Beyond the self: external influences in the career development process.
Within the field of vocational psychology, several major theories have emerged to explain the process by which individuals make career choices. According to some of these theories, person-environment fit is most critical, whereby an individual's unique interests, values, and skills are ideally matched with a certain job setting (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1997). Other theories view individuals as being in a constant state of development, in which the optimal career is one that best facilitates the implementation of a person's current self-concept (Savickas, 2002; Super, 1990). Theories that emphasize social learning and cognition have also been advanced. According to these theories, an individual's learning experiences about work and perceived ability to perform particular tasks necessary to succeed in a certain career are vital to decision making (Krumboltz, 1996; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). Although these theories differ in substantive ways, all focus primarily on the influence of an individual's internal goals, needs, and pursuit of satisfaction in career decision making. This commonality carries an implicit assumption that individuals making career decisions have the volition to do so and are primarily seeking their own satisfaction. However, recent work throughout the social sciences has demonstrated that these assumptions may be unfounded, because decisions are often made with limited options or in a collectivist context (e.g., Blustein, McWhirter, & Perry, 2005; Jackson, Colquitt, Wesson, & Zapata-Phelan, 2006; Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002).
Recently, the conceptual and theoretical work of Blustein and colleagues (e.g., Blustein, 2006; Blustein et al., 2005) has highlighted the need to better understand the role of volition in the career development process, with a particular focus on the negative influence of an individual's life circumstances on freedom of choice. The concept of volition is not new to the field of psychology, and most commonly refers to an individual's ability to have freedom in life choices (Lazarick, Fishbein, & Loiello, 1988). In a counseling context, research has demonstrated that therapists tend to view clients as having free will to make their own decisions (Chen, 2006; Slife & Fisher, 2000) and often view shifting the responsibility of choice away from clients as harmful (Kernes & McWhirter, 2001). However, although viewing individuals as absolute agents may be convenient, it is evident that life experiences and circumstances can significantly affect the degree to which each decision is volitional.
From a career development perspective, work volition refers to an individual's ability to freely make career choices, including the initial job choice when first entering the work world and any subsequent career decisions. Although volition has primarily been an underlying assumption of career choice theories, rather than a variable that has been investigated empirically, research has found that employed individuals who feel freedom in their job tasks report more positive work outcomes, including job satisfaction, meaning, and involvement (Bond & Bunce, 2003; Henderson, 2000; Muhonen & Torkelson, 2004; von Rosenstiel, Kehr, & Maier, 2000). This same principle could likely be extended to the career choice process, in which a higher degree of satisfaction may be found with individuals who believe they have high levels of control over their career paths. For example, one study found individuals with greater perceived control of their decision making reported lower anxiety in making decisions (Weinstein, Healy, & Ender, 2002).
Despite the common assumption of personal control and a focus on internal satisfaction embedded in most psychological theories of career choice and development, some theorists have placed a greater emphasis on certain aspects of external and nonvolitional components. For example, the theory of work adjustment (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984) postulates that changes in work environments often require changes on the part of the employee to maintain an acceptable degree of fit. However, the theory focuses little on external influences outside of the immediate work environment. Gottfredson's (1981, 2005) theory of circumscription and compromise delineates the influence of external influences related to gender stereotypes and prestige. However, Gottfredson's (1981, 2005) treatment of external influences is noncomprehensive, and empirical support for its tenets has been called into question (e.g., Swanson & Gore, 2000).
Social cognitive career theory (Lent et al., 1994; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2000) perhaps does the best job of postulating a critical role for external factors by suggesting resources and barriers influence career decision making indirectly through their effects on the acquisition of self-efficacy and outcome expectations and directly through their effects on choice goals and choice actions. However, internal influences (e.g., self-efficacy, outcome expectations) have been the dominant focus of this theory's researchers, and of the studies that have been completed focusing on barriers and resources, few have surveyed working adults. As such, empirical efforts to examine the role of external influences are needed to balance the knowledge base.
Other theorists have questioned the utility of volition-based approaches for many workers and proposed holistic models that place a greater emphasis on external factors, such as the changing economy, the changing world of work, and the connection of an individual's multiple life roles to the individual's career choices (Hansen, 1997). Similarly, sociological research (Hotchkiss & Borow, 1996; Johnson & Mortimer, 2002) has explored societal-level external influences (e.g., education structure and quality, local market conditions) on career behavior. However, this work tends to lack a unified theoretical framework useful for practitioners and is limited in scope to variables of primary interest to sociologists. To build on this previous theory and research, the present article addresses several factors across the spectrum of external influences that may limit or enhance a person's career decision-making process and examines how counselors might work effectively with clients for whom external influences are particularly salient.
