career identity

7/31/2019 Career Identity

1/21

Career Identity Development in CollegeStudents: Decision Making, Parental

Support, and Work Experience

Kate J. StringerJennifer L. Kerpelman

Auburn University

Identity exploration in the area of work is theorized to be salient in emerging adult-

hood, and according to Vondraceks extensions of Eriksons theory, self-realization

may be achieved through integration of career choice into ones identity. The presentstudy aimed to address the extent to which parental support for career, work experi-

ence, and career decision self-efficacy influenced career identity evaluation in a sam-

ple of 345 students attending a 4-year college. Structural equation modeling results

supported the hypothesized associations, showing that career decision self-efficacy

(suggestive of commitment making) was associated with career identity evaluation.

In addition, the number of jobs held was found to be more predictive of career deci-

sion self-efficacy and career identity evaluation than were perceptions of relevant

work experience. Overall, results were consistent with the Luyckx and colleagues

process model of identity development.

Emerging adulthood is a unique period in the life span and is characterized as a

time of identity exploration with decisions being made in the areas of work, self,

and love (Arnett, 2000). Identity exploration sets the foundation for commitments

made during emerging adulthood and the years that follow, and it is during emerg-

ing adulthood that considerable identity exploration and commitments in the ca-

reer domain occur, especially for college students. This period of exploration, in

part, is due to the institutionalized moratorium (i.e., support for delaying decision

making) of the college context (Ct, 2006; Erikson, 1968). However, prolonged,

Identity: An International Journal of Theory

and Research, 10:181200, 2010Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1528-3488 print/1532-706X onlineDOI: 10.1080/15283488.2010.496102


2/21

unfocused exploration delays commitments and can be maladaptive (Meeus,

Iedema, Helsen, & Vollebergh, 1999). Although there has been extensive research

on identity processes and their development (e.g., Luyckx, Goossens, & Soenens,2005, 2006), there has been only limited examination of the career domain. Iden-

tity development in the career domain is especially important during the college

years, given the emphasis placed on career preparation. Therefore, the present

study aimed to investigate factors that influence career identity commitment

among 4-year-college students.

Research has suggested that identity commitments are important to individuals

well-being and emotional adjustment (Berzonsky, 2003; Kunnen, Sappa, van

Geert, & Bonica, 2008; Meeus, Iedema, Maassen, & Engels, 2005). Kunnen et al.

found that trajectories of identity formation without commitment were morestrongly associated with worse adjustment than those without exploration. More

specific to the career domain, identity commitments in this domain have been as-

sociated positively with stability in career choices and satisfaction with work

(Kidd & Green, 2004; Perrone, gisdttir, Webb, & Blalock, 2006). Vondracek

(1995) asserted that individuals can experience self-realization through vocational

careers. Similar to Watermans (1990) description of personal expressiveness

through ones identity commitments, self-realization is the belief that one is reach-

ing ones full potential (Vondracek). Experiencing self-realization through a voca-

tional career is likely to happen when decisions about a career are based on whoone is (i.e., on the basis of interests, abilities, talents, and personality) and when ca-

reer identity is integrated into ones sense of self.

Although career identity development is a process that consists of exploration

and commitment (Skorikov & Vondracek, 2007), Skorikov and Vondracek found

that the Vocational Identity Scale of the My Vocational Situation measure (Hol-

land, Daiger, & Power, 1980) did not distinguish between the foreclosed and

achieved statuses. Therefore, the Vocational Identity Scale did not account for ca-

reer identity exploration. Measures such as the Extended Objective Measure of

Ego Identity Status-2 (Adams, Bennion, & Huh, 1989), which were developed todistinguish between the foreclosed and achieved statuses, account for exploration

and commitment, but have very few items focusing on the career identity domain.

In addition, further work by Luyckx et al. (2005, 2006) showed that there were

multiple dimensions of exploration and commitment that should be accounted for

when assessing domains of identity development.

On the basis of Marcias (1966) identity status paradigm, Stephen, Fraser, and

Marcia (1992) presented a process model whereby individuals continue to develop

their identities through a process of repeated moratorium and achievement cycles.

