Printer Friendly

Evaluating DISCOVER's effectiveness in enhancing college students' social cognitive career development.

College students (20 women, 14 men) seeking career counseling services at a university career center participated in this exploratory investigation. A 2 (DISCOVER treatment) X 2 (counseling treatment) research design was used to evaluate the individual and combined effects of DISCOVER (ACT, 1998) and counseling on participants' career decision-making self-efficacy and career decision-making attributional style. Findings revealed a significant effect of the use of DISCOVER on participants' career decision-making self-efficacy and their sense of control over the career decision-making process. Results are discussed regarding the implications for career counseling and ideas for further research in this domain.

**********

Social cognitive components of career decision making, such as career decision-making self-efficacy (CDMSE) and career decision-making attributional style, have received considerable attention in recent years by career counselors and vocational psychologists who continue to provide support for the relevance of these concepts to career counseling (Betz & Luzzo, 1996; Lent & Hackett, 1987; Luzzo & Tompkins-Bjorkman, 1999). However, only a few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of career counseling interventions for helping clients become more self-efficacious regarding their career decision making or more optimistic in their attributional explanations for career-related events (e.g., Foltz & Luzzo, 1998; Foss & Slaney, 1986; Fukuyama, Probert, Neimeyer, Nevill, & Metzler, 1988; Luzzo & Day, 1999; Luzzo, Funk, & Strang, 1996; Luzzo & Taylor, 1994). Furthermore, only one of these prior investigations has evaluated the effectiveness of computer-based career planning systems (CBCPSs), in particular, as a method for enhancing clients' CDMSE (Fukuyama et al., 1988), and no studies to date have evaluated the effectiveness of CBCPSs in enhancing clients' career decision-making attributional style. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of DISCOVER (ACT, 1998), one of the most popular CBCPSs available, on the CDMSE and career decision-making attributional style of college student career counseling clients.

Self-Efficacy and Career Decision Making

Bandura (1977) defined self-efficacy as a person's beliefs regarding her or his ability to successfully perform a particular task. By understanding a person's self-efficacy expectations, a career counselor or vocational psychologist can more effectively understand and predict an individual's career-related behavior. Interventions that are designed to increase self-efficacy expectations are useful because they can increase a client's likelihood of adopting an approach rather than an avoidant disposition to-ward a given behavior, such as choosing a career or college major. Other consequences of increased self-efficacy expectations may include greater persistence despite obstacles and performance enhancement resulting from a decrease in debilitating anxiety (Bandura, 1977).

CDMSE refers to a person's belief that she or he can successfully perform the tasks involved in choosing a career. The tasks may include researching careers in a career library or on the World Wide Web, formulating short- and long-term occupational goals, and arranging personal values into a hierarchy. As expected, CDMSE is positively related to career decidedness. Persons with high levels of CDMSE are more likely to be decided about and committed to a particular career direction (Gillespie & Hillman, 1993; Mathieu, Sowa, & Niles, 1993; Taylor & Betz, 1983).

Bandura (1977) outlined four sources of information from which individuals' self-efficacy expectations can be learned and ways that these expectations can be modified. They are (a) performance accomplishments, wherein the person actually experiences the successful performance of a given behavior; (b) vicarious learning, the process of watching another person successfully perform that behavior; (c) verbal persuasion, including support from others encouraging the person's successful performance; and (d) changes in emotional states (e.g., decreases in anxiety) associated with performing a behavior.

Luzzo and Taylor (1994) found that undergraduates who received verbal persuasion and encouragement from a career counselor demonstrated significant increases in CDMSE. A more recent study by Foltz and Luzzo (1998) revealed that a career guidance workshop that incorporated anxiety reduction, verbal persuasion, exposure to role models, and discussion of personal career-related accomplishments was effective in increasing the CDMSE of nontraditional college students. CBCPSs, such as DISCOVER, also may be effective in increasing the CDMSE of users; however, only one study has examined the utility of a CBCPS in modifying CDMSE. In their investigation, Fukuyama et al. (1988) found that DISCOVER was effective in decreasing career undecidedness and increasing the CDMSE of college students.