Defining the major constructs used throughout this article is important. First, when the term career is used as a qualifier (e.g., career decision making, career choice), it refers to any process related to work or working, whereas when the term is used as a noun (e.g., the course of an individual's career), it refers generally to a series of paid or unpaid occupations a person holds throughout his or her life (Sears, 1982). Second, throughout this article, the terms internal and external are used to describe different sources of influence on career decision making, when at a given time an individual could be simultaneously influenced by both types of sources. An internal source is defined as originating within the individual, whereby individual satisfaction represents the primary motivation. In contrast, an external source is defined as originating from someone or something outside the individual, whereby the satisfaction of some external factor or criteria represents the primary motivation. Examples of these sources of influence, which will be discussed at length, include external factors that individuals have freely chosen to guide their choice processes (i.e., motivators such as responding to a set of needs in society) as well as largely uncontrollable factors that develop from life circumstances (i.e., constraints such as prejudice because of racism or sexism).
The line between what serves as a motivator or a constraint is not always clear, and a particular factor may serve as a motivator, a constraint, or both, depending on individual circumstances. Additionally, external factors (both positive and negative) serve to shape the development of internal interests, values, and skills among all individuals. For example, individuals raised in particular environments and subjected to particular socialization experiences will develop unique sets of career beliefs and expectations; research and theory examining these factors for groups of children, adolescents, and college students is robust (Fouad, 2007). The current article focuses on the influences that are salient immediately before a person's decision point, rather than on the more distal developmental processes that shape many of those influences over time.
Finally, an argument can be made that an individual who chooses to place weight on an external factor in making a career decision is doing so using internal mechanisms, thus confounding any attribution of an influence as external. Space constraints preclude delving into the philosophical debates that this point has incited over the centuries (e.g., free will vs. determinism). Rather, for purposes of the present article, we consider an influence to be external if it is perceived by the individual to have originated beyond the self. The assumption is that all clients appeal to some combination of internal and external factors in their decision making and the ratio of importance placed on each category will greatly vary. However, given their status as both critically important and understudied, the focus of this article is on external influences and the types of individuals especially inclined to view them as primary.
We focus specifically on four categories of external influences: family expectations and needs, life circumstances, spiritual and religious factors, and social service motivation. Each of these categories represents factors outside the individual that are hypothesized to constrain or motivate an individual's choice behavior. We also assume that each of these categories of external factors interacts with internal factors to varying degrees when they influence an individual's choice-making process. For example, social service motivation may become a salient influence on career choice when a person experiences a pull from a particular social need, such as reversing the detrimental effects of climate change (an external influence), that converges with a push from the individual's own altruistic values (an internal influence). Thus, the separation of external from internal influences is a matter of convenience to facilitate discussion and is not intended to suggest that the influences operate independently. By no means are these four categories meant to exhaust the expanse of external factors, many of which have been reviewed at length elsewhere (e.g., institutional racism). However, these factors have received comparatively less attention in the literature, yet are arguably among the most salient for populations seeking career counseling.
Family Expectations and Needs
Perhaps the most significant category of external factors affecting most individuals' career development entails the expectations and needs of family (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006; Halpern, 2005; Schultheiss, 2006). Even in an American culture that often values individualism over collectivism (Williams, 2003), an individual's family can affect the development of internal values, interests, and skills and a person's stability in the working world. A review by Whiston and Keller (2004) explored family-of-origin influences as they relate to the career development process across the life span. On the basis of 77 studies, these authors concluded that family-of-origin characteristics significantly relate to people's aspirations, interests, feelings of support, self-efficacy, and choice; these relationships also seem to vary on the basis of gender and race. Although a family can be viewed as external to the individual, the values and expectations a family imposes are likely among the many factors influencing the development of internal interests, values, and skills. Beyond their indirect effects, however, family expectations and needs can play a dramatic role in making here-and-now career choices, and these factors may often supersede internalized processes (Halpern, 2005).
