View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Mutual Gains: Nonpresenting Undergraduate Attendance at Regional Scientific Meetings Benefits Students and Scientific Societies

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Mutual Gains: Nonpresenting Undergraduate Attendance at Regional Scientific Meetings Benefits Students and Scientific Societies
Language: English
Authors: Alex M. Champagne (ORCID 0000-0001-9408-1769), Sabrina E. Dunning (ORCID 0009-0003-3613-748X), Maryam H. Mahmoud, Elissa T. Fisher (ORCID 0009-0001-5465-4283), Sara N. Shah (ORCID 0009-0009-5620-8306), Heidi E. Walsh (ORCID 0009-0005-3805-6717)
Source: Advances in Physiology Education. 2026 50(2):352-360.
Availability: American Physiological Society. 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3991. Tel: 301-634-7164; Fax: 301-634-7241; e-mail: webmaster@the-aps.org; Web site: https://www.physiology.org/journal/advances
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 9
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Undergraduate Students, Attendance, Regional Programs, Self Concept, Sense of Belonging, Student Attitudes, Physiology, Conferences (Gatherings)
Geographic Terms: Indiana
DOI: 10.1152/advan.00213.2025
ISSN: 1043-4046
1522-1229
Abstract: Participation in scientific meetings confers many benefits to undergraduate students and promotes their success and retention in science. However, the cost and time required to attend a scientific meeting is often prohibitive for students, and university funding is often restricted to students presenting research. Small regional scientific meetings offer an opportunity to promote nonpresenting undergraduate attendance because of their reduced registration fees and travel time, but the benefits of attending regional scientific meetings have not been extensively studied. We recruited 45 nonpresenting undergraduate students to attend the annual meeting of the Indiana Physiological Society and provided students with pre- and postmeeting surveys measuring self-perceptions of their professional abilities, sense of belonging in science, confidence in their degree program and career pathway, and reflections on the conference experience. Additionally, because nonpresenting undergraduates made up nearly half of all meeting attendees, we surveyed other meeting attendees to assess the impact of these students on the meeting environment. After attending the meeting, students reported increased confidence talking to other scientists and presenting future research, a greater sense of belonging within the scientific community, more interest in pursuing research after graduation, and increased enthusiasm to attend future meetings. Other meeting attendees felt that the nonpresenting undergraduates had a positive impact on the meeting and enhanced the environment for student presenters. Our results suggest that the attendance of nonpresenting undergraduates at small regional scientific meetings provides mutual benefits to students, universities, and regional scientific societies.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1502784
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwF1wHbtIwgzlnT1hpbCZxLNAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDEU5KaXI_1Df7VOciQIBEICBmnXZoswFJ9l4-Ji7ElIuQpdQd02iqZ6UVSSaubshwzZKb9JVcatl00oCuI7xvy5OLywgF4K4xyPdWz7Ajf2TaxbITmQgNhrd5Tc8AZxQ8abLGIlgmkVuqIFM1auQpvcezQGtUKhthUtZ-oy6ebNBHvjZXAveMgL2LBMPULGPIaNerGh8ixXykj2ZhwyxwW-4DHlK0DYb0e87noY=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0194748773;apu01jun.26;2026Jun24.01:16;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0194748773-1">Mutual gains: nonpresenting undergraduate attendance at regional scientific meetings benefits students and scientific societies </title> <sbt id="AN0194748773-2">INTRODUCTION</sbt> <p>Participation in scientific meetings confers many benefits to undergraduate students and promotes their success and retention in science. However, the cost and time required to attend a scientific meeting is often prohibitive for students, and university funding is often restricted to students presenting research. Small regional scientific meetings offer an opportunity to promote nonpresenting undergraduate attendance because of their reduced registration fees and travel time, but the benefits of attending regional scientific meetings have not been extensively studied. We recruited 45 nonpresenting undergraduate students to attend the annual meeting of the Indiana Physiological Society and provided students with pre- and postmeeting surveys measuring self-perceptions of their professional abilities, sense of belonging in science, confidence in their degree program and career pathway, and reflections on the conference experience. Additionally, because nonpresenting undergraduates made up nearly half of all meeting attendees, we surveyed other meeting attendees to assess the impact of these students on the meeting environment. After attending the meeting, students reported increased confidence talking to other scientists and presenting future research, a greater sense of belonging within the scientific community, more interest in pursuing research after graduation, and increased enthusiasm to attend future meetings. Other meeting attendees felt that the nonpresenting undergraduates had a positive impact on the meeting and enhanced the environment for student presenters. Our results suggest that the attendance of nonpresenting undergraduates at small regional scientific meetings provides mutual benefits to students, universities, and regional scientific societies. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Small regional scientific meetings confer many of the same benefits to nonpresenting undergraduates as large national meetings and regional societies can mutually benefit from the attendance of large numbers of nonpresenting undergraduates.</p> <p>Participation in scientific meetings provides many benefits to undergraduate students, including a broadened perspective of scientific expertise, ability to think critically about their discipline, opportunities to network and explore different career pathways, and the cultivation of enthusiasm and a sense of belonging within the scientific community ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>]). Enthusiasm and a sense of belonging are critical in promoting the retention of students in the life sciences, and students from underrepresented groups in science show especially large increases in these variables as a result of attending scientific meetings ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref2">6</reflink>]).Although many benefits associated with attending a scientific meeting derive from presenting research ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref3">7</reflink>]), nonpresenting undergraduate students accrue many of the same benefits as their peers who present ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref4">2</reflink>]). Nonpresenting students who attended the Experimental Biology Conference reported gains in understanding the vastness and diversity of scientific research, exposure to different career pathways, and increased enthusiasm for science ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref5">4</reflink>]). In a separate study, students who attended the annual meeting of The Wildlife Society in nonpresenting roles reported increased confidence in speaking and networking with peers and senior scientists from other institutions ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref6">3</reflink>]). These same students also indicated that they were more confident in their abilities to present their own research at future meetings. These findings suggest that supporting the attendance of nonpresenting students at scientific meetings enhances students' career development and sets them up for success as scientists.Despite the benefits of attending a scientific meeting, the cost of attending a meeting is often high, especially for national and international meetings that incur travel costs in addition to registration fees. Therefore, university funding to attend scientific meetings is often contingent upon students presenting their research, and student attendance at meetings is largely limited to those who have collected sufficient data to present ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref7">8</reflink>]). Even if these monetary barriers are reduced or eliminated, nonpresenting students are still often discouraged from attending due to issues with travel logistics and time commitment ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref8">9</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref9">10</reflink>]). A possible mechanism to improve the attendance of nonpresenting students at scientific meetings is for universities and research laboratories to encourage students to attend regional meetings. These meetings often have lower registration fees, have reduced travel distance, and are shorter in duration than their national and international counterparts, thus reducing barriers to attendance. Regional meetings often feature a small number of attendees, which fosters greater interaction between participants ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref10">11</reflink>]). Because many regional meetings are hosted on university campuses, they allow attendees to tour laboratories and other facilities and potentially foster collaborations with local scientists ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref11">12</reflink>]). However, the specific impacts of small regional scientific meetings on nonpresenting students have not been studied.The Indiana Physiological Society (INPhys) is a state chapter of the American Physiological Society comprised of students, faculty, and industry professionals promoting physiological research and education in Indiana. In 2025, INPhys held its 15th annual meeting (INPhys 2025) on the campus of the University of Southern Indiana (USI), and funding was made available via an internal grant to allow nonpresenting USI undergraduates in the College of Science, Engineering, and Education to attend the meeting free of charge (see grants). In this study, we assess the benefits these nonpresenting undergraduate students received from attending this regional scientific meeting. Additionally, because nonpresenting students made up a large proportion of total meeting attendees, we measured the impact that these students had on other meeting attendees. Our findings demonstrate that attending a small regional scientific meeting as a nonpresenter can markedly increase undergraduates' confidence in communicating with other scientists and increase their enthusiasm for attending future scientific meetings while making them feel more a part of the scientific community. Furthermore, large numbers of nonpresenting students at a small regional meeting can positively affect the meeting and the scientific society hosting it by boosting attendance at sessions and increasing engagement.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-3">MATERIALS AND METHODS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0194748773-4">Recruitment of Students</hd> <p>Approximately 6 wk before INPhys 2025, we provided recruitment flyers and e-mails to instructors of courses in the Biology, Chemistry and Biochemistry, and Kinesiology departments at USI, with instructions to announce the meeting in class and via e-mail. We provided the same materials to leaders of student organizations within these departments to email their members and announce at meetings. Previous studies have found these methods to be effective in recruiting students to attend scientific meetings ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref12">4</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref13">13</reflink>]). All recruitment materials included a brief description of the meeting and information on how students could secure free registration and additional incentives by participating in this study. All methods were approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Southern Indiana (Reference No. 2025-065-SEE).</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-5">Preconference Activities</hd> <p>Interested students secured free registration to INPhys 2025 by completing a premeeting survey. In addition to basic demographic questions, this survey used a seven-point Likert scale to gauge student interest in research, confidence in their professional abilities, sense of belonging in science, and confidence in the relevance of their degree program and career pathway. We also included free-response questions that assessed students' motivations for attending, personal learning goals, and concerns about attending the meeting. Many of our Likert and free-response questions aligned with those used in previous studies analyzing the impact of nonpresenting student attendance at large national scientific meetings ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref14">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref15">4</reflink>]). Thus, our study lent itself to facilitating comparisons in student perceptions based on differences in meeting size, scope, and structure. We received premeeting surveys from 54 USI students, and these students were notified of their registration and received updates on the meeting.One week before INPhys 2025, all participating students were encouraged to attend a Zoom session entitled "How to Get the Most Out of INPhys," which introduced students to the basic meeting structure and etiquette and shared best practices for student attendees to maximize their professional development. This session was recorded for students who could not attend live, and a short quiz administered to attendees allowed us to document that 40 USI students attended or watched the recording.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-6">During Conference Activities</hd> <p>Given the small size and limited itinerary of INPhys 2025, all students who attended the meeting shared similar experiences. INPhys 2025 consisted of 7 student oral presentations on a variety of physiological topics lasting 15 min each, an hour-long keynote presentation about physiology education, a poster session featuring 17 posters presented by student researchers, and a choice of three 45-min breakout sessions. Attendees also had opportunities for unstructured networking during lunch and breaks. Students attended all parts of the conference with the exception of the breakout sessions, where 38 students attended at least 1 session. Of the breakout sessions, the career panel had the highest attendance, with 32 students attending. Smaller numbers of students attended breakout sessions featuring laboratory demonstrations (10 students) and showcasing techniques for teaching physiology (7 students).To incentivize USI students to actively participate in the meeting and encourage networking, all meeting attendees were given a scavenger hunt modeled after previously published examples (Refs. [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref16">4</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref17">14</reflink>]; Supplemental Table S1). While we did not specifically evaluate the impact of the scavenger hunt on the meeting experience, scavenger hunts that encourage student engagement enhance student learning and perceptions of the meeting experience ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref18">14</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-7">Postconference Activities</hd> <p>Immediately following INPhys 2025, students were given access to a postmeeting survey, which included open-ended questions asking students to reflect on their conference experience. Additionally, all Likert scale questions from the premeeting survey were repeated to gauge changes in student perception as a result of attending the meeting. Students were incentivized to complete the postmeeting survey with small prizes, and all students who attended the meeting completed the survey.To assess the impact nonpresenting USI students had on other meeting attendees, we used e-mail addresses provided during meeting registration to distribute a survey to the other attendees of INPhys 2025 ∼2 wk after the meeting. Of the 55 individuals who received the survey, 18 (33%) responded. The survey allowed respondents to anonymously answer questions about their role in the meeting, their level of interaction with nonpresenting USI students, and their perceptions of these students at the meeting. The latter questions included seven-point Likert scale questions and a free-response question allowing attendees to share any additional comments or observations.