Career Decision-Making Attributional Style

Closely related to CDMSE is the construct of career decision-making attributional style (Luzzo & Jenkins-Smith, 1998; Luzzo & Tompkins-Bjorkman, 1999). When people experience outcomes they consider important or novel, they seek explanations or attempt to make attributions regarding the causes of the outcomes. Weiner (1979, 1985, 1986) hypothesized that the attributions that a person forms directly influence her or his future motivation and performance (Perry, Hechter, Menec, & Weinberg, 1993).

Attributions can be classified on three dimensions: locus of causality, stability, and controllability (Graham, 1991; Weiner, 1986). Locus of causality (or causality) refers to the attribution of a cause as internal or external, characteristics or qualities attributable to the person (i.e., internal) or to the environmental context (i.e., external). Stability defines causes as either unchangeable (i.e., stable) or changeable (i.e., unstable). It is beneficial for most persons to conceptualize career-related outcomes (particularly outcomes that are not completely successful) as unstable and not necessarily constant or fixed (Luzzo & Tompkins-Bjorkman, 1999). Aptitude for a given task or content area is relatively stable, but effort is unstable and can vary in different situations. Controllability is the person's sense of responsibility or the ability to exert an influence upon a cause. For instance, effort, unlike luck or labor market forces, is defined as controllable because persons are believed to have control over the expenditure of effort (Graham, 1991). The most beneficial attributions, especially in terms of past failures in a given domain, are usually those that are internally caused, controllable, and changeable (i.e., unstable).

Attributional styles are frequently classified as either optimistic or pessimistic (Weiner, 1986). An optimistic attributional disposition is characterized by the attribution of behavioral outcomes to controllable, internal forces that are changeable. It is more often associated with positive expectations for the future than a pessimistic disposition, which attributes outcomes to uncontrollable, unchanging, external causes (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978; Spector, 1988; Weiner, 1985).

The application of Weiner's (1986) attribution theory to the career decision-making domain has led to the following propositions: Someone who believes that career decision making is susceptible to internal, dynamic, and controllable forces is likely to believe that career-related events and decisions are the result of internal factors within her or his control that can be changed with varying degrees of effort (i.e., an optimistic attributional style). A person who believes that the career decision-making process is the result of external, fixed, and uncontrollable forces will tend to believe that career-related events and decisions are the result of external factors that are out of her or his control and cannot be altered by increased effort (i.e., a pessimistic attributional style). Persons who possess a pessimistic attributional style for career decision making, compared with those who possess an optimistic attributional style, are likely to believe that they will "end up" in a particular career and that their efforts and volition are far less instrumental in career decision making (Luzzo & Jenkins-Smith, 1998; Luzzo & Tompkins-Bjorkman, 1999).

Results of several studies (e.g., Luzzo, 1993a; Taylor, 1982) have revealed that persons who believe that they possess control over the decision-making process are more likely to possess mature attitudes toward career development than persons who perceive little control over the process. Similarly, an optimistic attributional style has been found to be positively related to work satisfaction, motivation, job performance, job tenure, career exploratory behavior, career decisiveness, and career commitment (Colarelli & Bishop, 1990; Fuqua, Blum, & Hartman, 1988; Spector, 1982, 1988; Trice, Haire, & Elliot, 1989).

Research (e.g., Perry et al., 1993) has shown that attributional retraining techniques are an effective tool for encouraging a client to alter her or his attributional style from one that is pessimistic (an external locus and low sense of control) to one that is optimistic (an internal locus and high sense of personal control). Attributional retraining studies to date within the career development domain have relied on testimonials, wherein clients or research participants view videotapes that show people, often age cohorts, verbally persuading viewers to change their career decision-making attributional orientation from pessimistic to optimistic (Luzzo et al., 1996; Luzzo & Taylor, 1994). No research to date has evaluated the effectiveness of DISCOVER, or any other CBCPS, as a method of attributional retraining.