Family expectations and needs can affect individuals at all stages of career decision making, from the adolescent seeking a first job to the seasoned worker looking for new employment (Phillips, Christopher- Sisk, & Gravino, 2001). Research has found that for many adolescents, particularly those from collectivist cultures, parents may already have a career path planned for the child, such as taking over the family business, or parents may inflict shame and guilt if a specific career path is not followed (Miller & Brown, 2005; Young et al., 2001). This influence may be especially poignant for individuals from families whose cultures or local economies require specific work tasks and responsibilities, such as those raised on an American Indian reservation or in an Amish community (Juntunen et al., 2001). For adults in the working world, the influence of having children, having to make career decisions that affect both oneself and a partner, the need to care for older family members, family relocation, and juggling economic pressures are just several of the many factors that can significantly undermine career choice volition (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Collins, 2001; Halpern, 2005). Although the value underlying most theories of career development is that finding a career in line with an individual's values, interests, and skills would be best, expecting single parents supporting their families to make career choices solely on the basis of the dominant internal factors in these theories would be unreasonable. Similarly, expecting adolescents to completely deny the expectations and needs of their families, should these expectations and needs go against their own desires, would be imposing a subjective, individualist view on the career choice process.
The power and influence of one's family on initial career decisions and subsequent job choices is critical to consider for all clients with career concerns, especially those for whom family expectations and needs conflict with internal aspirations. Although the constraining components of a family, which are infrequently discussed in the literature, have been mentioned, a great deal of research exists that also describes the supportive role a family can provide in an individual's career process. This may come in the form of financial and emotional support, networking, and social resources (Pearson & Bieschke, 2001; Schultheiss, 2003; Young et al., 2001).
The phrase life circumstances can convey a variety of meanings; here, it refers to all of the uncontrollable situations, events, and conditions that occur at an individual and societal level that may constrain career decision making. Often these circumstances are positive and produce beneficial career outcomes for an individual, such as serendipitous events that lead to better employment or experiences that illuminate a type of job-related task that is particularly enjoyable. Mitchell, Levin, and Krumboltz (1999) discussed this notion with the idea of career-related planned happenstance, in which they acknowledge the large role of seemingly random events in clients'' career processes and provide strategies for clients to create and capitalize on serendipitous occurrences.
Often, however, life events may not be easily used as learning or growth experiences and can have significant detrimental effects on work volition. For example, situational variables such as poverty, marginalization, and stigmatization have been found to hamper the career aspirations and career achievements of children, adolescents, and adults (Arnold & Doctoroff, 2003; Blustein et al., 2002). As in the case of Maslow's (1943) need hierarchy, if physiological, safety, and belonging needs are not met, expecting an individual to view work as anything more than a means to meet these needs may be unrealistic. On an even broader scale, changes in economic and market conditions that may be caused by historical events and environmental constraints such as natural disasters can ripple through the work world and affect job opportunities and resources (Hotchkiss & Borow, 1996; Johnson & Mortimer, 2002). A clear example of this phenomenon is the Hurricane Katrina disaster, in which the career paths of more than 200,000 people were suddenly and dramatically altered.
On a smaller scale, specific life events can trigger shifts in an individual's career path that are antithetical to internalized objectives. These events may include job loss, injury, or a sudden change in an individual's financial situation. When these types of events occur, the ideal career needs of the individual will likely be subjugated to meet these more pressing and immediate demands caused by such life circumstances. Also, the degree to which a person's career choices are volitional may be heavily influenced by an individual's physical and mental conditions. Taken from 2000 Census data, estimates show that approximately 1 in 5 Americans have some type of disability and 1 in 10 have a severe disability (Waldrop & Stern, 2003). Clearly, a physical or mental disability can limit career opportunities; individuals with disabilities may be forced to choose jobs and careers that best fit with their disabilities rather than with their personalities or goals (Beveridge, Craddock, & Liesener, 2002; Enright, Conyers, & Szymanski, 1996). Although some theories of career decision making emphasize the role of person inputs, such as a disability, in the development of learning experiences (Lent et al., 1994), the role of these factors as they relate directly to choice tends to be understudied in terms of significance and the degree to which they may limit work volition. In sum, the unpredictability of life circumstances may have both positive and negative effects on an individual's career development from childhood to retirement. The circumstances that place a limit on the volition of career choice may be particularly powerful, although the degree to which these external factors are salient can be understood only on an individual client level.