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-8">Statistical Analysis</hd> <p>Because student responses for all Likert-scale questions were ordinal and nonnormal in distribution, we compared differences in pre- and postmeeting surveys with a cumulative link mixed model analysis using the "ordinal" package in R ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref19">15</reflink>]). We included students' major, year in school, gender, race, and previous involvement in research in initial models as demographic variables. Any demographic variable that was not significant (<emph>P</emph> > 0.05) was removed from the model. Additionally, we rejected any model where the condition number of the Hessian was greater than 10<sups>4</sups>, thus indicating a problem with the model ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref20">16</reflink>]). When a demographic variable was significant (<emph>P</emph> ≤ 0.05), we also tested for an interaction term between pre- and postmeeting surveys and that demographic to determine whether demographic groups responded differently to attending the meeting. To compare differences between demographic groups and interactions, we performed post hoc tests with the "emmeans" package in R ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref21">17</reflink>]). In a few instances where we performed comparisons of student responses outside of pre- and postmeeting comparisons, we again accounted for the ordinal and nonnormal nature of the data by using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test or Mann-Whitney <emph>U</emph> test in SPSS Statistics 28.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY), depending on whether the samples were paired or independent, respectively.To analyze student responses to free-response questions, we used an inductive approach to conduct a thematic analysis, where we identified explicit themes within responses ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref22">18</reflink>]). Briefly, three investigators independently read all student responses and documented words and phrases that commonly appeared in responses to each question, grouping these commonalities into preliminary themes. All three investigators then met to share and discuss their preliminary themes, with discrepancies between independent investigators resolved via discussion to produce finalized themes associated with each free-response question. Once themes were finalized, the same three investigators then independently analyzed each student response to each question and identified the theme(s) represented within each response. After this independent identification, all three investigators again met to discuss their identifications and resolve discrepancies via discussion to reach consensus and calculate the abundance of each theme for each free-response question. We report the abundance of each theme for free-response questions as the percentage of total students who included the theme somewhere in their response. Because many student responses were complex and contained more than one theme, percentages of each theme sum to more than 100 percent.We also hypothesized that different demographic groups varied in their motivations for attending the conference and their sense of belonging. To determine this, we identified themes in the free-response answers that were associated with motivations for attending the conference and sense of belonging and used Fisher's exact test (2 demographic groups) or the maximum likelihood ratio χ<sups>2</sups>-test (3 or more demographic groups) in SPSS for different distributions of themes between demographic groups ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref23">19</reflink>]). Although our analysis of the Likert scale questions and demographic analysis of the free-response questions involved making multiple comparisons, we did not alter our <emph>P</emph> value to correct for multiple comparisons because we had a small number of planned comparisons and considered the results of the individual comparisons rather than testing a universal null hypothesis ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref24">20</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-9">RESULTS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0194748773-10">Demographic Composition of Participants</hd> <p>Of the 54 USI students who completed the premeeting survey to secure registration to INPhys 2025, 45 actually attended, and we excluded the 9 nonattending students from our analysis. With a total attendance of 101 individuals at INPhys 2025, nonpresenting USI students therefore comprised nearly half of all meeting attendees. Students were mainly biology (54%) and biochemistry (34%) majors, and the vast majority (91%) were interested in pursuing a career in healthcare. Students were balanced with respect to year in school, with 29% of students in their first year, 27% in their second year, 24% in their third year, and 20% in their fourth year or later. The majority of students were female (70%) and white (71%), and just under half of the students (44%) had performed undergraduate research before attending the meeting.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-11">Premeeting Perceptions: Free-Response Questions</hd> <p>For each free-response question, student responses reflected between five and seven distinct themes. Here, we report major themes, with the four most common themes in response to each question listed in Table 1 along with an example response that adhered to each theme. Before attending INPhys 2025, students most commonly reported the experience of attending a conference as their primary motivation for attending (42% of students), along with the desire to learn about physiology (38%), and networking with other scientists (27%). A small number of students were also motivated to explore research opportunities (13%), but this motivation was not evenly distributed across students' year in school (<emph>P</emph> = 0.05) and consisted exclusively of first- or second-year students. When asked what they hoped to learn at the conference, students again expressed interest in learning about scientific content (64%) while also hoping to receive information about their future career (29%). Over half of students (69%) also expressed at least one concern about attending the conference, with the most common concerns being an inability to understand the content of the presentations (29%), feeling out of place (23%), interacting with other attendees (16%), and feeling overwhelmed (16%). Other than motivation to explore research differing based on year in school, we found no differences between demographic groups in answers to the premeeting free-response questions.</p> <p></p> <p>Open in Viewer</p> <p>Table 1. Free-response questions asked on the premeeting questionnaire to nonpresenting undergraduate students</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Question</th><th>Response Theme</th><th>Example Response</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="4"><p>What is your primary motivation for attending this conference?</p></td><td><p>1. Experiencing a conference (42%)</p></td><td><p>"I want to experience a conference so I have some experience for future conferences I may attend."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Learn about research content/Learn about physiology (38%)</p></td><td><p>"Learn more about research happening in the scientific community."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. Networking (27%)</p></td><td><p>"To meet professionals in the field I am interested in going into."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. Explore Research Opportunities (13%)</p></td><td><p>"Learning the opportunities of research in the community and possibly getting involved in similar activities."</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5"><p>What do you hope to learn at this conference?</p></td><td><p>1. Understanding research content (64%)</p></td><td><p>"I hope to learn about current physiological research and their broader applications."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Career information (29%)</p></td><td><p>"I hope to hear from professionals about their career paths and gain advice on how to navigate my own journey in the medical field."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. How to get involved in research (20%)</p></td><td><p>"I hope to learn about different research opportunities."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. How a conference works (13%)</p></td><td><p>"I hope to learn how scientific conferences operate."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>5. How scientists communicate (13%)</p></td><td><p>"How to confidently talk to researchers and peers about science properly."</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4"><p>What are your primary concerns about attending this conference?</p></td><td><p>1. Not understanding content of presentations (29%)</p></td><td><p>"Not being able to comprehend advanced research."