Evaluating DISCOVER's Effects on Social Cognitive Career Variables

CBCPSs, such as ACT's (1998) DISCOVER program or the Kuder Career Planning System (National Career Assessment Services, Inc. [NCASI], 2004) hold considerable promise for increasing clients' CDMSE and encouraging their adoption of an optimistic attributional style toward career decision making. In the case of DISCOVER, in particular, clients receive information about their personal interests, abilities, and values as well as about the role that work plays in one's life. According to Crites (1978), self-appraisal is one of the most integral components of career decision making. DISCOVER provides a mechanism for this self-appraisal, which, in turn, can assist the client in meeting appropriate career-related tasks, such as making a vocational choice.

Second, some of DISCOVER's more practical components, such as the completion of interest and values inventories, seem likely to increase a client's confidence in her or his ability to perform other tasks associated with comprehensive career exploration and planning. These practical components, including a portion of DISCOVER that deals with managing life transitions, provide useful information that is likely to decrease career counseling clients' anxiety related to making career decisions.

Furthermore, by successfully completing several of the self-assessment activities included in many of the most popular CBCPSs (e.g., DISCOVER [ACT, 1998] and Kuder Career Planning System [NCASI, 2004]), a client may benefit from the sense of performance accomplishment (a source of self-efficacy modification) associated with engagement in career exploration activities. She or he may then feel empowered to pursue other exploratory and decision-making activities. This type of "successful" career decision-making activity performance may help the client develop an attributional disposition that explains previous career-related outcomes as events that are internally caused, controllable, and changeable. Based on these arguments, we expected a significant increase in the CDMSE and optimistic attributional style of participants who received the DISCOVER treatment in this investigation.

Method

Participants

Participants included 20 women and 14 men enrolled in undergraduate studies at a large university in the South. Participants' ages ranged from 18 to 21 years (M = 19.18, SD = .80). The ethnic background of participants included Caucasian (n = 27), African American (n = 4), Latino (n = 1), Asian American (n = 1), and Native American (n = 1). Participants included 1st-year students (35%), sophomores (47%), and juniors (18%). All participants were students who sought career counseling services from the university's career development center.

Instruments

Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (CDMSES-SF). Participants completed the CDMSES-SF (Betz, Klein, & Taylor, 1996) to evaluate their CDMSE (i.e., confidence in their ability to successfully make career decisions). The CDMSES-SF includes 25 items (e.g., "How much confidence do you have that you could determine what your ideal job would be?") for which respondents indicate their level of confidence on a scale from 0 to 9 (0 = no confidence, 9 = complete confidence). Responses to each item are summed for a composite score, with higher scores reflecting higher levels of CDMSE.

The CDMSES-SF has exhibited psychometric properties comparable to or better than the longer, 50-item form. Betz et al. (1996) reported a total scale coefficient alpha of .94 for the CDMSES-SF, and Luzzo (1993b) reported a 6-week, test-retest reliability of .83 for the CDMSES-SF. Validity estimates of the CDMSES-SF when assessed concurrently with the Career Decision Scale (Osipow, Carney, Winer, Yanico, & Koschier, 1976) and My Vocational Situation (Holland, Daiger, & Power, 1980) are comparable to or better than those of the long form (Betz et al., 1996).

Assessment of Attributions for Career Decision Making (AACDM). The AACDM (Luzzo & Jenkins-Smith, 1998) was used to measure each participant's attributional style toward making career decisions. The AACDM is a nine-item questionnaire with a factor structure reflective of Weiner's (1979, 1985, 1986) three-dimensional taxonomy for classifying attributions: causality, stability, and controllability. There are three items for each dimension, and each item is answered on a score continuum of 1 to 5. Scores on each dimension can range from 3 to 15. Total AACDM scores (i.e., AACDM composite) can range from 9 to 45.

