Self-efficacy and research self-efficacy in biomedical doctoral students’ accounts of professional coaching

Introduction Professional coaching may complement research mentoring in biomedical doctoral education, but little is known about how PhD students connect professional coaching to changes in self-efficacy (SE) and research self-efficacy (RSE). Methods This nested qualitative study examined 28 biomedical doctoral students assigned to the coaching arm of the Biomedical Excellence Achieved through Coaching Networks (BEACON) trial. Participants completed one academic year of coaching (15 sessions) with coaches credentialed by the International Coaching Federation (ICF). The data comprised 28 post-coaching interviews and transcripts from 56 coaching sessions. Using codebook thematic analysis combining theory-informed and data-driven coding, we examined how students described coaching-related changes in SE and RSE and which coaching practices they associated with those changes. Nineteen students (68%) provided accounts meeting the study’s criteria for an SE gain and 7 (25%) provided accounts meeting the criteria for an RSE gain. Results All students who reported RSE gains also reported SE gains, whereas 12 reported SE gains without research-specific gains. Students described SE as perceived capability across doctoral training, including remaining effective under pressure, managing complex problems, pursuing goals, and navigating difficult relationships. They described RSE in relation to specific research tasks, relationships, and scientific roles, including scientific writing, research meetings, laboratory decision-making, collaboration, and critical engagement with the literature. Students associated both forms of efficacy with overlapping practices, including affirmative feedback, guiding questions, longitudinal goal review, action planning, and SMART goals. Participants’ accounts most often reflected verbal persuasion and mastery-related sources of efficacy information; what differed was whether students interpreted and applied these practices broadly or within concrete research activities. The findings do not establish a causal effect of coaching but indicate that broad efficacy-related changes may not automatically become research-specific. Discussion Non-evaluative developmental support may become more relevant to RSE when students connect reflection, feedback, and planning to authentic research work.