This suggests that individuals do not just achieve their identities, but they alsomake commitments and then must engage in continued exploration to maintain

182 STRINGER AND KERPELMAN


3/21

further to identify with their commitments. In addition, Meeus et al. (1999) pro-

vided evidence that foreclosure and achievement are both adaptive in terms of their

associations with well-being, and they proposed that youth continually reconsidertheir identity commitments through continued in-depth exploration of the commit-

ment. It is this in-depth exploration that distinguishes the closure and achiev-

ing identity statuses. Collectively, there is strong evidence to support the impor-

tance of commitment processes to identity formation. Luyckx et al. (2005, 2006)

identified two cycles involved in the identity development process: commitment

formation (i.e., exploration in breadth anddecision making) and commitment eval-

uation (i.e., exploration in depth and identification with commitment). It is during

this second process that identity commitments become more firm and integrated

into a persons sense of identity. Luyckx et al. (2005, 2006) found that the commit-ment formation process was associated with the commitment evaluation process in

the student and relationship identity domains, but they did not test associations

among these processes in the career domain.

Luyckx et al.s (2005, 2006) framework provides a basis for how individuals in-

tegrate career into their overall identities. The present study also is guided by

Vondraceks (1995) developmental-contextual perspective on achieving self-real-

ization through vocational careers. This perspective suggests that career identity

development during emerging adulthood is influenced by a number of important

factors, such as career-decision self-efficacy, support for career from parents, andpast work experiences that inform ones career goals.

CAREER DECISION SELF-EFFICACY

Pastresearchhasshownthatanimportantpredictorofin-depthcareeridentityexplo-

ration and internalizing of identity commitments is career decision self-efficacy

(Brown & Lavish, 2006; Chung, 2002; Lucas, 1997; Porfeli & Skorikov, in press).

Career decision self-efficacy is defined as having confidence in oneself to makede-cisionsaboutacareeronthebasisofinformationabouttheself,goals,andcareerop-

tions (Betz, Klein, & Taylor, 1996). Career decision self-efficacy includes the fol-

lowing dimensions: (a) accurate self-appraisal (being realistic about ones skills,

abilities, strengths), (b) problemsolving (ability todealwithproblemsrelatedtoca-

reer decisions), (c) planning(having a plan for ways to obtain careergoals), goal se-

lection (having goals), and (d) gathering occupational information (seeking infor-

mation about occupations available). These dimensions reflect aspects of career

decision making that are particularly important for making career decisions on the

basis of exploration of the self and careers available (Betz et al.). Studies have sug-gested that career decision self-efficacy is associated positively with career identity

CAREER IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT 183


4/21

cision self-efficacy was associated with career decidedness and career exploration,

andthese associations were similar for men and women. Likewise, in another study

of undergraduate college students, career decision self-efficacy predicted careercommitment (i.e., career giving meaning to ones life) for both men and women

(Chung). Also, in a longitudinal study of high school students,Porfeli and Skorikov

found that linear change in, and the average score of, career confidence was associ-

ated withlinear changein, and the averagescore of, career explorationindepth(spe-

cific career exploration). Career indecision, which is highly associated with career

decision self-efficacy (e.g., Osipow & Gati, 1998), also was shown to be associated

negatively with career identity commitment in a sample of Australian high school

students (Creed & Patton, 2003). On the basis of the extant literature, we predicted

thatcareerdecisionself-efficacywouldbepositivelyassociatedwith thecareeriden-tity evaluation process, and there would be no gender differences in the association

of career decision self-efficacy and career identity evaluation.

PARENTAL SUPPORT FOR CAREER

Well before they leave for college, children receive messages from their parents re-

garding how they should think about their future careers. Research has shown that

parental support for career (Alliman-Brissett, Turner, & Skovholt, 2004;Berrios-Allison, 2005) as well as general support from parents (Constantine,

Wallace, & Kindaichi, 2005; Leal-Muniz & Constantine, 2005; Lucas, 1997) are

positively associated with identity commitment and career decision-making confi-

dence in both high school and college samples.

Leal-Muniz and Constantine (2005) found that perceived parental support posi-

tively predicted career identity commitment and negatively predicted the tendency

toforecloseprematurelyoncareeroptionsinasampleofMexicanAmericancollege

students. In samples of high school sophomores and seniors (Sartor & Youniss,

2002) and college students (Berrios-Allison, 2005) general parental support andidentity commitment were positively associated. Parental support in the area of ca-

reerhasbeenfound tobepositively associatedwith careerdecision self-efficacy and

career choice certainty in samples of early adolescents (Alliman-Brissett et al.,

2004) and high school juniors and seniors (Constantine et al., 2005).