Higher scores on the Controllability scale indicate a greater sense of control over the career decision-making process. Higher scores on the Causality scale indicate a greater sense that internal forces are responsible for career decision-making outcomes. Higher scores on the Stability scale indicate a greater level of belief that career decisions change over time. As described earlier, more adaptive or beneficial attributions for career decision making are those that are internal, controllable, and unstable (i.e., attributions that hold that career decision making is the result of internal forces that are under a person's control and that can change over time).

Several studies have evaluated the psychometric qualities of the AACDM to support its use in research. Luzzo and Jenkins-Smith (1998) reported the following internal consistency reliability estimates: Controllability scale, .84; Causality scale, .89; Stability scale, .64; and Composite scale, .78. They also reported 6-week, test-retest reliability coefficients of Controllability, .84; Causality, .89; Stability, .64; and Composite, .78. Evidence of the AACDM's criterion-related, predictive, and incremental validity has also been demonstrated across three separate college student populations (Luzzo & Jenkins-Smith, 1998).

Procedure

All participants were college students who sought career counseling services at the university's career center. After a brief, initial meeting with each student, a career counsel or made a clinical judgment regarding whether the student was sufficiently undecided about his or her career to benefit from career counseling activities designed to clarify one's vocational self-concept. Counselors asked students who qualified for participation in the study if they would like to participate in a project designed to evaluate various career counseling services offered at the university. Of the 38 students who were asked to participate, 35 agreed. However, one participant's pre- and posttreatment data were incomplete and, therefore, not included in the statistical analyses.

A 2 (DISCOVER treatment) X 2 (counseling treatment) design was used to evaluate the individual and combined effects of DISCOVER and counseling on participants' CDMSE and career decision-making attributional style. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: (a) control group (n = 8; students who received no intervention between pre- and posttest), (b) DISCOVER-only group (n = 9; students who participated in DISCOVER use without discussing results with a counselor), (c) counseling-only group (n = 9; students who participated in a single counseling session to discuss the role of interests, abilities, and values in career decision making), and (d) combined treatment group (n = 8; students who participated in DISCOVER use and subsequently met with a counselor to discuss the role of interests, abilities, and values in career decision making).

In actuality, all participants in the study had the opportunity to use DISCOVER and to meet with a counselor to discuss results. The timing of the posttest assessments is what varied across groups. Depending on the group to which a student was randomly assigned, posttest assessments of CDMSE and career decision-making attributional style were either completed before any intervention, after DISCOVER use only, after counseling only, or after DISCOVER use and a follow-up counseling session. Between 10 and 14 days elapsed between the pre- and posttest assessments for any participant. Although it is possible that the participants may have participated in other vocational interventions between the pretest and posttest of CDMSE and career decision-making attributional style, the random assignment of participants to conditions helped to ensure that such participation was likely to have been equally distributed across the various treatment and control groups.

Interventions

DISCOVER-only treatment. All participants assigned to the DISCOVER-only treatment condition followed the same protocol. After receiving initial instructions regarding the use of DISCOVER, participants completed all three assessments that appear in Hall 1 of the Windows[R] version of DISCOVER (ACT, 1998). The assessments included in Hall 1 consist of the Unisex Edition of the ACT Interest Inventory (UNIACT; Swaney, 1995), the Inventory of Work-Related Abilities (ACT, 1999), and the Inventory of Work-Related Values (Prediger & Staples, 1996). After the completion of these three inventories, participants printed a summary of their results. They were then allowed up to 15 minutes to learn more about any of the occupations they were interested in by accessing occupational information in the DISCOVER program. Participants who received the DISCOVER treatment used the program for approximately 1 hour.

Counseling-only treatment. As with the DISCOVER intervention, all participants who received the counseling-only treatment followed the same protocol. The purpose of the single, 45- to 50-minute counseling session was to discuss the role of work-related interests, abilities, and values in career exploration and planning. Students who were randomly assigned to the counseling-only treatment group met with a career counselor prior to using DISCOVER, and they completed the posttest after meeting with the counselor and before using DISCOVER. In such instances, counselors engaged participants in a clinical evaluation of interests, abilities, and values and stressed the importance of evaluating one's self-concept when making career decisions.

