3 were statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections. At Step 1, the omnibus test was statistically significant, F(6, 257) = 33.31, p < .001, adjusted R² = .42, as well as covariates such as social anxiety (β = −.29, p < .001) and maladaptive perfectionism (β = −.48, p < .001). This evidence suggests that higher levels of self-esteem was associated with lower levels of social anxiety and maladaptive perfectionism. At Step 2, the omnibus test was also statistically significant, F(3, 254) = 30.37, p < .001, ΔR² = .15, adjusted R² = .57, with IP (β = −.26, p < .001) and John Henryism (β = .32, p < .001) exhibiting significant main effects, indicating that higher levels of self-esteem was associated with lower levels of IP and higher levels of active coping. Notably, in Step 2, IP, John Henryism, and institutional racial composition accounted for an additional 14% of the variance in self-esteem. At Step 3, the omnibus test remained statistically significant, F(3, 251) = 4.83, p = .003, ΔR² = .023, adjusted R² = .59, as was the two-way interaction between IP and institutional racial composition (β = .18, p = .007). Simple slope analyses illustrated an inverse link between IP and self-esteem among participants attending PWIs (b = −.41; p < .001) and HBCUs (b = −.16; p < .001). At Step 4, the omnibus test was not found to be significant, F(1, 250) = 3.71, p = .055, ΔR² = .006, adjusted R² = .59, nor was the three-way interaction term.

Maladaptive perfectionism.

In predicting maladaptive perfectionism, only Steps 1 and 2 were statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections. At Step 1, the omnibus test was statistically significant, F(6, 257) = 31.85, p < .001, adjusted R² = .41, as well as some of the covariates such as (a) gender (β = .16, p < .001), (b) minority status stress (β = .19, p < .001), and (c) self-esteem (β = −.49, p < .001). These findings suggest that males experienced more maladaptive perfectionism than females. These results also highlighted that higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism were associated with higher levels of minority status stress and lower levels of self-esteem. At Step 2, the omnibus test was also statistically significant, F(3, 254) = 5.09, p = .002, ΔR² = .033, adjusted R² = .44, with only IP being significant (β = .19, p = .003), suggesting that higher levels of impostor cognitions were predictive of higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism. Within Step 2, IP, John Henryism, and institutional racial composition only accounted for an additional 3% of the variance in maladaptive perfectionism. The omnibus test at Step 3, F(3, 251) = 1.15, p = .330, ΔR² = .007, adjusted R² = .44, and at Step 4, F(1, 250) = 0.16, p = .687, ΔR² = .000, adjusted R² = .44, were not found to be significant.

Discussion

The primary aim of this study was to examine the unique moderating roles of John Henryism and institutional racial composition on the relationship between IP and psychological well-being. It was hypothesized that individuals reporting lower levels of John Henryism would be more vulnerable to negative well-being outcomes in the context of IP cognitions. Contrary to predictions, John Henryism was not found to independently moderate the link between IP and psychological well-being. We also predicted that PWI attendance would confer an increased risk for negative well-being outcomes associated with IP, relative to HBCU attendance. This hypothesis received partial support with students attending PWIs evidencing a stronger negative relationship between IP and self-esteem relative to students attending HBCUs. Interestingly, we found that the association between IP and social anxiety depended on the interaction between John Henryism and institutional racial composition. More specifically, IP was found to positively predict social anxiety, but only among students attending PWIs who reported higher levels of John Henryism. Our study extends previous literature linking IP to negative psychological adjustment for Black emerging adults (Bernard et al., 2017; Cokley et al., 2017; Peteet et al., 2015) and highlights the importance of considering individual and contextual factors that may influence this association.

A unique contribution of our study was the investigation of John Henrysim and contextual diversity (i.e., institutional racial composition) as moderators of the link between IP and markers of well-being. Our results revealed that these factors may differentially affect the extent to which IP may influence psychological well-being. We were surprised to find that neither John Henryism nor institutional diversity influenced the relationship between IP and maladaptive perfectionism. Previous research has found that individuals reporting higher levels of IP endorse greater concerns of making mistakes, less satisfaction with success, lower confidence in abilities, and lower perceptions of control compared with those endorsing lower levels of IP (Thompson et al., 2000). As such, it may be that higher levels of IP inherently increase maladaptive perfectionistic tendencies by reinforcing beliefs that anything less than perfect equates to failure, regardless of effortful coping or institutional racial composition.

