How Higher Education Impacts Women’s Confidence: A Social Cognitive Perspective

Back in 2019, I completed a small research project for Tara Mohr exploring the impact of higher education on women’s confidence. In this article, I unpack what I found—starting with a closer look at what we even mean when we say “confidence.”

What Is “Confidence,” Really?

Despite how commonly the term “confidence” is used, it lacks a strong theoretical foundation. In fact, Bandura (1997) argued that confidence is not a psychological construct in itself, but a broad, informal term that refers to the strength of belief. To study confidence meaningfully, we must examine the more specific constructs it encompasses:

• Self-Efficacy – Belief in one’s ability to complete a task. It answers: “Can I do this?”
  (Bandura, 1977)

• Self-Esteem – One’s evaluation of their worth. It answers: “How do I feel about myself?”

• Self-Concept – A person’s perception of themselves across characteristics. It answers: “What am I like?”

• Identity – Defined by self-categorization and social roles. It answers: “Who am I?”

Theories such as social identity theory (Hogg & Abrams, 1988) and identity theory (Burke & Tully, 1977; Thoits, 1986) explain how our roles and group memberships shape how we see ourselves.

The Impact of Higher Education on Confidence in Women

Understanding how higher education impacts women’s confidence requires first defining what outcome we’re measuring. Are we interested in how confidence influences motivation? Performance? Persistence?

If so, we can investigate how each of the four constructs—self-efficacy, self-esteem, self-concept, and identity—relates to those outcomes. Neighboring theories like growth mindset (Dweck, 2006), stereotype threat (Steele, 2010), belonging (Good et al., 2012), and attribution theory (AWE, 2005) also shape self-efficacy and related beliefs.

Here’s what we know from the research:

• High self-efficacy is strongly linked to increased interest, motivation, engagement, performance, and persistence.

• Self-efficacy—not self-esteem—is predictive of academic achievement (Bong et al., 2012; Bandura, 1997).

• In STEM fields, self-efficacy is one of the most powerful factors influencing women’s decisions to enter and persist. Role models, positive feedback, and mastery experiences all contribute (Hill, 2010).

When Higher Education Harms Confidence

While higher education can nurture self-beliefs, it can also unintentionally erode them, particularly for women and other marginalized groups. Several concepts illuminate these negative effects:

• Stereotype Threat – The risk of confirming negative stereotypes about one’s group. This has been widely documented to impact women and students of color, especially in high-stakes environments.

• Imposter Syndrome – The internalized fear of being exposed as a fraud, despite evidence of competence (Clance & Imes, 1978).

• Bootstrap Mentality and Deficit Ideology – Cultural narratives that ignore systemic barriers and place undue burden on the individual to “overcome.”

• Marginalization in Specific Fields – In male-dominated fields like engineering and physics, the lack of representation and support can undermine identity and belonging.

Intersectional Considerations

All of these dynamics are amplified when viewed through an intersectional lens. Women of color, for example, often experience compounded effects of stereotype threat, imposter syndrome, and systemic marginalization.

As Dr. Bettina Love writes,

“Measuring African-American students’ grit while removing no institutional barriers, then watching to see who beats the odds makes for great Hollywood movies […] and leaves us all feeling good because the gritty black kid made it out of the ‘hood.” (Love, 2019)

Her critique highlights the danger of focusing on internal traits like confidence or grit without addressing the structural conditions that shape those traits.

What’s Accepted, What’s Evolving

Much of the research on self-efficacy and identity is well-established and widely accepted. However, theories like growth mindset and grit—while popular—face criticism when applied without context. From an intersectional perspective, some scholars argue these theories risk reinforcing deficit ideologies.

Additionally, many of the dominant frameworks come from social cognitive theory, which focuses on the individual. Critics, including Pawley (2019), caution that these frameworks often overlook climate and ruling relations, or the systemic forces of power and privilege. To understand confidence comprehensively, we must explore both individual beliefs and the environments that shape them.

Final Thoughts

If we’re serious about supporting women’s confidence in higher education, we must do more than encourage self-belief. We must address the systemic barriers that chip away at that belief in the first place. Confidence doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s a mirror reflecting both our inner narrative and the world around us.