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Feeling out of place (23%)</p></td><td><p>"I don't take part in undergraduate research and I'm worried that I won't be able to relate."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. Feeling overwhelmed (16%)</p></td><td><p>"I am concerned that talking with multiple different disciplines will be an overwhelming intake of information."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. Interacting with others (16%)</p></td><td><p>"I am nervous to interact with people doing research."</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>For each question, the top 4 most common response themes are listed, with example responses to illustrate each theme. The percentage of students who included each theme in their response is indicated in parentheses.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-12">Changes in Pre- and Postmeeting Perceptions: Likert Scale Questions</hd> <p>When comparing pre- and postmeeting responses for all Likert scale questions, average scores were higher for all questions postmeeting. However, we report only significant results below (<emph>P</emph> ≤ 0.05). After attending INPhys 2025, students reported increased confidence in approaching and speaking with faculty (<emph>z</emph> = 3.30; <emph>P</emph> < 0.001) and students (<emph>z</emph> = 3.07; <emph>P</emph> = 0.002) from other institutions (Fig. 1). Students also increasingly viewed themselves and their peers as members of the scientific community postmeeting (<emph>z</emph> = 2.483; <emph>P</emph> = 0.013). Female students felt more strongly that they were part of the scientific community compared with male students (<emph>z</emph> = 2.018; <emph>P</emph> = 0.044), and students who had conducted undergraduate research before attending the conference trended toward a stronger sense of community (<emph>z</emph> = 1.951; <emph>P</emph> = 0.051). On the other hand, students who were in their fourth year or later of undergraduate studies felt less a part of the scientific community than students in their first year (<emph>z</emph> = −2.794; <emph>P</emph> = 0.027). After attending INPhys, students also reported increased confidence presenting their own research at a future meeting (<emph>z</emph> = 3.134; <emph>P</emph> = 0.002). White students reported lower confidence in their ability to present than nonwhite students (<emph>z</emph> = −2.307; <emph>P</emph> = 0.0211). However, based on a significant interaction term, white students reported an increase in confidence levels postconference (<emph>z</emph> = 3.134; <emph>P</emph> = 0.002), whereas nonwhite students reported a slight nonsignificant decrease (<emph>z</emph> = −1.033; <emph>P</emph> = 0.302). This may simply reflect that regardless of demographic group, students who were most confident presenting before the meeting (6 or above on the Likert scale; <emph>n</emph> = 10) reported an average decrease in confidence levels postmeeting whereas those who were less confident (1–5 on the Likert scale; <emph>n</emph> = 35) reported an increase (Mann-Whitney <emph>U</emph> test = 27; <emph>P</emph> < 0.001).</p> <p></p> <p>Open in Viewer</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Student responses (n = 45) to each Likert scale question included on both pre- and postmeeting surveys, with a score of 1 indicating the least amount of confidence, interest, or agreement with a statement, and 7 indicating the greatest. Top axis: average student response ± standard error on pre (triangles)- and postmeeting (squares) surveys. *Significant differences between pre- and postmeeting responses. Bottom axis: percentage of responses at each level of confidence, interest, or agreement for pre (orange shades)- and postmeeting (blue shades) surveys. The neutral response (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref25">4</reflink>) is centered on 0 percent.</p> <p>Overall enthusiasm for attending scientific meetings also increased among students. Compared with premeeting surveys, postmeeting surveys indicated that students were more likely to attend a meeting even if they had to pay the student registration fee of $50 (<emph>z</emph> = 2.69; <emph>P</emph> = 0.007). Students' postmeeting likelihood of attending a future meeting increased even more if they were hypothetically provided with institutional funding to attend free of charge, as opposed to having to pay for themselves (Fig. 2; <emph>z</emph> = 5.64; <emph>P</emph> < 0.001).</p> <p></p> <p>Open in Viewer</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 2. Student responses (n = 45) to Likert scale questions indicating their likelihood of attending a meeting at different levels of financial support, with a score of 1 indicating the lowest likelihood and 7 indicating the greatest likelihood. Top axis: average student response ± standard error on questions asked on pre (triangles)- or postmeeting (squares) surveys. Different letters indicate significant differences between responses. Bottom axis: percentage of responses at each level of likelihood, with premeeting responses represented by orange shades and postmeeting responses represented by blue shades. The neutral response (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref26">4</reflink>) is centered on 0 percent.</p> <p>Attending INPhys also increased students' interest in pursuing scientific research after graduation (<emph>z</emph> = 1.981; <emph>P</emph> = 0.048), with female (<emph>z</emph> = 2.442; <emph>P</emph> = 0.015) and nonwhite (<emph>z</emph> = 2.020; <emph>P</emph> = 0.043) students expressing the most interest. Among the students not already conducting undergraduate research, attending the meeting did not increase interest in undergraduate research, but among students not doing research, first-year and second-year students expressed greater interest than fourth-year students (<emph>z</emph> = 3.460, <emph>P</emph> = 0.003 and <emph>z</emph> = 3.236, <emph>P</emph> = 0.007, respectively) and nonwhite students expressed greater interest than white students (<emph>z</emph> = 2.249; <emph>P</emph> = 0.025). The difference between first- and fourth-year students was also clear in response to the statement, "My field of study offers a wide variety of career options," where despite no differences pre- and postmeeting, fourth-year students expressed a lower level agreement with this statement (<emph>z</emph> = −3.264; <emph>P</emph> = 0.006).</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-13">Postmeeting Perceptions: Free-Response Questions</hd> <p>For each free-response question, student responses reflected between five and eight distinct themes. As with the premeeting responses to free-response questions, we report major themes, with the four most common themes in response to each question listed in Table 2 along with an example response that adhered to each theme. After the meeting, most students (59%) indicated that the student presentations (poster, oral, or both) had been the most useful part of the meeting for them. When asked to justify why they found a certain aspect of the meeting to be most useful, the two most common responses were that students learned about science (32%) and were able to have discussions with scientists (30%; Table 2). Students also most commonly indicated that student presentations had the greatest influence on their perceptions of scientific research (50%). In response to the prompt, "What surprising information did you learn from this conference?" students most often cited a specific piece of scientific information they learned (36%), but other common responses included an appreciation for the breadth of research opportunities available (18%) or for general learning of scientific information (16%).</p> <p></p> <p>Open in Viewer</p> <p>Table 2. Free-response questions asked on the postmeeting questionnaire to nonpresenting undergraduate students</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Question</th><th>Response Theme</th><th>Example Response</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="4"><p>Justify your choice for the most useful aspect of the conference.</p></td><td><p>1. Learned about science (32%)</p></td><td><p>"The presentations opened my eyes to the sheer number of research topics and their applications."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Able to have discussions with scientists (30%)</p></td><td><p>"Talking to other students about their research was valuable because I got to learn about the research process and how much failure that goes into making progress in science."