In the context of IP and self-esteem, we also found that John Henryism did not serve as a significant moderator. Given the nonsignificance of John Henrysim in the context of self-esteem and maladaptive perfectionism, it is possible that this coping strategy is most relevant in the context of interpersonal stressors (e.g., racial discrimination) as opposed to internal stressors such as IP. Consistent with this assertion, our review of the scholarly literature found that the majority of John Henryism research work has examined this culturally relevant coping strategy in the context of interpersonal race-related stressors, such as racial discrimination (Bennett et al., 2004; Jones et al., 2019; Volpe et al., 2020). Thus, while high effort coping may shape behavioral health outcomes in the face of race-related stressors, it may not influence perfectionistic tendencies or evaluations of one’s own worth. However, more work investigating John Henryism in the context of IP and psychological well-being is needed to confirm this notion.

Interestingly, we did find that the strength of the association between IP and self-esteem was influenced by institutional racial composition. Although students attending PWIs and HBCUs both reported lower levels of self-esteem in the context of IP, we found this relationship to be strongest among students attending PWIs compared with students attending HBCUs. Notably, students attending PWIs also reported higher levels of IP compared with students attending HBCUs. These findings are in line with previous research arguing that IP may be more salient and psychologically damaging in contexts that are predominately non-Black (Bernard et al., 2017; Peteet et al., 2015). Although the link between IP and self-esteem may be more salient in PWI settings, it is also important to highlight that this relationship was also significant among students attending HBCUs. This finding is important given the dearth of research examining IP in HBCU settings and suggests that in predominately Black contexts, even relatively lower levels IP may hinder the way an individual perceives their own abilities.

Perhaps the most notable finding of our study was that John Henyrism and institutional racial composition jointly moderated the association between IP and social anxiety. We expected that low levels of John Henryism and PWI attendance would separately confer an increased risk for poor psychological well-being among Black college students in the context of IP. However, our study revealed that the strongest association between IP and social anxiety existed among students attending PWIs who reported higher levels of John Henrysim. We offer several possibilities that may explain this finding. First, chronic reliance on active coping may actually increase risk for physical and psychological outcomes over time (Matthews et al., 2013; Volpe et al., 2020), especially when stressors are outside of one’s own control (Greer & Brown, 2011). Thus, as Black students navigate individual, cultural, and institutional race-related stressors beyond their control in PWIs, John Henryism may deplete cognitive resources and increase risk for suboptimal psychological outcomes. In the context of IP, sole reliance on John Henryism to grapple with stress associated with PWI attendance may inadvertently reinforce erroneous attributions of achievement (i.e., success is only due to extreme effort and hard work rather than actual ability; Bernard & Neblett, 2018). Therefore, students attending PWIs who report higher levels of IP and John Henryism may also report higher levels of social anxiety. That is, these students may believe it is a must to work harder than others to do well, but still fear that their efforts may be perceived as inadequate.

Alternatively, students attending PWIs who report higher levels of IP and John Henryism may perceive themselves to be more socially and academically isolated compared with their HBCU peers. Given that IP has been described as “a private, internal, emotional experience” (Lane, 2015, p. 9), the determination and high effort that undergirds John Henryism may be used as a means of self-protection from outside scrutiny or criticism that may reify negative self-perceptions. This issue may be particularly relevant at PWIs in which some Black students feel the need to prove that they belong on campus (Solórzano et al., 2000). Consequently, students at PWIs who report higher levels of IP and John Henryism may avoid interacting with others or seeking help due to worries of confirming an internalized sense of fraudulence.