Spiritual and Religious Factors
Whereas family expectations and needs and life circumstances are often viewed as largely or wholly uncontrollable, spiritual and religious factors can, depending on the individual, be viewed as both volitional and determined. Research on the role of spirituality and religion in career development, although limited in scope, has suggested that such factors relate positively to desirable career development outcomes such as career decision self-efficacy, career maturity, and job satisfaction (Duffy, 2006; Duffy & Blustein, 2005; Duffy & Lent, 2008). For many individuals with spiritual or religious commitments, faith plays a critical role in the career decision-making process. This may be especially true for those with intrinsic religious orientations (Allport, 1950; Allport & Ross, 1967), in which faith is approached as an end in itself rather than a means to some other end. Such individuals may express belief in a Divine will or plan for their lives, or specifically for their careers (e.g., Constantine, Miville, Warren, Gainor, & Lewis-Coles, 2006), and may view career decision making as an extension of a general process of trying to discern God's will.
For some, this discernment process may entail having (or wanting) an experience in which a particular career path is shown to them through Divine inspiration or revelation, akin to well-known examples from the Abrahamic religious traditions (e.g., Noah, Abraham, Moses, and others; Colozzi & Colozzi, 2000) and other world religions (e.g., Siddhartha Gautama's experience of the four heavenly messengers at the advent of Buddhism). Perhaps more commonly, individuals with religious beliefs may view Divine directives as mediated through life experiences or circumstances or through their own interests, abilities, and personality characteristics. Regardless, once a particular career path is identified as consistent with God's will or plan, individuals may orient their activities in pursuing that path as a way in which they might honor God or a Higher Power. This approach to the work role is prototypic of what Dik and Duffy (2009) referred to as a calling, defined as an orientation toward a particular life domain, such as work, containing three dimensions: the experience of a transcendent summons originating beyond the self, the pursuit of activity within the work role as a source or extension of an individual's overall sense of purpose and meaningfulness in life, and viewing other-oriented values and goals as primary sources of motivation. This conceptualization of calling does not limit its application to spiritual or religious individuals, although it may be particularly salient for such individuals. Previous research on calling, although limited, has shown that participants who approach work as a calling tend to report higher levels of both general and work-specific well-being outcomes, in comparison with the levels reported by individuals with other approaches to work (e.g., Davidson & Caddell, 1994; Duffy & Sedlacek, 2007, in press; Treadgold, 1999; Wrzesniewski, McCauley, Rozin, & Schwartz, 1997).
Other mechanisms also exist through which an individual's spirituality and religion may influence career decision making, such as when spiritual or religious teachings require particular career decisions (e.g., young men in the Latter-Day Saints church are asked to devote 2 years to full-time missions; Ulrich, Richards, & Bergin, 2000). Additionally, external influences may interact with internal influences to affect career decision making. For example, adolescents expressing interest in pursuing careers in ministry may receive considerable encouragement and mentoring to support this path from members of their religious communities.
Social Service Motivation
The final factor discussed, and arguably the most volitional, concerns the pull to use work for the primary purpose of bettering the external world. In the United States, the pervasive values of economic freedom and the American dream, combined with the secularization of the West, has arguably placed current emphasis on work as a path to individual well-being. Indeed, career development professionals frequently describe the goal of career counseling as helping clients attain optimal levels of job satisfaction and job performance, with the implicit goal of promoting personal fulfillment (Brown & Krane, 2000). Yet, for some individuals, such as those pursuing work as a calling or vocation, the desire to serve others may take precedence over other aspects of personal fulfillment. For example, some areas of job satisfaction (e.g., pay, comfort, social status) may be sacrificed when they are perceived to conflict with the value of making a difference in society (Hardy, 1990). Recently, the resurrection of the concept of social fit, or fit between an individual's work personality and a particular set of social needs, as a potentially important parameter to incorporate into career counseling has been suggested (Dik, Duffy, & Eldridge, in press).
Many individuals who pursue meaningful work with the goal of contributing to the common good choose their career paths for internal or self-motivated reasons. Thus, they may be characterized by the second and third dimensions of calling (i.e., the pursuit of activity within the work role as a source or extension of an individual's overall sense of purpose and meaningfulness in life and viewing other-oriented values and goals as primary sources of motivation); this approach to work is identified as a vocation according to Dik and Duffy's (2009) conceptualization. However, the first dimension of the calling construct (i.e., the experience of a transcendent summons originating beyond the self) is also relevant for some individuals, such as those for whom critical life events serve as a call to address certain social needs through their careers. This critical life event may be something the individual experiences directly (e.g., enduring a custody battle as a child) or may entail indirect exposure to a certain social need (e.g., watching a documentary on the AIDS epidemic). As another example, after highly visible disasters such as the September 11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina, news reports abounded of people who left their jobs to come to the aid of those affected, often for indefinite periods.
