Development and Validation of the Mentoring in Undergraduate Research Survey
Limeri, L. B.; Carter, N. T.; Hess, R. A.; Tuma, T. T.; Koscik, I.; Morrison, A. J.; Outlaw, B.; Royston, K. S.; Bridges, B. H. T.; Dolan, E. L.
Show abstract
Here we present the development and initial validation of the Mentoring in Undergraduate Research Survey (MURS) as a measure of a range of mentoring experienced by undergraduate science researchers. We drafted items based on qualitative research and refined the items through cognitive interviews and expert sorting. We used national dataset to evaluate the internal structure of the measure and a second national dataset to examine how responses on the MURS related to theoretically-relevant constructs and student characteristics. Our factor analytic results indicate seven lower order forms of mentoring experiences: abusive supervision, accessibility, career and technical support, psychosocial support, interpersonal mismatch, sexual harassment, and unfair treatment. These forms of mentoring mapped onto two higher-order factors: supportive and destructive mentoring experiences. Although most undergraduates reported experiencing supportive mentoring, some reported experiencing absence of supportive as well as destructive experiences. Undergraduates who experienced less supportive and more destructive mentoring also experienced lower scientific integration and a dampening of their beliefs about the value of research. The MURS should be useful for investigating the effects of mentoring experienced by undergraduate researchers and for testing interventions aimed at fostering supportive experiences and reducing or preventing destructive experiences and their impacts. Highlight summaryThis study presents the development and initial validation of the Mentoring in Undergraduate Research Survey, including evidence of its internal structure as well as convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Undergraduate students with and without mental health concerns have different perceptions of disclosing mental health challenges to instructors 95%
- Cross-Cultural Validation of Acculturation Measures: Expanding the East Asian Acculturation Framework for Global Applicability 95%
- Factors and mediators impacting the number of undergraduate research mentees at a research-intensive Hispanic-serving institution 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and Initial Validation of the Duke Misophonia Questionnaire 93%
- The measurement properties and acceptability of a new parent-infant bonding tool (‘Me and My Baby’) designed for use in a universal healthcare setting in the UK 92%
- ‘Kindness By Post’: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of A Participatory Public Mental Health Project 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Gray and White Matter Networks Predict Mindfulness and Mind Wandering Traits: A Data Fusion Machine Learning Approach 88%
- Recalled parental bonding interacts with oxytocin receptor gene polymorphism in modulating anxiety and avoidance in adult relationships 88%
- Effort-based decision-making and gross motor performance: Are they linked? 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Systems Change Framework for Evaluating Academic Equity and Inclusion in an Ecology & Evolution Graduate Program 93%
- Three Decades as an NSF REU Site: Lessons and Recommendations 92%
- Breaking barriers: The effect of protected characteristics and their intersectionality on career transition in academics 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Anticipatory Emotions and Academic Performance: The Role of Boredom in a Preservice Teachers' Lab Experience 95%
- Self-learning on COVID-19 among medical students and their preparedness to participate in government's COVID-19 response in Bhutan: a cross-sectional study 89%
- Cloud-controlled microscopy enables remote project-based biology education in Latinx communities in the United States and Latin America 87%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.