ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Neurosurgeons demonstrate some of the highest levels of burnout among surgeons, yet little research has been done to understand the underlying stressors that neurosurgeons and trainees experience and the emotional responses to them. Our goal was to conduct a feasibility study identifying job stressors and emotional responses among neurosurgeons, rather than generalize findings across the profession. METHODS: Emphasizing a qualitative approach in this feasibility and descriptive study, we strategically selected a small sample of neurosurgical attendings, residents, and fellows at two United States academic neurosurgical departments to ensure an in-depth analysis laying the groundwork for future extensive research. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding work-related stressors and high- and low-arousal emotional responses to these stressors, as well as a standardized Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses evaluating types of stressors and emotional responses reported were assessed based on participant training level. RESULTS: Participants identified three main stressors: 1. administrative deficiencies, 2. delivering bad news/saving lives, and 3. work-life balance. A low frequency of negative emotional responses was reported, but those reported were mainly high-arousal emotions. Limited prior training in coping strategies was also reported. We also found that residents, fellows, and faculty surgeons reported about work stressors and coping strategies differently. CONCLUSION: The results of our study provide an understanding of neurosurgical professionals' unique emotional landscape, emphasizing the need for reforms in administrative practices, enhanced, healthy coping strategies, and career stage-specific mental health support.
ABSTRACT
Inculcating the capacity to adapt successfully to failures is essential for talent development in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Despite its importance, this capacity to learn from failure is among the least understood processes in the field of talent development. This study aims to investigate how students conceptualize and react to failures and whether there is a correlation between students' conceptualizations of failure, emotional reactions to it, and academic performance. We invited 150 high-achieving high school students to share, interpret, and label their most memorable struggles in their STEM classes. Most of their struggles focused on the learning process itself, such as poor understanding of the subject matter, insufficient motivation or effort, or adopting ineffective learning strategies. Poor performance outcomes, such as poor test scores and bad grades, were not mentioned as frequently as the learning process. Students who labeled their struggle experiences as failures tended to focus more on performance outcomes, whereas students who labeled their struggle experiences as neither failures nor successes focused more on the learning process. Higher-achieving students were also less likely to label their struggles as failures than less-high achievers. Implications for classroom instruction are discussed with a particular focus on talent development in STEM fields.