Anecdotal evidence has suggested that this social-need-as-calling phenomenon is not limited to those in social service occupations. For example, when doing volunteer work in Grand Forks, North Dakota, after the Red River flood in the late 1990s, the second author encountered a forklift operator providing services for a Salvation Army food distribution center. The operator indicated that he had previously been managing several warehouses in a neighboring state, but when he saw news coverage of the disaster, he immediately left his job and drove to Grand Forks to help, even living out of his car until he found housing. The external pull an individual feels to do work for the betterment of others will likely coincide with the individual's internal career influences whereby, as in this example, the individual might pursue a different job that requires similar skills but produces far more proximal societal benefits. However, only on an individual client level may a counselor understand if, how, and why societal factors serve as important influences.
Implications for Theory and Research
Unfortunately, because the majority of research in vocational psychology has been completed with populations for whom external influences may be the least salient (i.e., late adolescent, single, wealthy, White, precareer college students; Fitzgerald & Betz, 1994), the potential influence of external influences has been widely overlooked and represents a research domain in desperate need of catching up with practice. External influences are believed to be particularly salient constructs for individuals who are currently employed and attempting to balance work, family, and difficult life circumstances. Additionally, the expectation is that for underrepresented groups (e.g., people of color, women, intrinsically religious individuals), the pervasive influence of external constraints will be especially strong.
Whereas qualitative research has begun to highlight these factors (e.g., Blustein et al., 2002; Blustein, Phillips, Jobin-Davis, Finkelberg, & Roarke, 1997), researchers should attempt to quantitatively measure external influences and their effects on important career-related and psychological variables. Perhaps the most important step in this process is the development of instruments to measure work volition, or the degree to which individuals feel control over their work lives. Ideally, such instruments would assess the wide range of variables that constrain an individual's decision making. Scores on these instruments could then be correlated with such variables as job satisfaction and well-being. Individuals who experience greater levels of work volition are hypothesized to also experience more favorable career-related and psychological outcomes. Additionally, instruments to measure constraints should be complemented by those measuring external motivators, especially those related to the perception of a calling, vocation, or motivation to serve others. Whereas initial evidence has suggested the positive effect of a calling and service motivation on career-related variables, no psychometrically sound instruments have been developed to date that would assess these constructs (Dik & Duffy, 2009; Duffy, 2007; Duffy & Sedlacek, 2007).
Theorists are also encouraged to qualify theories in ways that more explicitly highlight the role of external influences, particularly as they apply to currently employed workers. Rather than conceptualizing external influences as simply barriers or resources, viewing them as moderator variables that affect the extent to which internal influences relate to outcomes might be more appropriate. It might be hypothesized that the degree to which variables such as self-efficacy and vocational interests predict career choice is moderated by the degree to which individuals have volition in their choices, suggesting that the lower the level of volition, the less strongly these variables might correlate with criterion variables. This same principle could be extended to external motivators, whereby variables such as person-environment fit might differentially relate to job satisfaction for workers who believe they have a calling. Each of these examples is meant to illustrate the hypothesized importance of external influences in career choice and satisfaction, and theorists are encouraged to view these factors as central components of any model. Clearly, however, the role of external influences in career development processes is ultimately an empirical question.
Implications for Counseling Practice
Despite the relatively limited emphasis on external influences in many career development theories, most career counselors are likely acutely aware of how pervasive external factors can be on the decision-making processes of clients. Perhaps most evident is that all clients seeking career counseling are guided to some degree by external influences. External influences may take the shape of factors that are chosen as guiding mechanisms for career behavior, such as placing the needs of society or religious directives above the individual's own needs. For these types of clients, counselors are encouraged to explicitly assess the relevance of external factors among the range of influences a person perceives as salient when making a career choice. Counselors might also initiate exploration of how these sources of motivation relate to clients' internal interests, values, and skills, and ultimately assist clients in identifying career options that may encompass as many of these factors as possible. Similarly, when working with all clients, counselors are encouraged to ask about the prosocial components of clients' career choices and explore the extent to which these considerations influence their decision making (Dik et al., in press). Although the research in this area is limited, a few studies have shown that when a career is viewed as something that meets more than just an individual's desires, it tends to be more satisfying and fulfilling (e.g., Garcia-Zamor, 2003; Lips-Wiersma, 2002; Milliman, Czaplewski, & Ferguson, 2003; Wrzesniewski et al., 1997).