Combined treatment group. Students who were randomly assigned to the combined treatment group met with a counselor after their use of DISCOVER. When working with these participants, counselors also stressed the importance of evaluating one's self-concept when making career decisions and reviewed DISCOVER assessment results with clients individually. Students in the combined treatment group completed the posttest after using DISCOVER and meeting with a counselor.

The four career counselors were not aware of the purpose of the investigation (i.e., they were not told about the dependent variables and their relationship with the DISCOVER and counseling interventions). They were, however, aware that the counseling session with participants was designed to focus on the role of interests, abilities, and values in career exploration and planning. Each of the career counselors who participated in the investigation held a master's or doctoral degree in counseling, counselor education, or counseling psychology. Furthermore, each counselor had at least 4 years of experience providing career counseling services on a college or university campus. Each counselor worked with between 7 and 9 students during the course of the investigation.

Data Analysis

A 2 (DISCOVER treatment) X 2 (counseling treatment) multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was performed, with pretreatment scores on the CDMSES-SF and the AACDM (total score and individual scale scores) as covariates and posttreatment scores on the CDMSES-SF and the AACDM as dependent variables. The use of pretreatment scores on the CDMSES-SF and the AACDM as covariates in the multivariate analysis helps to control for differences in pretreatment mean scores between the treatment and nontreatment groups.

Results

Results of the MANCOVA revealed the absence of an interaction between treatment conditions, Pillai's F(2, 27) = 0.390, p = .681. Results also revealed the absence of a main effect of the counseling treatment, Pillai's F(2, 27) = 1.767, p = .190. However, as expected, results indicated a significant main effect of the DISCOVER treatment, F(2, 27) = 6.621, p = .005.

Subsequent univariate analyses of between-subjects effects revealed a significant effect of DISCOVER treatment on CDMSE, F(1, 26) = 10.88, p = .003. The mean posttreatment score for CDMSE was significantly higher for students who used DISCOVER (M = 180.06, SD = 14.97) relative to participants who did not use DISCOVER (M = 170.59, SD = 17.48), with a moderate effect size of 0.541. Effect size was calculated using delta, the Glassian effect size (Glass, McGaw, & Smith, 1981; Oliver & Spokane, 1988; Smith, Glass, & Miller, 1980).

Univariate analyses also indicated a significant effect of DISCOVER on the Controllability dimension of career decision-making attributional style: F(1, 26) = 6.12, p = .020. The mean posttreatment Controllability scale score was significantly higher for the DISCOVER-only and combined treatment groups (M = 14.00, SD = 1.11) compared with the control group (M = 12.82, SD = 1.59), with a moderate effect size of 0.740, thereby indicating that students who interacted with DISCOVER believed more strongly that they had personal control over career decision making than did the students who did not work with the DISCOVER program. No other significant effects were found for the other AACDM scales (Causality scale effect size = 0.215; Stability scale effect size = 0.227), although the univariate analyses of the effect of DISCOVER on the AACDM composite score approached significance, F(1, 26) = 3.99, p = .056 (with a small effect size of 0.441). Table 1 reports means and standard deviations for scores on the pre- and posttreatment measures of CDMSE and the Controllability scale of the AACDM across the DISCOVER treatment groups.

Discussion

Results of this preliminary investigation lend partial support to the notion that DISCOVER enhances the CDMSE and career decision-making attributional style of college students. Students who worked with the DISCOVER program for approximately 1 hour exhibited significant gains in CDMSE and enhanced their sense of control over the career decision-making process compared with their peers who did not work with the DISCOVER program.

