Pluralistic ignorance and occupational choice: The impact of communicating norms on graduate students' career aspirations

Occupational choices at the early stage of one's career path are influenced by the real and imagined input of mentors. This research focuses on PhD advisors and the graduate students that they mentor. Each participant in that dyadic mentoring relationship holds assumptions about the beliefs of the other regarding the students' career preferences. We propose that, in the absence of discussions surrounding career goals in such relationships, pluralistic ignorance surrounding career norms may develop. PhD students may assume that their advisors prefer that students seek academic research positions; while advisors may assume students prefer academic research positions and may not bring up alternative careers. Three studies adopt a mixed-method approach to investigate divergent experiences surrounding career discussions. Study 1A (N = 301 faculty members in STEM fields) features qualitative and quantitative data and found that PhD advisors have experience working with students whose career preferences did not align with their expectations, and report changing their mentorship approaches while maintaining rigorous training. Study 1B (N = 195 PhD students in STEM fields) features qualitative data and found that students, although generally comfortable discussing different career options with their advisors, report several concerns that deterred them from discussing nonacademic research positions. Study 2, an experiment designed to compare perceived with actual norms (N = 200 PhD students in STEM fields) revealed that such discomfort could be alleviated by making explicit advisors' support for diverse career options and actual career preferences. The present research provides insights about pluralistic ignorance with implications for having more holistic career discussions in dyadic mentor relationships.