Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
51 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Describe Holland, 1997 P-E fit theory |
People search for environments that let them use skills/abilities, express/fulfil values, entail appropriate goals/challenges |
|
|
What are cognitive and non-cognitive predictors of career related outcomes |
Armstrong & Rounds, 2008 Cog: measures of general mental ability Non-cog: interests, personality, self-efficacy |
|
|
2 major P-E fit vocational theories |
Holland Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA; Dawis & Lofquist, 1984) |
|
|
Did Tracey & Rounds, 1996 find support for RIASEC internationally? |
No. RIASEC and 3 factor model did not have good model fit indicies in 15 of 18 countries |
|
|
Ryan, Tracey & Rounds, 1996 found |
Different RIASEC structure when both ethnicity and SES were considered togehter, not for ethnicity considered alone |
|
|
Day et al., 1998 findings |
Consistent RIASEC support for large representative US sample across minority groups |
|
|
Who originally had the idea for person environment fit |
Parsons, 1909 |
|
|
Diagnostic indicators of P-E fit in Holland, 1997 model |
Congruence - degree of fit between a person's personality and the type of work they are doing 2. Consistency - coherence of persons code type 3. Differentiation - distinctness I'd personality profile, differences between likes and dislikes 4. Identity - degree to which individual has a clear picture of goals, interests, talents |
|
|
Empirical support for Holland's theory (7) |
1. Interests accounted for a significant amount of variance in occupational choices (Betz et al., 2006; Rottinghaus et al., 2006) 2. Individuals tens to choose congruent environments (Betz, 2008) 3. The structure of RIASEC appears to explain a limited set of types (Holland, 1962) 4. A circular structure is supported (Tracey & Rounds, 1993) 5. Overall a strong match between personality and jobs (Swanson & Gore, 2000) 6. Studies with predominantly white college student sample suggests a circumplex model (equal distances between types) 7. May explain data better than other models (e.g. SCCT; Armstrong & Vogel, 2009) |
|
|
Pros of Holland's model |
1. Both individuals and the environment can be easily, gives us a common language to use 2. The majority of assessments, tools, even interventions are based on this theory |
|
|
Which aspects of Holland's, 1997 model have not been examined as much |
Consistency and differentiation |
|
|
Cons of Holland's model |
1. Neglects contextual variables 2. Doesn't take into account career beliefs, decision making styles, goals 3. Doesn't take into account barriers to vocational choice (Fitzgerald, Fassinger & Betz, 1995) 4. Many have seriously questi9ned the this theories applicability for non educated white men |
|
|
Some gender differences in Holland's model (4 examples of many) |
1. Women have higher interests in social and artistic areas, lower in realistic and investigative, less women are seen in those fields 2. Women are typically concentrated in lower level jobs despite interests 3. It has been suggested that women's career development is directed more by family and gender roles and barriers 4. Women prefer working with people, men with things based on Prediger' s people/things dimension (large effect size) |
|
|
3 citations for SCCT |
Bandura, 1986 Betz & Hackett, 1981 Lent et al., 1994 |
|
|
3 models of Social cognitive career theory (Lent, Brown & Hackett, 1994) |
Interest model Choice model Performance model |
|
|
Which SCCT model has received the most interest and support |
The interest model |
|
|
4 types of self efficacy |
Content or task specific Coping self efficacy Process self efficacy (ie in career decision making) Self regulatory self efficacy |
|
|
Empirical evidence for SCCT (some of many) |
1. Interests related to SE and OE (Rottinghaus et al., 2003) 2. SE mediates interest-ability relationship 3. SE and OE r = .45-.55 (Nauta & Epperson, 2003) 4. SE and OE explain large amounts of variance in RIASEC interests, predictor of occupational consideration (Lent et al., 2003) 5. SE and OE were more powerful predictors of occupational consideration than P-E fit (Gore & Leuwerke, 2000) 6. Limitation - almost all research has been done on SE, not been any testing on alternative models (Armstrong & Vogel, 2009) |
|
|
Pros of SCCT |
1. Able to understand how interests are developed, maintained, and change 2. Learning experiences are unique to individual and can help explain differential career segregation for women and diverse individuals |
|
|