Previous research has shown that CDMSE and an optimistic attributional style are related to other desirable career-related variables, such as career decidedness and commitment (Fuqua et al., 1988; Gillespie & Hillman, 1993; Mathieu et al., 1993; Taylor & Betz, 1983), work satisfaction, job performance and tenure, and career commitment (Colarelli & Bishop, 1990; Spector, 1982, 1988; Trice et al., 1989). Although the respective relationships between CDMSE, attributional style for career decision making, and other such career-related variables were not explored in this study, previous research indicates that CBCPS interventions may have benefits beyond confidence in researching and choosing a career (Fukuyama et al., 1988).

Implications for Career Counseling

One of the ways that the effectiveness of a CBCPS can be evaluated is to look at the CBCPS's impact on social cognitive variables related to career decision making. As such, a CBCPS could be considered effective if it helps clients become more self-efficacious in their career decision making and more optimistic in their attributional explanations for career-related events. DISCOVER, at least based on the findings of the present study, appears to be an effective career counseling intervention, contributing to increased levels of CDMSE and to a more positive attributional style in at least one domain of career decision-making attributional style, namely, the dimension of controllability.

By completing the assessment activities in the DISCOVER program--and quite possibly in similar CBCPSs--a client personally engages in and successfully completes various career assessment activities on her or his own instead of passively receiving information or watching another person complete the assessment activity. The completion of the activity is "rewarded" by the receipt of printed results summarizing the client's interests, abilities, and values. The active, immediate, successful completion of this activity, together with the tangible reward of printed results, reinforces the client's expenditure of energy, making it more likely that she or he will want to attempt similar activities in this domain. Furthermore, engaging in the career assessment process empowers the client, boosting the client's confidence in her or his abilities to complete related activities in the future.

Essentially, interaction with a CBCPS (e.g., DISCOVER [ACT, 1998]) or the Kuder Career Planning System [NCASI, 2004]) that provides clients with the opportunity to successfully complete assessments of career-related interests, values, and skills can be considered a performance accomplishment, one of the four sources of self-efficacy modification outlined by Bandura (1977). If this type of a performance accomplishment is associated with a decrease in anxiety or with some other adaptive change in a client's emotional state, using a CBCPS, such as DISCOVER, can be legitimately thought of as one means for modifying self-efficacy as it relates to career exploration behaviors.

With an increase in self-efficacy comes a disposition toward a particular behavior and greater persistence in that behavior (Bandura, 1977). The completion of a CBCPS, therefore, is likely to lead to other career-exploratory behaviors, as well as contributing to persistence in career decision-making activities when such tasks may not be as rewarding or as easy to complete as an individual might have initially expected. On the basis of the results of this preliminary investigation, it seems appropriate for career counselors to consider integrating CBCPSs into the overall career counseling experience for college students. Furthermore, counselors should explore additional methods for successfully altering clients' CDMSE and attributional style.

Limitations of the Investigation

Three primary limitations associated with this study warrant discussion, because each significantly limits the generalizability of the results of this preliminary investigation. First, the sample size was particularly small. With only 8 or 9 students participating in each experimental group, it is difficult to conclude in any definitive manner that the results from this investigation may be representative of college student populations in general. Similarly, ethnic minority participation in the investigation was limited. Only 1 participant represented each of three minority groups (Latino, Asian American, and Native American). With the significant increases in the number of minority college students in recent years, it is important to include as many minority participants in career development research as possible. Third, the lapse of time between the pre- and postassessments of CDMSE and career decision-making attributional style was only between 10 and 14 days. Ascertaining the long-term effects of attributional retraining on the social cognitive career development of students is critical to evaluating the lasting impact of attributional retraining interventions as a career counseling tool.

Ideas for Further Research

No significant effects were found when individual counseling was included as part of the treatment, either as the sole intervention or as a combined intervention with DISCOVER. A few explanations can be suggested for this finding. First, a single, brief, interpersonal counseling session may not provide sufficient opportunities for performance accomplishments and the related beneficial changes in emotional states that result from performing a successful behavior. Likewise, a single counseling session may not provide sufficient opportunities for vicarious learning and may not necessarily include, depending on the counselor, specific verbal encouragement for engaging in the career-exploration and planning process. We do not conclude from the findings in our study that individual career counseling is neither a beneficial nor a necessary adjunct treatment to DISCOVER; however, the way that individual career counseling is offered in conjunction with CBCPSs may warrant further inquiry.

