By Jordi Cabanas-Danés
A Dutch expression I often hear is “door de mand vallen”, which literally means “to fall through the basket.” Figuratively, it means something like “being exposed or found out” or “being seen for who you “really” are”. It’s a perfect metaphor for the fear that many PhD candidates face: the fear that one day, others will discover they’re not as competent or knowledgeable as they seem or they made them believe: the infamous impostor syndrome.
I recently listened to a podcast episode on this topic (in Dutch) featuring philosopher Katrien Schaubroeck, and two insights from her discussion stayed with me.
Rethinking the Impostor Syndrome: A Philosophical Lens
The first one, was the distinction between a psychological and a philosophical perspective on the impostor syndrome. While the psychological approach focuses on individual coping strategies: how to silence or challenge impostor thoughts; the philosophical view explores the societal and systemic undercurrents that trigger these thoughts in the first place.
Sure, we can become more acceptant towards our shortcomings and embrace who we are beyond our function. But how effective can that really be if the environment around us actively fosters feelings of inadequacy? It’s one thing to control your internal self-doubt and another to live in a context that continually throws doubt back to you.
What Katrien points out is that the impostor syndrome often arises not from individual weakness but from a crisis of self-identity provoked by external pressures. Academia, like many other (professional) settings, has invisible norms and unspoken rules about how one should act, speak, perform, and even think. When these expectations don’t align with who we are, we begin to feel divided between our true self and the role we feel compelled to play. In other words, we might look at ourselves through the glass of the system surrounding us.
It’s not just you, it’s also the system
The second insight I got from the podcast was this: if the impostor syndrome is partially a reaction to systemic exclusion, we then need to also look at how to transform the system.
Take Anne, a fictional second-year PhD student in a male-dominated department. She regularly finds herself being spoken over in meetings, her ideas later repeated and credited to male colleagues. She still manages to lead a project to publication with comments such as "being lucky" or "being a natural in writing", rather than getting recognition for her technical expertise and commitment to the project. Over time, she begins to doubt her own competences and whether she truly belongs here or is just lucky to be here. But is this on Anne’s low self-esteem or on a response on a gendered undercurrent? In this context, the usual advise to “challenge your impostor thoughts” falls short.
What’s the way forward?
So how do you navigate this, as a PhD candidate, while forming your academic identity?
Here are a few ideas that go beyond personal affirmations and into challenging the structure:
- Challenge exluding norms: Talk openly about how certain practices might be inducing doubt, comparison and hierarchy amongst candidates. Normalizing this conversation can shift it from private shame to collective reflection.
- Be curious about difference: Instead of juding whether someone “fits” into academic culture, let’s be geniuinly interested in how different identities, backgorounds and ways of thinking contribute to academia. In other words, let’s assume everyone is a great academic by default and try to learn from the diversity as a strength and not as liability.
- Build counter communities: Find spaces with other PhD candidates (such as peer-to-peer groups) where you can share stories of both success and failure without fear. These groups are not just for productivity, they’re for belonging and solidarity.
- Reclaim your difference: Instead of hiding what makes you feel out of place, name it, and explore how it gives you a unique perspective. What if when believing you always ask “weird” questions, you start believing you are asking questions that bring another perspective to the topic or help you grow?
- Resist the mith of the perfect PhD candidate: It's just that, a mith! Everyone doubts, everyone struggles. Even your supervisors. The difference is, some have sadly simply learned to hide it better.
In the end, perhaps the goal is not to stop ourselves from “falling through the basket,” but to question who sets the basket from which we fall through? Is it our own insecurity or the system’s invisible hand? And more radically: can we get rid of the basket altogether?
Do you recognize yourself in this article? The PhD advisors are here for you. Get in touch with us for a consultation (phdadvisor@amsterdamumc.nl).