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. Improved confidence presenting research (20%)</p></td><td><p>"I will be presenting at a future conference and I did not know what to expect. I am now confident of what will be expected from me if I am selected to present."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. Picked up improved study habits (18%)</p></td><td><p>"The keynote had very useful tips for improving studying and information on graduate school."</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4"><p>What surprising information did you learn from this conference?</p></td><td><p>1. Specific scientific information (36%)</p></td><td><p>"I learned a lot about the impact of propofol on the blood-brain barrier."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Breadth of research opportunities (18%)</p></td><td><p>"There are so many different areas of research that are still being discovered."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. General scientific information (16%)</p></td><td><p>"I learned a lot about physiology advancements I didn't know before."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. Applications of research (9%)</p></td><td><p>"I gained a new perspective on the research and how it translates into real world applications."</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4"><p>In what ways has your sense of belonging within the scientific community changed after attending the conference?</p></td><td><p>1. Feel more confident presenting or discussing science (29%)</p></td><td><p>"I feel more comfortable listening to research and engaging in conversation with researchers."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Felt welcomed by other scientists (17%)</p></td><td><p>"I felt that I belonged because the students presenting posters were very sincere and helpful when answering questions."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. Felt valued and connected to other scientists (17%)</p></td><td><p>"I felt connected to the scientific community because I was able to see many things from the classes that I'm currently in or have taken."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. Affirmation of career pathway and motivation to continue (12%)</p></td><td><p>"It helped reinforce that my education has truly worked toward instilling scientific principles and my ability to understand and discuss science."</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4"><p>Why would you recommend attending a scientific conference to a peer?</p></td><td><p>1. You'll learn something (52%)</p></td><td><p>"There is truly so much to learn, not just about the research, but the field and people within it."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2. Builds professional relationships (30%)</p></td><td><p>"It is a great environment to meet new people and interact with your peers in a scientific setting."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>3. Helps with your career (16%)</p></td><td><p>"You meet many people in positions you want to be in one day. Their advice could be beneficial."</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>4. Helps with your own research (14%)</p></td><td><p>"It's a great way to get some inspiration for your own research project and find your own niche worth exploring."</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>For each question, the top 4 most common response themes are listed, with example responses to illustrate each theme. The percentage of students who included each theme in their response is indicated in parentheses next to each theme.</p> <p>Of all students, 95% reported that their sense of belonging within the scientific community changed in some way after attending the meeting, and 30% of those students used some form of the word "confident" in their response. The most common response among students was that attending the meeting made them feel more confident talking about science and asking questions (29%). Finally, 100% of students indicated that they would recommend attending a scientific meeting to a peer. When asked how they would justify this recommendation, the majority of students (52%) would tell their peers that they would learn something by attending a meeting. We found no differences between demographic groups in answers to the postmeeting free-response questions.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-14">Postmeeting Perceptions: Other Conference Attendees</hd> <p>Of the 55 INPhys 2025 attendees outside of the nonpresenting USI students, 18 completed the postmeeting survey. Among those who completed the survey, 14 (78%) indicated that they had at least 1 conversation with a nonpresenting USI student. Additionally, 11 (61%) respondents were undergraduate or graduate students, and 10 (56%) respondents presented a poster or oral presentation at INPhys 2025. All respondents agreed that the nonpresenting students conducted themselves professionally (average score 6.78 out of 7 on the Likert scale) and asked insightful questions (6.67; Fig. 3). Additionally, most agreed that the presence of the nonpresenting USI students had an impact on INPhys 2025 (6.44) and most agreed the impact was positive (6.61). All respondents agreed that future INPhys meetings would benefit from encouraging nonpresenting undergraduate students to attend (6.72), and most agreed that a small regional meeting like INPhys benefits from large numbers of nonpresenting undergraduates (6.47). No responses below neutral were reported for any Likert scale statements. Of all respondents, eight (44%) completed the free-response portion of the survey. Although we acknowledge that the small number of respondents completing the free-response portion presents an issue with sample size, we found it notable that seven of the eight respondents (88%) mentioned that they appreciated the attendance and engagement of nonpresenting USI students with presentations. For example, one comment in this category read, "The nonpresenting students allowed for the presenters to have a greater audience to speak to, greatly increasing the presenting experience."</p> <p></p> <p>Open in Viewer</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 3. Responses of other meeting attendees (n = 18) indicating their level of agreement with the following statements on a Likert scale. Top axis: average response ± standard error. Bottom axis: percentage of responses at each level of agreement. The neutral response (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref27">4</reflink>) is centered on 0 percent. No responses below neutral were recorded.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-15">DISCUSSION</hd> <p>We have found that nonpresenting undergraduate students who attended a small regional scientific meeting (INPhys 2025) reported gains in confidence talking to other scientists and presenting research, a greater sense of belonging within the scientific community, and an increased interest in pursuing research after graduation. These gains were largely consistent for all students, with only a few small differences between demographic groups, and resulted in increased enthusiasm for attending future scientific meetings. Overall, students indicated that the experience of attending a scientific meeting aligned with their goals of learning about science and interacting with scientists while easing their concerns of not understanding material or feeling out of place. Furthermore, these nonpresenting students contributed to a more positive meeting experience for other meeting attendees, suggesting that the inclusion of nonpresenting undergraduates at meetings provides benefits to small regional scientific societies.Increased confidence in talking with other scientists and presenting research, a greater sense of belonging, and enthusiasm for attending scientific meetings after INPhys 2025 align with the experiences of nonpresenting undergraduates attending national meetings ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref28">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref29">4</reflink>]), demonstrating that scientific meetings confer many of the same benefits to nonpresenting undergraduates regardless of their size and scope. However, student experiences at scientific meetings can differ depending on the scale of the meeting. For example, when undergraduates attending Experimental Biology, a large national meeting with over 14,000 attendees, were asked what surprising information they learned at the meeting, many students commented on the diversity and vastness of scientific research and the size and scope of the conference ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref30">4</reflink>]). When