Development and field test of an intervention to reduce conflict in faculty-doctoral student mentoring relationships

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Mentoring is a critical component of graduate education. However, conflicts can occur between faculty mentors and their graduate students, which can undermine the quality of these relationships. We leveraged attribution theory and relationship science to develop a novel professional development intervention that combines attribution retraining to enhance faculty beliefs that they can improve their mentoring relationships, and conflict management training to build faculty skills in having productive problem-solving conversations with their graduate students. We piloted and refined the intervention, then conducted a field test of the intervention with life science faculty (n = 71) from U.S. universities. Participants were randomly assigned to an asynchronous self-guided condition or to a self-guided + synchronous facilitated peer discussion condition. We measured faculty beliefs, perceived skills, and self-reported behaviors when encountering conflicts before and after participating in the intervention. Faculty in both conditions reported significant reductions in the frequency of conflicts with their students, the time and energy they spent addressing conflicts, and the extent to which conflicts disrupted their research productivity. Faculty also expressed increased confidence that they could manage conflicts. Our results suggest that the intervention has the potential to improve faculty capacity to effectively navigate conflicts with their graduate students. Highlight summary A mentoring intervention for faculty combining attribution-retraining and conflict management skill-building strengthened faculty self-efficacy and motivational beliefs and reduced mentoring conflicts.
Full text 1,789 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Mentoring is a critical component of graduate education. However, conflicts can occur between faculty mentors and their graduate students, which can undermine the quality of these relationships. We leveraged attribution theory and relationship science to develop a novel professional development intervention that combines attribution retraining to enhance faculty beliefs that they can improve their mentoring relationships, and conflict management training to build faculty skills in having productive problem-solving conversations with their graduate students. We piloted and refined the intervention, then conducted a field test of the intervention with life science faculty (n = 71) from U.S. universities. Participants were randomly assigned to an asynchronous self-guided condition or to a self-guided + synchronous facilitated peer discussion condition. We measured faculty beliefs, perceived skills, and self-reported behaviors when encountering conflicts before and after participating in the intervention. Faculty in both conditions reported significant reductions in the frequency of conflicts with their students, the time and energy they spent addressing conflicts, and the extent to which conflicts disrupted their research productivity. Faculty also expressed increased confidence that they could manage conflicts. Our results suggest that the intervention has the potential to improve faculty capacity to effectively navigate conflicts with their graduate students. Highlight summary A mentoring intervention for faculty combining attribution-retraining and conflict management skill-building strengthened faculty self-efficacy and motivational beliefs and reduced mentoring conflicts. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00