For perhaps most clients, external influences are constraining, are out of the individual's control, and can significantly alter a given career path. Several counseling approaches have been proposed for working with client populations that disproportionately experience such constraints (Blustein et al., 2005; Caporoso & Kiselica, 2004; Hershenson, 2005; Pope, 2003; Tang, 2003). For many lower- to middle-class working Americans, for example, external factors related to life circumstances and family needs are likely the primary form of motivation, and thus traditional career theories may be insufficient in explaining career choice behavior. For counselors working with these types of clients, the first recommendation is to assist clients in voicing any frustration and anger that may exist concerning the relinquishing of their personal goals to meet external needs. In the United States, a pervasive cultural message is that, with hard work and dedication, people can do whatever they choose; realizing that this may not be the case can be disheartening and painful for clients.
Counselors are also encouraged to examine the extent to which factors beyond clients' control may constrain their desired career paths. For some clients, these limitations may be inconvenient but relatively easily navigated obstacles, such as for a high school teacher looking for a new position because of his wife's job transfer to another part of the country. Although this client may have to leave a good work environment, with the right help, proper effort, and patience, he will likely find another job that resembles his previous employment. Other clients may experience major external limitations that can have both sudden and lifelong effects on their career choices. For example, clients who develop unexpected physical disabilities and work in environments that require complex or demanding physical skills will likely have to completely reevaluate their careers. The spectrum of uncontrollable external factors that may influence a client's career path is wide ranging and unique; thus, counselors are reminded to take the time to understand the idiosyncratic scope of these limitations on an individual client level.
Once the nature and extent of clients' external influences are understood, counselors are encouraged to help clients construct their own unique career decision-making models that take into account both internal and external factors. Here, the counselor would explore with clients how much weight they put on specific internal factors (e.g., skills, interests, values) versus specific external factors (e.g., family needs). One simple and practical method is to have clients list all the factors they believe are affecting their eventual career choice, and then rank these from most important to least important. On the basis of this ranking, the counselor could then proceed to help find specific career choices that match these needs. In sum, counselors are encouraged to respect and honor clients' external influences and not relinquish the importance of finding careers in line with clients' internal desires; balancing these two components may be critical for clients' eventual work satisfaction.
The discussion of external factors outlined in this article is by no means exhaustive; instead, it is intended to highlight the importance that such influences may play in the career choice process of many clients. Although the traditional career models are believed to be excellent in capturing the how and why of decision making for a privileged number of individuals, they do not sufficiently meet the needs of the more typical clients who, either by choice or circumstance, place factors outside themselves as critical and often primary in their career paths. For clients, each of the four factors discussed (family expectations and needs, life circumstances, spiritual and religious factors, and social service motivation) could be considered constraints or motivators, depending on the particulars of the situation or circumstance. Theorists, researchers, and counselors are greatly encouraged to appreciate these factors and better understand their power in the career development process.
Allport, G. W. (1950). The individual and his religion, a psychological interpretation. New York: Macmillan.
Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432-143.
Arnold, D. H., & Doctoroff, G. L. (2003). The early education of socioeconomically disadvantaged children. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 517-545.
Beveridge, S., Craddock, S. H., & Liesener, J. (2002). INCOME: A framework for conceptualizing the career development of persons with disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 45, 195-206.
Blustein, D. L. (2006). The psychology of working: A new perspective for career development, counseling, and public policy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Blustein, D. L., Chaves, A. P., Diemer, M. A., Gallagher, L. A., Marshall, K. G., Sirin, S., & Bhati, K. S. (2002). Voices of the forgotten half: The role of social class in the school-to-work transition. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 311-323.
Blustein, D. L., McWhirter, E. H., & Perry, J. C. (2005). An emancipatory communitarian approach to vocational development theory, research, and practice. Counseling Psychologist, 33, 141-179.
Blustein, D. L., Phillips, S. D., Jobin-Davis, K., Finkelberg, S. L., & Roarke, A. E. (1997). A theory-building investigation of the school-to-work transition. Counseling Psychologist, 25, 364-402,
Bond, F. W., & Bunce, D. (2003). The role of acceptance and job control in mental health, job satisfaction, and work performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1057-1067.
Brown, S. D., & Krane, N. E. R. (2000). Four (or five) sessions and a cloud of dust: Old assumptions and new observations about career counseling. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 740-766). New York: Wiley.
