Imposter syndrome has historically been viewed from a pathologizing lens that is not trauma-informed. I wrote this article to address why I believe that viewing imposter syndrome as "inaccurate thinking" is a red herring.

Excerpts:

When someone has received hundreds of thousands of corrective/negative comments by their 20s, I would propose that most people, neurotypical or otherwise, will have internalized some forms of nervous system distress and cognitive distortion. That seems normal to me, that our bodies and brains react in defensive ways in order to survive psychologically unsafe environments. I see no benefit to pathologizing people who have experienced this form of disprivilege or promoting the idea that we need to “fix” what is a completely normal physiological adaptation, a part of how our bodies fundamentally operate.

Even the idea that “everyone thinks I’m competent but they’re mistaken and when they find out they’ll hate me and reject me” can come from some real basis in past experience. This has never happened to Bob, so when Alice shares this with him, Bob thinks Alice is out of touch with reality. However, this archetypal scenario has played out at least once, if not several times in Alice’s life.

[...] when people take chaotic/creative/unconventional paths to success, there are no efficient ways to reduce epistemic uncertainty about one’s capabilities (even more so in a comparative sense). Self-doubt is natural and logical. Cognitive strategies miss the point and do not lead to resolution or acceptance.