presented with this same question, only a small percentage of INPhys attendees commented on the breadth of research, indicating that smaller meetings may be limited in their ability to expose students to a wide variety of topics. On the other hand, students at large national meetings hosted by The Wildlife Society (∼1,800 attendees) or the Society for Community Research and Action (∼650 attendees) expressed feelings of being overwhelmed or tired, as well as difficulty budgeting time between sessions ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref31">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref32">5</reflink>]). Students in this study did not express any of these feelings on postmeeting surveys, despite many expressing concerns that they would feel overwhelmed on preconference surveys. Additionally, despite students being close to home and free to leave at any time, 100% of students in this study attended through the afternoon poster session, and 83% of students attended at least one breakout session at the end of the day. This suggests that a small, 1-day meeting featuring minimal concurrent sessions may alleviate some of the fatigue that students often experience at larger meetings.Surprisingly, nonpresenting undergraduates who attended INPhys 2025 did not express increased confidence in securing a position after graduation and the perception that their field of study offered a wide variety of career options also did not increase. Students attending national meetings often reflect on the diversity of career opportunities to which they are exposed and report increased confidence in securing a position after graduation ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref33">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref34">4</reflink>]). This discrepancy between our study and previous studies may be attributed to multiple factors, one of which is the level of guidance and mentoring before, during, and after the conference. Although our premeeting Zoom session and scavenger hunt outlined basic meeting expectations and provided some structure, a more formalized experience with opportunities for students to discuss and reflect on their conference experience may help students maximize the value of a scientific meeting, including their career perceptions ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref35">3</reflink>]). Additionally, large national conferences feature not only a more diverse group of attendees but also a large assortment of exhibitors and vendors. Many exhibitors and vendors have scientific backgrounds or represent companies that employ scientists, thus showcasing nontraditional science careers ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref36">4</reflink>]). Although many students in this study attended the career panel breakout session, the panelists generally represented traditional careers in physiology (medicine, academia, and pharmaceutical research). Small regional conferences may better serve student attendees by intentionally recruiting scientists in nontraditional careers and allowing for interactions between those scientists and their student members. This strategy may especially benefit fourth-year undergraduates, as this group had the lowest perception of career options in their field, and recruiting these scientists would mutually benefit graduate student attendees who are increasingly competing for limited opportunities in traditional careers ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref37">21</reflink>]).Beyond differences in attitudes about career options, fourth-year undergraduates also exhibited the lowest interest in undergraduate research and the lowest perception that they were part of the scientific community when compared with students earlier in their college career. These differences may reflect declines in self-confidence, extrinsic motivation, and confidence in securing a position after graduation that often occur in students as they proceed through their undergraduate degree ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref38">22</reflink>]). Many of these changes may be attributed to the Dunning-Kruger effect ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref39">25</reflink>]), where more experienced students can underestimate their abilities compared with less experienced students, perhaps reflecting that they recognize the inherent challenges of a scientific career. Given the timing of this conference, just 6 wk before the end of the academic year, these effects may have been amplified in fourth-year students, especially because confidence levels can fluctuate even in a student's final year of school ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref40">26</reflink>]). Conversely, the greater interest in conducting undergraduate research we observed in first- and second-year students may reflect a greater self-perception in ability or a higher extrinsic motivation. Because extrinsic motivation predicts eventual involvement in student research ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref41">27</reflink>]), students may benefit most by attending scientific meetings in the first or second year of their undergraduate education, when they still have time to pursue multiyear research opportunities. Subsequently, participation in undergraduate research will increase their sense of belonging in the scientific community, as shown in this study, while also increasing their self-confidence for the duration of their undergraduate career and improving their career prospects ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref42">28</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref43">29</reflink>]). Therefore, support for early-career undergraduates at small regional meetings may provide a solution for universities hoping to maximize the benefits of their undergraduate research programs while minimizing costs and logistical barriers.In addition to the benefits received by nonpresenting undergraduates at small regional scientific meetings, our data suggest that a sizeable cohort of these undergraduates confers a mutualistic benefit to other meeting attendees. In general, INPhys 2025 attendees agreed that nonpresenting undergraduates had a positive impact on the meeting, and most comments on the postmeeting survey alluded to the large number of undergraduates enhancing the experience of students presenting their research. Some of these sentiments may be attributed to changes in audience size and demographics. The addition of 45 nonpresenting undergraduate students roughly doubled the number of attendees at INPhys 2025, thus significantly increasing the reach and impact of the conference. Demographically, having a large proportion of nonpresenting undergraduates at the meeting allowed student presenters to present their research to a less expert audience, and research students often report reduced nervousness when presenting to nonexperts ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref44">30</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref45">31</reflink>]). Thus, student presenters may have felt more confident presenting to an audience with proportionally more undergraduates and fewer faculty and professionals.One limitation of this study was that all nonpresenting undergraduates were from the host institution. As a result, students did not have to travel or experience an unfamiliar physical or social environment, and these variables can influence student perceptions ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref46">9</reflink>]). Thus, future studies may assess whether the same mutual benefits to students and regional societies persist when nonpresenting undergraduates originate from multiple more distant universities. However, because our results largely align with previous studies of students attending national conferences ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref47">3</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref48">4</reflink>]), we believe they are broadly applicable. We suggest that support for students to attend small regional meetings is a cost-effective mechanism for universities to promote retention of undergraduates in science. In this study, for example, the cost incurred by the university was funded via a small internal grant, with the total cost of providing registration and incentives for all students totaling approximately $3,700, or about $80 per student. This cost will obviously vary depending on registration costs of individual societies, degree of travel required, and incentives offered. At minimum, because many regional meetings are held on university campuses ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref49">12</reflink>]), universities hosting regional meetings should make efforts to facilitate the attendance of their own undergraduate students.In conclusion, this study provides evidence that nonpresenting undergraduate students benefit from attending small regional scientific meetings. In turn, when these students make up a sizable proportion of meeting attendees, they mutually benefit the scientific society by influencing the size and demographics of the meeting. Many of the benefits that students receive align with those gained by nonpresenting students at large national meetings. However, because students' exposure to the diversity and vastness of research and career opportunities may be limited by the size and scope of a meeting, small regional scientific societies may consider ways to maximize the diversity of their programming to benefit undergraduate students.