Caporoso, R. A., & Kiselica, M. S. (2004). Career counseling with clients who have a severe mental illness. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 235-245.
Chen, C. P. (2006). Strengthening career human agency. Journal of Counseling & Development, 84, 131-138.
Colozzi, E. A., & Colozzi, L. C. (2000). College students' callings and careers: An integrated values-oriented perspective. In D. A. Luzzo (Ed.), Career counseling of college students: An empirical guide to strategies that work (pp. 63-91). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Constantine, M. G., Miville, M. L., Warren, A. K., Gainor, K. A., & Lewis-Coles, M. E. L. (2006). Religion, spirituality, and career development in African American college students: A qualitative inquiry. The Career Development Quarterly, 54, 227-241.
Davidson, J. C., & Caddell, D. P. (1994). Religion and the meaning of work. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33, 135-147.
Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment: An individual-differences model and its applications. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2009). Calling and vocation at work: Definitions and prospects for research and practice. Counseling Psychologist, 37, 424-450.
Dik, B. J., Duffy, R. D., & Eldridge, B. (in press). Calling and vocation in career counseling: Recommendations for promoting meaningful work. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice.
Duffy, R. D. (2006). Spirituality, religion, and career development: Current status and future directions. The Career Development Quarterly, 55, 52-63.
Duffy, R. D. (2007, May). A focus on others: Motivation to serve and career development. Poster session presented at the conference of the Society for Vocational Psychology, Akron, OH.
Duffy, R. D., & Blustein, D. L. (2005). The relationship between spirituality, religiousness, and career adaptability. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 429-440.
Duffy, R. D., & Lent, R. W. (2008). Relation of religious support to career decision self-efficacy in college students. Journal of Career Assessment, 16, 360-369.
Duffy, R. D., & Sedlacek, W. E. (2007). The presence of and search for a calling: Connections to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 590-601.
Duffy, R. D., & Sedlacek, W. E. (in press). The salience of a career calling among college students: Exploring group differences and links to religiousness, life meaning, and life satisfaction. The Career Development Quarterly.
Enright, M. S., Conyers, L. M., & Szymanski, E. M. (1996). Career and career-related educational concerns of college students with disabilities. Journal of Counseling & Development, 75, 103-114.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Betz, N. E. (1994). Career development in cultural context: The role of gender, race, class, and sexual orientation. In M. L. Savickas & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Convergence in career development theories: Implications for science and practice (pp. 103-117). Palo Alto, CA: CPP Books.
Fouad, N. A. (2007). Work and vocational psychology: Theory, research, and applications. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 543-564.
Garcia-Zamor, J.-C. (2003). Workplace spirituality and organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 63, 355-363.
Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545-579.
Gottfredson, L. S. (2005). Applying Gottfredson's theory of circumscription and compromise in career guidance and counseling. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 71-100). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, $., & Collins, K. M. (2001). Career involvement and family involvement as moderators of relationships between work-family conflict and withdrawal from a profession. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 91-100.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 72-92.
Halpern, D. F. (2005). Psychology at the intersection of work and family: Recommendations for employers, working families, and policymakers. American Psychologist, 60, 397-409.
Hansen, L. S. (1997). Integrative life planning: Critical tasks for career development and changing life patterns. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hardy, L. (1990). The fabric of this world: Inquiries into calling, career choice, and the design of human work. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Henderson, S. J. (2000). "Follow your bliss": A process for career happiness. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78, 305-315.
Hershenson, D. B. (2005). INCOME: A culturally inclusive and disability-sensitive framework for organizing career development concepts and interventions. The Career Development Quarterly, 54, 150-161.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Hotchkiss, L., & Borow, H. (1996). Sociological perspectives on work and career development. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed., pp. 281-334). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jackson, C. L., Colquitt, J. A., Wesson, M. J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2006). Psychological collectivism: A measurement validation and linkage to group member performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 884-899.
Johnson, M. K., & Mortimer, J. T. (2002). Career choice and development from a sociological perspective. In D. Brown & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 37-81). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Juntunen, C. L., Barraclough, D. J., Broneck, C. L., Seibel, G. A., Winrow, S. A., & Morin, P. M. (2001). American Indian perspectives on the career journey. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 274-285.
Kernes, J. L., & McWhirter, J. J. (2001). Counselors' attribution of responsibility, etiology, and counseling strategy. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79, 304-313.