It is also possible that HBCU attendance may serve a protective role in relation to IP, John Henryism, and social anxiety. As illustrated in the seminal work by Fleming (1984), Black students attending HBCUs reported higher academic achievement, greater campus satisfaction, and more positive relationships with faculty and peers than students attending PWIs. Accordingly, the HBCU environment may cultivate a more supportive and affirming climate relative to PWIs (Greer & Brown, 2011), wherein individuals are more readily able to navigate their identity around individuals who share similar life experiences. As such, while active coping within PWIs may be seen as an independent or individualistic strategy to cope with stress (e.g., “I’ll get through this myself”), active coping within HBCUs may be a more communalistic or collective strategy to navigate stressors (e.g., “We’ll get through this together”). In line with this assertion, research has found that Black students attending HBCUs develop close, familial type relationships with peers, professors, and community members (i.e., fictive kin) that play an important role in promoting positive adjustment both inside and outside the academy (Brooks & Allen, 2016; Walker, 2018). The inherent support and representation often associated with HBCU attendance may serve to repudiate feelings of otherness commonly associated with IP and may subsequently decrease negative internal dialogues related to one’s own intellectual abilities.

Study Limitations

It is important to note the limitations of the present work. First, we are aware that Black students are not monolithic in their experiences and reducing institutional racial composition to a binary variable may not capture the complexities associated with attending a PWI or HBCU. Second, our sample was predominantly female; thus, the generalizability of our findings may be limited. Third, as the current work is correlational, it is difficult to determine the directionality of the link between IP and well-being. Fourth, we are also aware that conclusions pertaining to the two and three-way interactions should be made with caution because of the relatively small percentage of variance explained in the outcome variables of social anxiety and self-esteem. Fifth, given that measures were not counterbalanced, we cannot rule out the possibility of order effects.

Future Directions

Notwithstanding the limitations, the current study makes important contributions to the IP literature, particularly as it pertains to the significance of contextual and culturally specific coping factors. This study also generates several novel lines of inquiry that can be addressed in future research. For example, given the significant differences in IP and John Henryism between students attending HBCUs and PWIs, future research should explore context-specific factors that may operate to increase or decrease the strength of the relationship between IP and well-being among Black college students (e.g., social support, campus climate, campus involvement, and/or peer and faculty diversity). This is a particularly important area of investigation for first-generation college students who may be at an increased risk for IP in the collegial context (Canning et al., 2019). Second, this study underscores the heterogeneity in responses to chronic stressors among Black college students and needs to be replicated on a broader scale to understand the association among key study variables for individuals of diverse and intersectional social identity positions (e.g., biracial/multiracial students, first-generation college students). Third, given the cross-sectional nature of this work it is important to understand the interplay among key study variables over time. Longitudinal approaches can offer much needed insight into the temporal relationship between IP and psychological adjustment, and how the link between IP and psychological well-being may look different across contextual settings over time.

Clinical and Educational Implications

Several implications can be drawn from the current study to inform clinical and educational practice. First, considering the psychologically damaging nature of IP among Black students attending PWIs and HBCUs, it is crucial for institutions to begin proactively developing formal programming tailored to equip these students with the knowledge and support to recognize, normalize, and adaptively navigate IP. Such programming can take many forms such as workshops, seminars, and/or student forums. Second, findings suggest that PWIs may serve as a key context in which IP cognitions are able to thrive. For this reason, it is crucial for educators and clinicians to provide support and validation to Black college students who may be experiencing stressors that may be unique to and/or exacerbated by attending a PWI (e.g., race-related stress and IP). While particularly important among students at PWIs, this also applies to students attending HBCUs. Although candidly discussing IP may be difficult for students, openly discussing their cognitions with others (e.g., peers, clinicians, and educational advisors) may be useful to normalize, challenge, and ultimately diminish maladaptive cognitions of intellectual incompetence (Clance et al., 1995). Third, given that active coping can compromise adjustment in the context of IP, it is critical that clinicians and educators assist students in adopting adaptive coping strategies that may engender positive self-appraisals and increased self-efficacy across contexts.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the moderating roles of John Henryism and institutional racial composition on the association between IP and psychological well-being. This study is among the first to suggest that IP may confer an increased risk for Black students attending PWIs, particularly when students report higher levels of active coping. The collective findings of this study indicate that institutional diversity and coping strategies are important factors to consider in understanding the relationship between IP and well-being among Black college students. Future work should seek to gain a more nuanced understanding of the individual and contextual factors that may influence how IP may affect psychological well-being among Black emerging adults.