Additional research with larger numbers of participants across multiple college and university campuses would allow for greater generalizability of the findings to college student populations. Researchers interested in engaging in future research in this domain should also strive for a more diverse sample of participants and should consider using multiple measures to tap each of the social cognitive constructs of interest over a more extended period of time. Evaluating the efficacy of other CBCPSs, particularly those that are offered in online, Web-based environments, is also warranted.
TABLE 1 Mean and Standard Deviation Pre- and Posttreatment Assessment
Scores Across DISCOVER Treatment Groups

 DISCOVER Treatment Groups
 DISCOVER Received
Pre- and Pretest Posttest
Postassessment M SD M SD

CDMSES-SF (a) 147.29 20.84 180.06 14.97
AACDM
 Controllability (b) 13.53 1.59 14.00 1.11

 DISCOVER Treatment Groups
 DISCOVER Not Received
Pre- and Pretest Posttest
Postassessment M SD M SD

CDMSES-SF (a) 162.86 24.48 170.59 17.48
AACDM
 Controllability (b) 13.67 1.68 12.94 1.63

Note. CDMSES-SF = Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form;
AACDM = Assessment of Attributions for Career Decision Making.
(a) CDMSES-SF scores range from 0 to 225. (b) AACDM Controllability
scale scores range from 3 to 15.


References

Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74.

ACT, Inc. (1998). DISCOVER. Hunt Valley, MD: Author.

ACT, Inc. (1999). Career Planning Survey technical manual. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Betz, N. E., Klein, K. L., & Taylor, K. M. (1996). Evaluation of a short form of the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 47-57.

Betz, N. E., & Luzzo, D. A. (1996). Career assessment and the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 413-428.

Colarelli, S. M., & Bishop, R. C. (1990). Career commitment: Functions, correlates, and management. Group and Organization Studies, 15, 158-176.

Crites, J. O. (1978). The Career Maturity Inventory: Theory and research handbook. Monterey, CA: CTB/McGraw-Hill.

Foltz, B. M., & Luzzo, D. A. (1998). Increasing the career decision-making self-efficacy of nontraditional college students. Journal of College Counseling, 1, 35-44.

Foss, C. J., & Slaney, R. B. (1986). Increasing nontraditional career choices in women: Relation of attitudes toward women and responses to a career intervention. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 28, 191-202.

Fukuyama, M. A., Probert, B. S., Neimeyer, G. J., Nevill, D. D., & Metzler, A. E. (1988). Effects of DISCOVER on the career self-efficacy and decision making of undergraduates. The Career Development Quarterly, 37, 56-62.

Fuqua, D. R., Blum, C. R., & Hartman, B. W. (1988). Empirical support for the differential diagnosis of career indecision. The Career Development Quarterly, 36, 364-373.

Gillespie, D., & Hillman, S. B. (1993). Impact of self-efficacy expectations on adolescent career choice. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED360572)

Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Graham, S. (1991). A review of attributional theory in achievement contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 5-39.

Holland, J. L., Daiger, D. C., & Power, P. G. (1980). My vocational situation. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Lent, R. W., & Hackett, G. (1987). Career self-efficacy: Empirical status and future directions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30, 347-382.

Luzzo, D. A. (1993a). Predicting the career maturity of undergraduates: A comparison of personal, educational, and psychological factors. Journal of College Student Development, 34, 271-275.

Luzzo, D. A. (1993b). Value of career decision-making self-efficacy in predicting career decision-making attitudes and skills. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 194-199.

Luzzo, D. A., & Day, M. A. (1999). Effects of Strong Interest Inventory feedback on career decision-making self-efficacy and social cognitive career beliefs. Journal of Career Assessment, 7, 1-17.