Krumboltz, J. D. (1996). A learning theory of career counseling. In M. L. Savickas & W. B. Walsh (Eds.), Handbook of career counseling theory and practice (pp. 55-80). Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black.
Lazarick, D. L., Fishbein, S. S., & Loiello, M. A. (1988). Practical investigations of volition. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 15-26.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79-122.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 36-49.
Lips-Wiersma, M. (2002). The influence of spiritual "meaning making" on career behavior. Journal of Management Development, 21, 497-520.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.
Miller, M. J., & Brown, S. D. (2005). Counseling for career choice: Implications for improving interventions and working with diverse populations. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 441-465). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Milliman, J., Czaplewski, A. J., & Ferguson, J. (2003). Workplace spirituality and employee work attitudes: An exploratory empirical assessment. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 16, 426-447.
Mitchell, K. E., Levin, A. S., & Krumboltz, J. D. (1999). Planned happenstance: Constructing unexpected career opportunities. Journal of Counseling & Development, 77, 115-124.
Muhonen, T., & Torkelson, E. (2004). Work locus of control and its relationship to health and job satisfaction from a gender perspective. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 20, 21-28.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.
Pearson, S. M., & Bieschke, K. J. (2001). Succeeding against the odds: An examination of familial influences on the career development of professional African American women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 301-309.
Phillips, S. D., Christopher-Sisk, E. K., & Gravino, K. L. (2001). Making career decisions in a relational context. Counseling Psychologist, 29, 193-213.
Pope, M. (2003). Career counseling in the twenty-first century: Beyond cultural encapsulation. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 54-60.
Savickas, M. L. (2002). Career construction: A developmental theory of vocational behavior. In D. Brown & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 149-205). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schultheiss, D. E. P. (2003). A relational approach to career counseling: Theoretical integration and practical application. Journal of Counseling & Development, 81, 301-310.
Schultheiss, D. E. P. (2006). The interface of work and family life. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37, 334-341.
Sears, S. (1982). A definition of career guidance terms: A National Vocational Guidance Association perspective. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 31, 137-143.
Slife, B. D., & Fisher, A. M. (2000). Modern and postmodern approaches to the free will/determinism dilemma in psychotherapy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 40, 80-107.
Super, D. E. (1990). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development: Applying contemporary theories to practice (2nd ed., pp. 197-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Swanson, J. L., & Gore, P. A., Jr. (2000). Advances in vocational psychology theory and research. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 233-269). New York: Wiley.
Tang, M. (2003). Career counseling in the future: Constructing, collaborating, advocating. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 61-69.
Treadgold, R. (1999). Transcendent vocations: Their relationship to stress, depression, and clarity of self-concept. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 39, 81-105.
Ulrich, W. L., Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (2000). Psychotherapy with Latter-Day Saints. In P. S. Richards & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and religious diversity (pp. 185-209). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
von Rosenstiel, L., Kehr, H. M., & Maier, G. W. (2000). Motivation and volition in pursuing personal work goals. In J. Heckhausen (Ed.), Motivational psychology of human development: Developing motivation and motivating development (pp. 287-305). New York: Elsevier Science.
Waldrop, J., & Stern, S. M. (2003). Disability status: 2000 (Census 2000 Brief No. C2KBR-17). Retrieved May 19, 2009, from U.S. Census Bureau Web site: http://www.census. gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-17.pdf
Weinstein, F. M., Healy, C. C., & Ender, P. B. (2002). Career choice anxiety, coping, and perceived control. The Career Development Quarterly, 50, 339-349.
Whiston, S. C., & Keller, B. K. (2004). The influences of the family of origin on career development: A review and analysis. Counseling Psychologist, 32, 493-568.
Williams, B. (2003). The worldview dimensions of individualism and collectivism: Implications for counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, 81, 370-374.
Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C, Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People's relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21-33.
Young, R. A., Valach, L., Ball, J., Paseluikho, M. A., Wong, Y. S., DeVries, R. J., et al. (2001). Career development in adolescence as a family project. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 190-202.
Ryan D. Duffy, Counseling Center, University of Maryland; Bryan J. Dik, Department of Psychology, Colorado State University. Ryan D. Duffy is now at Department of Psychology, University of Florida. The authors thank Ellen Duffy, Suzanne Friedman, and Briana Keller for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ryan D. Duffy, Department of Psychology, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Florida, PO Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611 (e-mail: email@example.com).