What is Gottfredson, 1996 theory of Circumscriptiom and Compromise about? |
Cultural factors circumscribe potential jobs and people make compromises based on those limiting factors |
|
|
Circumscription is? |
Narrowing the zone of acceptable alternatives |
|
|
Compromise is? |
The process of relinquishing most preferred alternatives to more accessible ones |
|
|
Which has more empirical support, Circumscriptiom or compromise |
Circumscriptiom has more support than compromise Gottfredson, 1996, 1999, 2002 |
|
|
Pros of Gottfredson, 1996, 1999, 2003 theory |
1. Allows for external reasons to influence career choice 2. For women and minorities the theory is apt to explain differences seen in types of levels of career attainment 3. Culture pushes adherence to sex-type which can result in poor P-E fit 4. For diverse individuals the theory can also explain different grouping of occupations for certain groups based off of learning experiences which are limited and distinct |
|
|
Any evidence that self efficacy is not predictive of career interests |
This is highly debated Armstrong & Vogel, 2009, 2010 Lent, 2005 Lent, Sheu & Brown, 2010 Lubinski, 2010 Patrick et al., 2011 |
|
|
Why is Super's career construction theory unique |
Super, 1992 Considers career development across lifespan |
|
|
Career Construction Theory considers what 3 main constructs |
Super, 1992 1. Differential - vocational personality 2. Developmental - life themes 3. Dynamic - career adaptability |
|
|
Who invented the Theory of Work Adjustment |
Dawis & Lofquist, 1984 |
|
|
TWA explains what 3 things? |
Dawis & Lofquist, 1984 Satisfaction Performance Tenure |
|
|
How much empirical work is there on TWA |
Very little (Dawis, 2005) |
|
|
Unlike other models TWA also accounts for satisfactoriness which means what |
Dawis & Lofquist, 1984 How well am employee meets the demands of the jobs |
|
|
What are the facets of satisfactoriness |
Performance Conformance Dependability Personal adjustment General satisfactoriness |
|
|
What are the facets of satisfaction, how happy a worker is |
1. Achievement - conditions that encourage accomplishment and progress 2. Comfort - conditions that encourage lack of stress 3. Status - conditions that provide recognition and prestige 4. Altruism - conditions that foster harmony and service to others 5. Safety - conditions that establish predictably and stability 6. Autonomy - conditions that increase personal control |
|
|
What does the RIASEC model actually predict |
1. College major (Gasser, Larson & Borgen, 2007) 2. Occupation choice (Ackerman & Beier, 2003) |
|
|
What elements of RIASEC correlate with the big 5 |
Larson, Rottinghaus & Borden, 2002 Artistic-openness Enterprising -Extraversion Social-Extraversion Investigative-openness Social-agreeableness |
|
|
What are 4 sources of self efficacy |
Bandura, 1977, 1997 Mastery Modeling Social persuasion Physiological arousal (anxiety) |
|
|
Citation for there is a strong correlation between interests and self efficacy in all RIASEC areas |
Rottinghaus, Larson & Borgen |
|
|
Citation for 40-50% of career interests are genetic |
Tellegan, 2000 |
|
|
Citation for gender influences career aspirations |
Rojewski, 2005 |
|
|
Citation for women make 80% of what men make |
Betz, 2006 |
|
|
Citation for minority women have even greater career barriers than white women |
Fessinger, 2005 |
|
|
Citation for personality dispositions towards/against leadership do not differ by gender |
Betz, Borgen & Harmon, 2005 Donnay et al., 2005 |
|
|
Citation for perceptions of career barriers are greater foe non-whites |
Fouad & Byars-Winstin, 2005 |
|
|
Citation for career choice does not differ between racial/ethnic groups |
Fouad & Byars-Winstin, 2005 |
|
|
Citation for MPQ |
Tellegen & Waller, 1992 |
|
|
What are 3 aspects of personality in Tellegen's model |
Positive emotional temperament Negative emotional temperament Constraint |
|
|
What is not accounted for by most vocational theories |
Swanson & Gore, 2000 Discrimination and economic conditions |
|
|
Who found that Holland model fit AA and Hispanic more poorly than White/Asian |
Armstrong et al., 2003 |
|
|
Who found that gender trumps race in influencing RIASEC scores |
Betz & Gwilliam, 2002 |
|
|
What are the critical intervention |
Brown & Kane, 2000 Written exercises Individually focused interventions and feedback World of work information Modeling Attending to building support |
|
|
4 factors impact vocational indecision |
Gati, 1998; Brown & Rector, 2008 Indecisiveness Lack of information Interpersonal conflicts/barriers Lack of readiness |