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-16">DATA AVAILABILITY</hd> <p>Data will be made available upon reasonable request.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-17">SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL</hd> <p>Supplemental Table 1: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31069672.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-18">GRANTS</hd> <p>Funding for this project was provided by a Pott College Innovation Grant from the University of Southern Indiana (19346-01790) to A.M.C.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-19">DISCLOSURES</hd> <p>No conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the authors.</p> <hd id="AN0194748773-20">AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS</hd> <p>A.M.C. conceived and designed research; A.M.C., S.E.D., M.H.M., E.T.F., S.N.S., and H.E.W. performed experiments; A.M.C., S.E.D., M.H.M., E.T.F., S.N.S., and H.E.W. analyzed data; A.M.C., S.E.D., M.H.M., and H.E.W. interpreted results of experiments; A.M.C. prepared figures; A.M.C. and S.E.D. drafted manuscript; A.M.C., S.E.D., M.H.M., E.T.F., S.N.S., and H.E.W. edited and revised manuscript; A.M.C., S.E.D., M.H.M., E.T.F., S.N.S., and H.E.W. approved final version of manuscript.</p> <ref id="AN0194748773-21"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Mabrouk PA. Survey study investigating the significance of conference participation to undergraduate research students. J Chem Educ 86: 1335–1340, 2009.Go to Citation Crossref Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref4" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Helm HW, Bailey KG. Perceived benefits of presenting undergraduate research at a professional conference. N Am J Psychol 15: 527–536, 2013.Google Scholar a [...] belonging within the scientific community b [...] same benefits as their peers who present</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref6" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Flaherty EA, Urbanek RE, Wood DM, Day CC, D'Acunto LE, Quinn VS, Zollner PA. A framework for mentoring students attending their first professional conference. Nat Sci Educ 47: 1–8, 2018.Crossref Google Scholar a [...] belonging within the scientific community b [...] senior scientists from other institutions c [...] at large national scientific meetings d [...] undergraduates attending national meetings e [...] difficulty budgeting time between sessions f [...] in securing a position after graduation g [...] meeting, including their career perceptions h [...] of students attending national conferences</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref5" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Gopalan C, Halpin PA, Johnson KM. Benefits and logistics of nonpresenting undergraduate students attending a professional scientific meeting. Adv Physiol Educ 42: 68–74, 2018.Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar a [...] belonging within the scientific community b [...] and increased enthusiasm for science c [...] students to attend scientific meetings d [...] at large national scientific meetings e [...] after previously published examples (Refs. f [...] undergraduates attending national meetings g [...] and the size and scope of the conference h [...] in securing a position after graduation i [...] showcasing nontraditional science careers j [...] of students attending national conferences</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref32" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Lien A, Fyne A, DeVito J, Ogunbo O, Prado R, Chaparro J. Promoting undergraduate student engagement in the SCRA biennial conference. Global J Comm Psychol Pract 10: 1–12, 2019.Crossref Google Scholar a [...] belonging within the scientific community b [...] difficulty budgeting time between sessions</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref2" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Casad BJ, Chang AL, Pribbenow CM. The benefits of attending the annual biomedical research conference for minority students (ABRCMS): the role of research confidence. CBE Life Sci Educ: 15: ar46, 2016.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref3" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Little C. Undergraduate research as a student engagement springboard: exploring the longer-term reported benefits of participation in a research conference. Educ Res 62: 229–245, 2020.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref7" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Hunter AB, Laursen SL, Seymour E. Becoming a scientist: the role of undergraduate research in students' cognitive, personal, and professional development. Sci Educ 91: 36–74, 2007.Go to Citation Crossref Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref8" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Lei SA. Field trips in college biology and ecology courses: revisiting benefits and drawbacks. J Instruct Psychol 37: 42–48, 2010.Google Scholar a [...] with travel logistics and time commitment b [...] variables can influence student perceptions</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Raby CL, Madden JR. Moving academic conferences online: aids and barriers to delegate participation. Ecol Evol 11: 3646–3655, 2021.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pierce GN. On meetings and conferences: is bigger really better? Can J Physiol Pharmacol 92: v, 2014.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sarabipour S, Khan A, Seah YF, Mwakilili AD, Mumoki FN, Sáez PJ, Schwessinger B, Debat HJ, Mestrovic T. Changing scientific meetings for the better. Nat Hum Behav 5: 296–300, 2021.Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar a [...] foster collaborations with local scientists b [...] meetings are held on university campuses</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Halpin PA. Recruiting undergraduate biology majors to attend experimental biology EB2015 Boston. FASEB J 28: 531.3, 2014.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kubasik MA, Van Dyke AR, Harper-Leatherman AS, Miecznikowski JR, Steffen LK, Smith-Carpenter J. A cloud-based scavenger hunt: orienting undergraduates to ACS national meetings. J Chem Educ 93: 1957–1960, 2016.Crossref Web of Science Google Scholar a [...] after previously published examples (Refs. b [...] and perceptions of the meeting experience</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Christensen R. Ordinal—Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R Package Version 2023.12-4.1. 2023. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ordinal [2025 Dec 16].Go to Citation Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Christensen R. Cumulative Link Models for Ordinal Regression with the R Package Ordinal. 2018. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ordinal/vignettes/clm%5farticle.pdf [2025 Dec 16].Go to Citation Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lenth R. emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. R Package Version 1.11.2-8. 2025. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans [2025 Dec 16].Go to Citation Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Braun V, Clark V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3: 77–101, 2006.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McHugh ML. The chi-square test of independence. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 23: 143–149, 2013.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Armstrong RA. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 34: 502–508, 2014.