Luzzo, D. A., Funk, D. P., & Strang, J. (1996). Attributional retraining increases career decision-making self-efficacy. The Career Development Quarterly, 44, 378-386.

Luzzo, D. A., & Jenkins-Smith, A. (1998). Development and initial validation of the Assessment of Attributions for Career Decision Making. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 224-245.

Luzzo, D. A., & Taylor, M. (1994). The effects of verbal persuasion on the career self-efficacy of college freshmen. California Association for Counseling and Development Journal, 14, 31-34.

Luzzo, D. A., & Tompkins-Bjorkman, A. (1999, April). An attributional model of career decision making: Implications for counseling. Paper presented at the 1999 annual convention of the American Counseling Association, San Diego, CA.

Mathieu, P. S., Sowa, C. J., & Niles, S. G. (1993). Differences in career self-efficacy among women. Journal of Career Development, 19, 187-197.

National Career Assessment Services, Inc. (2004). Kuder Career Planning System. Adel, IA: Author.

Oliver, L. W., & Spokane, A. R. (1988). Career-intervention outcome: What contributes to client gain? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 447-462.

Osipow, S. H., Carney, C. G., Winer, J., Yanico, F., & Koschier, F. (1976). The Career Decision Scale (3rd rev.). Columbus, OH: Marathon Consulting & Press.

Perry, R. P., Hechter, F. J., Menec, V. H., & Weinberg, L. E. (1993). Enhancing achievement motivation and performance in college students: An attributional retraining perspective. Research in Higher Education, 34, 687-723.

Prediger, D. J., & Staples, J. G. (1996). Linking occupational attribute preferences to occupations (ACT Research Report Series 96-3). Iowa City, IA: ACT.

Smith, M. L., Glass, G. V., & Miller, T. I. (1980). The benefits of psychotherapy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Spector, P. E. (1982). Behavior in organizations as a function of employees' locus of control. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 482-497.

Spector, P. E. (1988). The assessment of career decision making. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career decision making (pp. 33-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Swaney, K. B. (1995). Technical manual: Revised unisex edition of the ACT Interest Inventory (UNIACT). Iowa City, IA: ACT.

Taylor, K. M. (1982). An investigation of vocational indecision in college students: Correlates and moderators. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 191-226.

Taylor, K. M., & Betz, N. E. (1983). Applications of self-efficacy theory to the treatment of career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 63-81.

Trice, A. D., Haire, J. R., & Elliott, K. A. (1989). A career locus of control scale for undergraduate students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 555-561.

Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3-25.

Weiner, B. (1985). An attribution theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548-573.

Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Michael R. Maples and Darrell Anthony Luzzo, ACT, Inc., Iowa City, Iowa. Michael R. Maples is now at the St. Meinrad School of Theology. Darrell Anthony Luzzo is now with JA Worldwide, Colorado Springs, Colorado. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Darrell A. Luzzo, One Education Way-JA Worldwide, Colorado Springs, CO 80906 (e-mail: dluzzo@ja.org).
COPYRIGHT 2005 National Career Development Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:career decision-making self-efficacy
Author:Luzzo, Darrell Anthony
Publication:Career Development Quarterly
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Mar 1, 2005
Words:5487
Previous Article:Parental emotional support, science self-efficacy, and choice of science major in undergraduate women.
Next Article:Editorial note.
Topics:


Related Articles
Interpersonal Influences on Students' Academic and Career Decisions: The Impact of Sexual Orientation.
Practice and Research in Career Counseling and Development--2000. (Annual Review).
Relation of type and amount of training to career counseling self-efficacy in Italy.
The relationship between race and students' identified career role models and perceived role model influence.
Practice and research in career counseling and development--2003.
Cultural context of career choice: meta-analysis of race/ethnicity differences.
Career techniques and interventions: themes from an international conversation.
A grounded analysis of career uncertainty perceived by college students in Taiwan.
Community service self-efficacy: research review.
Trauma symptoms: relationship with career thoughts, vocational identity, and developmental work personality.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters