Imposter Syndrome
What Is Imposter Syndrome? (And Why High Achievers Can't Shake It)
Dr. Ruhama Hazout • June 15, 2026 • 15 min read
▶ Listen to this article ~15 min
I have sat across from surgeons, executives, published researchers, and people who run teams of fifty. At some point in therapy, almost all of them have said some version of the same thing.
“I keep waiting for someone to figure out I have no idea what I’m doing.”
The resume tells one story. The internal experience tells another. And for many of the most accomplished people I work with, the wider the gap between those two stories, the more certain they become that the external one was a mistake.
The promotion, the paper, the title, the team, none of it settles the feeling. If anything, it raises the stakes. More success means more to protect, more distance to fall, and more exposure when what they believe about themselves finally surfaces.
This post is about a pattern I see frequently in high-achieving professionals with high-functioning anxiety. Achievement becomes a way of managing distress. The person keeps collecting evidence of competence, yet continues to feel like a fraud. Over time, success becomes less of a source of satisfaction and more of an attempt to quiet a fear of being exposed.
In this post:
- What Is Imposter Syndrome? (And Why High Achievers Can’t Shake It)
- Why High Achievers Use Success to Manage Anxiety
- How the Anxious Brain Files Evidence
- Where Imposter Syndrome Starts: Early Achievement and the Need for Safety
- How High-Pressure Work Environments Amplify Imposter Syndrome
- The Difference Between Humility and Self-Erasure
- What Actually Helps Imposter Syndrome (And What Doesn’t)
What Is Imposter Syndrome? (And Why High Achievers Can't Shake It)
The term “impostor phenomenon” was introduced by psychologists Pauline Clance and Suzanne Imes in 1978. They were studying a specific pattern in high-achieving women: people with documented, objective accomplishments who still believed that they had fooled others into overestimating them (Clance & Imes, 1978). Their successes, in their own accounting, were explained by luck, timing, or someone else’s generosity. Never by their own ability.
Clance and Imes were clear about what this was. While this is not a formal diagnosis or a lack of ability, the core feature was the inability to internalize achievement, which means success did not update the internal belief system. Later research extended the pattern across genders, professions, and high-pressure work environments.
This is important to remember because imposter syndrome is not characterized by a lack of ability, but by a failure to absorb evidence of ability. Accomplishments accumulate, while the person’s view of themselves remains largely unchanged.
Why High Achievers Use Success to Manage Anxiety
“Make a list of your accomplishments” does not work, despite being one of the most common recommendations for imposter syndrome. For many high-functioning anxious professionals, achievement is not only something they pursue but also how they regulate anxiety.
The pattern is straightforward. Anxiety creates a sense that more preparation is needed, more effort is required, or another accomplishment is necessary before they can finally feel confident in their position. As a result, they work harder, stay later, take on additional responsibilities, and set increasingly ambitious goals. The strategy often works in the short term. The project succeeds. The promotion comes through. The presentation goes well.
The relief rarely lasts.
Instead of incorporating the accomplishment into their understanding of themselves, they explain it away. Expectations were lower than expected. Other people contributed more than they did. The success becomes an exception rather than evidence. Before long, attention shifts to the next challenge, the next credential, or the next opportunity to prove themselves.
Over time, achievement becomes less about growth and more about reducing uncertainty. The problem is that uncertainty never stays resolved for long. Each accomplishment provides temporary reassurance before a new standard takes its place.
This helps explain why highly successful people can continue feeling like frauds despite years of objective evidence to the contrary. Research by Bravata and colleagues (2020) found that imposter syndrome frequently co-occurs with anxiety, depression, and burnout and is associated with impaired professional functioning, even among individuals with substantial career success. The issue is not a lack of achievement. The issue is that every accomplishment gets treated as an exception instead of evidence.
Why more success does not fix it.
Psychologist Dan McAdams’ narrative identity research explains this. McAdams found that people build identity through the stories they tell about their own lives, stories that integrate the past, explain the present, and anticipate the future (McAdams & McLean, 2013).
In imposter syndrome, success gets consistently placed into what McAdams calls a contamination narrative. A contamination narrative is one where a positive event gets framed as the setup for eventual failure. The good thing happened, but it is only a matter of time before the real story begins. In practice, it sounds like: I got the promotion, but now I have to prove I deserved it. Every accomplishment becomes the opening scene of a future exposure story rather than evidence of a track record.
The anxious brain is not collecting evidence. It is building a case.
How the Anxious Brain Files Evidence
I see a consistent pattern in my office. You tend to sort professional experience like this:
Success → luck, timing, or someone else doing the heavy lifting.
Mistake → proof of true incompetence.
Praise → politeness, or they do not know me well enough yet.
Promotion → higher stakes, higher risk of exposure.
Asking for help → weakness.
Over time, these explanations become automatic. They shape how people interpret their experiences and determine which information gets taken seriously. Success gets discounted before it has a chance to change anything. Mistakes receive far more attention and carry far more weight.
Clance and Imes observed this pattern in their original study. Participants consistently attributed success to factors outside themselves, even when they had years of objective accomplishments behind them. New achievements rarely changed the story. The explanation stayed the same.
Research on core self-evaluation helps explain why this pattern can become so persistent. Judge and colleagues (2002) identified four foundational beliefs that influence how people evaluate themselves: self-esteem, self-efficacy, locus of control (the belief about whether your own actions or external factors determine your outcomes), and emotional stability.
Individuals with lower self-efficacy often struggle to trust their own competence, while those with a more external locus of control are more likely to credit outcomes to luck, timing, or circumstance. Together, these tendencies create a predictable pattern: accomplishments are explained away, while mistakes are treated as meaningful evidence about one’s abilities.
The result is a system that minimizes competence and magnifies shortcomings.
Where Imposter Syndrome Starts: Early Achievement and the Need for Safety
For many high-achieving adults, accomplishment became a survival strategy long before it became a career strategy.
Achievement was often tied to approval, belonging, attention, or stability. Performing well earned praise. Falling short carried consequences. Over time, success became more than something they did. It became part of who they were.
Family roles frequently reinforce this pattern. Some children grow up as “the smart one.” While that label may sound positive, it can create a fragile identity. Struggling, making mistakes, or needing help begins to feel threatening because it conflicts with how they have learned to define themselves.
Others grow up with the opposite experience. They internalize the idea that they are not particularly capable, talented, or intelligent. When success arrives later in life, it feels inconsistent with the story they have carried for years. Accomplishments are dismissed as luck, timing, or circumstance because they do not fit the existing narrative.
Although the stories differ, the outcome is often the same. Achievement has very little impact on how the person sees themselves.
That is why imposter syndrome often persists despite years of objective success. The professional accomplishments came later. The beliefs about competence were formed much earlier.
How High-Pressure Work Environments Amplify Imposter Syndrome
A 2025 study by Bielenberg, Ibrahim, and Herzberg found that performance pressure predicted stronger imposter syndrome symptoms among early-career professionals. The effect was particularly strong for women and was independent of actual competence (Bielenberg et al., 2025). That last finding is important. People can perform exceptionally well and still experience persistent self-doubt when they work in environments that place constant emphasis on performance.
In these settings, mistakes carry disproportionate weight. Employees become focused on avoiding errors, protecting their reputation, and proving they belong. Questions can feel risky. Asking for help can feel exposing. Success quickly becomes the expected standard rather than something that builds confidence.
Many professionals with imposter syndrome assume the problem exists entirely within them. Workplace culture often plays a role as well. When performance is constantly evaluated and mistakes are highly visible, self-doubt becomes easier to maintain, regardless of how capable the person actually is.
This helps explain why imposter syndrome can persist even in highly competent professionals. Success becomes the baseline rather than evidence of competence, leaving people feeling as though they still have something to prove.
The Difference Between Humility and Self-Erasure
High achievers often defend imposter thinking by calling it humility. I am not someone who takes too much credit. I do not want to overstate what I did. Anyone could have done it.
Humility and self-erasure are not the same thing.
Humility allows room for both strengths and limitations. Self-erasure acknowledges the limitations and ignores the strengths.
Imagine a manager who leads a difficult project for six months. The project succeeds, deadlines are met, and the team performs well. Humility sounds like: The team worked hard, and I am proud of how I led it. Self-erasure sounds like: Anyone could have done that. I was lucky to have a good team.
Or consider the professional who earns a promotion after years of strong performance. Humility sounds like: I still have a lot to learn, and I earned this opportunity. Self-erasure sounds like: They must have been short on candidates.
One perspective reflects the full picture. The other removes the person’s contribution from the story.
You readily recognize effort, talent, and competence in other people. When the focus turns to yourself, those same qualities become harder to see. Over time, this creates a distorted record. Accomplishments are explained away. Strengths are minimized. Mistakes become the evidence people return to again and again.