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Claydon J, Farley-Barnes K, Baserga S. Building skill-sets, confidence, and interest for diverse scientific careers in the biological and biomedical sciences. FASEB Bioadv 3: 998–1010, 2021.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brainard SG, Carlin L. A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. J Engr Educ 87: 369–375, 1998.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Isiksal M. A comparative study on undergraduate students' academic motivation and academic self-concept. Span J Psychol 13: 572–585, 2010.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Beaumont E, Gedye S, Richardson S. 'Am I employable?': understanding students' employability confidence and their perceived barriers to gaining employment. J Hosp Leis Sport Tour Educ 19: 1–9, 2016.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kruger J, Dunning D. Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J Pers Soc Psychol 77: 1121–1134, 1999.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Surdilović D, Adtani P, Ali Fuoa S, Abdelaal H, D'souza J. Evaluation of the Dunning-Kruger effects among dental students at an academic training institution in UAE. Acta Stomatol Croat 56: 299–310, 2022.Go to Citation Crossref Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ommering BW, van Blankenstein FM, Wijnen-Meijer M, van Diepen M, Dekker FW. Fostering the physician–scientist workforce: a prospective cohort study to investigate the effect of undergraduate medical students' motivation for research on actual research involvement. BMJ Open 9: e028034, 2019.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seymour E, Hunter AB, Laursen SL, Deantoni T. Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: first findings from a three-year study. Sci Educ 88: 493–534, 2004.Go to Citation Crossref Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carter FD, Mandell M, Maton KI. The influence of on-campus, academic year undergraduate research on STEM Ph.D. outcomes: evidence from the Meyerhoff Scholarship Program. Educ Eval Policy Anal 31: 441–462, 2009.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leone EA, French DP. A mixed-methods study of a poster presentation activity, students' science identity, and science communication self-efficacy under remote teaching conditions. J Microbiol Biol Educ 23: e00262-21, 2022.Go to Citation Crossref PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leone EA, French DP. A mixed-methods study of a poster presentation activity, students' science identity, and science communication self-efficacy in face-to-face teaching conditions. J Coll Sci Teach 53: 293–301, 2024.Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Alex M. Champagne; Sabrina E. Dunning; Maryam H. Mahmoud; Elissa T. Fisher; Sara N. Shah and Heidi E. Walsh</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref45"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1502784
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Mutual Gains: Nonpresenting Undergraduate Attendance at Regional Scientific Meetings Benefits Students and Scientific Societies
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Alex+M%2E+Champagne%22">Alex M. Champagne</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9408-1769">0000-0001-9408-1769</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sabrina+E%2E+Dunning%22">Sabrina E. Dunning</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3613-748X">0009-0003-3613-748X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Maryam+H%2E+Mahmoud%22">Maryam H. Mahmoud</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Elissa+T%2E+Fisher%22">Elissa T. Fisher</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5465-4283">0009-0001-5465-4283</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sara+N%2E+Shah%22">Sara N. Shah</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5620-8306">0009-0009-5620-8306</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Heidi+E%2E+Walsh%22">Heidi E. Walsh</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3805-6717">0009-0005-3805-6717</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Advances+in+Physiology+Education%22"><i>Advances in Physiology Education</i></searchLink>. 2026 50(2):352-360.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: American Physiological Society. 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3991. Tel: 301-634-7164; Fax: 301-634-7241; e-mail: webmaster@the-aps.org; Web site: https://www.physiology.org/journal/advances
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 9
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attendance%22">Attendance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Regional+Programs%22">Regional Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sense+of+Belonging%22">Sense of Belonging</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physiology%22">Physiology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Conferences+%28Gatherings%29%22">Conferences (Gatherings)</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Indiana%22">Indiana</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1152/advan.00213.2025
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1043-4046<br />1522-1229
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Participation in scientific meetings confers many benefits to undergraduate students and promotes their success and retention in science. However, the cost and time required to attend a scientific meeting is often prohibitive for students, and university funding is often restricted to students presenting research. Small regional scientific meetings offer an opportunity to promote nonpresenting undergraduate attendance because of their reduced registration fees and travel time, but the benefits of attending regional scientific meetings have not been extensively studied. We recruited 45 nonpresenting undergraduate students to attend the annual meeting of the Indiana Physiological Society and provided students with pre- and postmeeting surveys measuring self-perceptions of their professional abilities, sense of belonging in science, confidence in their degree program and career pathway, and reflections on the conference experience. Additionally, because nonpresenting undergraduates made up nearly half of all meeting attendees, we surveyed other meeting attendees to assess the impact of these students on the meeting environment. After attending the meeting, students reported increased confidence talking to other scientists and presenting future research, a greater sense of belonging within the scientific community, more interest in pursuing research after graduation, and increased enthusiasm to attend future meetings. Other meeting attendees felt that the nonpresenting undergraduates had a positive impact on the meeting and enhanced the environment for student presenters. Our results suggest that the attendance of nonpresenting undergraduates at small regional scientific meetings provides mutual benefits to students, universities, and regional scientific societies.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1502784
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1502784
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1152/advan.00213.2025
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 9
        StartPage: 352
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attendance
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Regional Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sense of Belonging
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Physiology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Conferences (Gatherings)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Indiana
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Mutual Gains: Nonpresenting Undergraduate Attendance at Regional Scientific Meetings Benefits Students and Scientific Societies
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Alex M. Champagne
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sabrina E. Dunning
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Maryam H. Mahmoud
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Elissa T. Fisher
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sara N. Shah
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Heidi E. Walsh
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1043-4046
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1522-1229
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 50
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Advances in Physiology Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1