Humility allows your accomplishments to be part of the story. Self-erasure explains them away.
What Actually Helps Imposter Syndrome (And What Doesn't)
Many people respond to imposter syndrome by trying to convince themselves they are competent. They make lists of accomplishments, repeat affirmations, or remind themselves of their credentials.
Research suggests this approach has limitations. Wood and colleagues (2009) found that positive self-statements can backfire when they conflict with deeply held beliefs. If someone already doubts their competence, repeating “I am competent” often highlights the gap between what they are trying to believe and what they currently believe.
What tends to be more helpful is paying attention to how you interpret your successes and failures.
1. Pay Attention to How You Explain Success
Start by noticing the explanations you give yourself. When something goes well, how do you explain it? When something goes poorly, how do you explain that? Many high-functioning anxious professionals are surprised to discover how quickly they take ownership of mistakes and how quickly they dismiss success.
For example, a positive performance review may be explained as having a supportive supervisor, while a single mistake is treated as proof that they are falling behind.
2. Notice When Achievement Becomes an Attempt to Feel Secure
Pay attention to when achievement becomes an attempt to feel secure. Before taking on the next certification, project, or responsibility, ask yourself whether it is genuinely important to you or whether you are hoping it will finally quiet the doubt. Achievement is a meaningful pursuit. It was never designed to provide lasting reassurance.
Many people believe they will finally feel confident after the next promotion, credential, or accomplishment. The goal is reached, and the doubt simply attaches itself to the next milestone.
3. Practice Receiving Positive Feedback
Practice receiving positive feedback without immediately disqualifying it. You instinctively minimize compliments, redirect credit, or explain away praise. A simple “thank you” is often a useful place to start.
A colleague says, “You handled that meeting really well.” The immediate response is often, “It wasn’t that difficult,” or “Anyone could have done it.” Notice how quickly the accomplishment gets discounted.
4. Apply the Same Standard to Yourself That You Apply to Others
Finally, apply the same standard to yourself that you would apply to someone you respect. If a colleague had your track record, would you dismiss their accomplishments as luck? Would you explain away years of consistent performance? Most people answer no.
An executive would not look at a respected colleague’s career and conclude they simply got lucky. Yet you apply that standard to yourself every day.
The goal is not to convince yourself that you are extraordinary. The goal is to develop a more balanced account of your own experience, one that includes both the mistakes and the accomplishments.
If this article felt uncomfortably familiar, that is often a sign that the problem is bigger than confidence.
Many of the people I work with are successful by every external measure and still question whether they are doing enough, achieving enough, or measuring up.
This is exactly the pattern that therapy at RueCare works with directly. Therapy can help you break that cycle and build a more realistic relationship with your accomplishments.
Final Thoughts:
Many high-achieving professionals spend years waiting for a feeling that never arrives.
They assume confidence will come after the next promotion, the next credential, or the next stretch of consistent performance. Yet each accomplishment quickly becomes the new expectation. The standard changes, and the pursuit continues.
Achievement is rarely the missing piece. Most people struggling with imposter syndrome have already accumulated years of evidence that they are capable, competent, and effective.
The challenge is that the evidence rarely changes the conclusion.
That is why imposter syndrome can persist for decades, even in people with remarkable careers.
You are already holding yourself accountable. What you are missing is an equally honest accounting of what you have done well.
References
Bielenberg, C., Ibrahim, F., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2025). The impact of workplace environment on the impostor phenomenon among early career starters. Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, 6, 100175.
Bravata, D. M., Watts, S. A., Keefer, A. L., Madhusudhan, D. K., Taylor, K. T., Clark, D. M., Nelson, R. S., Cokley, K. O., & Hagg, H. K. (2020). Prevalence, predictors, and treatment of impostor syndrome: A systematic review. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35, 1252–1275.
Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 15(3), 241–247.
Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2002). Are measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control, and generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core construct? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 693–710.
McAdams, D. P., & McLean, K. C. (2013). Narrative identity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(3), 233–238.
Wood, J. V., Perunovic, W. Q. E., & Lee, J. W. (2009). Positive self-statements: Power for some, peril for others. Psychological Science, 20(7), 860–866.
Dr. Ruhama Hazout, PsyD
I’m Dr. Rue Hazout, a psychologist passionate about helping ambitious, caring people who spend so much time taking care of everyone else that they lose sight of their own needs. My goal is to help readers better understand their minds, develop lasting skills for managing anxiety and stress, and move through life with greater clarity and purpose.