Alliman-Brissett et al. (2004) examined four dimensions of parental support for

career: (a) career-related modeling (exposure to parental work role), (b) verbal en-

couragement (promoting participation in educational and career-related activities),

(c) instrumental assistance (guiding educational and career decisions) and (d) emo-

tionalsupport(e.g.,talkingwiththechildabouthisorhergoals).Theyfoundthatthedifferent types of parental support for career predicted career decision self-efficacy



5/21

port wasthebest predictorofcareerdecision self-efficacy. Theseresults suggest that

there may be gender differences in the association between parental support for ca-

reer and career decisions self-efficacy. Concerning gender differences, Sartor andYouniss(2002)alsofoundthattheassociationbetweenparentalsupportandidentity

achievement was stronger for men than for women. Given findings linking parental

supportandcareerdecisionself-efficacy/careerdecision-makingandcareeridentity

commitment,itwaspredictedthatparentalsupportforcareerwouldbepositivelyas-

sociatedwithcareerdecisionmakingandcareeridentityevaluationforbothmenand

women. The associationbetween parental supportand career decision self-efficacy

may be stronger for women; whereas, theassociationbetween parental support and

career identity evaluation may be stronger for men.

WORK EXPERIENCE

Havingworkexperiencesthatarerelevanttocareerchoicecanprovideopportunities

for careerexploration. Most research that has examined workexperience andcareer

decision-making has been conducted on Australian samples. Findings from this re-

search suggest that individuals who had made a career decision were more likely to

havehadworkexperience(Creed,Prideaux,& Patton, 2005) and had workedlonger

than those who had not made a career decision (Earl & Bright, 2003). In one of thefewstudiesofU.S.collegestudents,havingworkexperiencesthatwereperceivedas

relevant to ones career choice were associated with being ready to make decisions

about career, controlling for participant gender and length of time spent at a job

(Ohler, Levinson, & Barker, 1996). Most other research with U.S. samples has ex-

amined volume of hours worked by high school students andassociations with aca-

demic achievement, school misconduct, and drug and alcohol use (for a review, see

Zimmerman-Gemback & Mortimer, 2006). Given the paucity of studies that have

examined college studentspast and current work experiences and the relevance of

these experiences to career identity formation, the present study explored whetherperceptionsofrelevantworkexperienceorthenumberofjobsapersonhadheldmat-

tered more for explaining confidence to make career decisions and career identity

evaluation in an U.S. college sample. In other words, does having experiences with

work that one perceives as relevant to ones future career or does having a variety of

work experiences help emerging adults develop confidence to choose their careers

and to make stronger commitments to their career identities?

SUMMARY AND RESEARCH HYPOTHESES



6/21

ing has been associated with parental support. In turn, both parental support and

career decision making have been associated with career identity commitment.

Career decision making also has been associated with having work experience.Because having work experiences can serve as a form of career exploration, it

was predicted that work experiences would be associated with the career identity

evaluation process. The literature has found evidence to suggest that there are no

gender differences in the association between career decision self-efficacy and

career identity evaluation, but that there are differences in the associations be-

tween parental support for career and career decision self-efficacy and career

identity evaluation.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate career identity evaluation

(i.e., career identity exploration in depth and identification with career identitycommitment) in college students by examining the associations between career

identity evaluation and career decision self-efficacy, parental support for career,

and work experience (both perceived relevant work experience and number of jobs

held). The aim of the present study was to understand factors that help explain the

deepening of career identity commitment.

For the present study, work experience was included as an indicator of the di-

mension of exploration in breadth. Past work experience represents one aspect of

exploration in breadth by providing opportunities to consider different aspects of

the world of work. Career decision self-efficacy (i.e., the confidence to make ca-reer decisions; Betz et al., 1996) was chosen to represent commitment making be-

cause college students may not be fully decided about their careers, but they are in

the process of making and then exploring their career choices. On the basis of find-

ings of Luyckx et al. (2005, 2006), we predicted that career decision self-efficacy

would be positively associated with career identity evaluation. One unique feature

of the career decision self-efficacy measure chosen for this study is that it exam-

ines self-efficacy to choose a career on the basis of accurate self-appraisal, goals,

planning, problem solving, and occupational information available. In other

words, as individuals become more confident about making career decisions on thebasis of their exploration in breadth, it was expected that they would explore their

career choices more in depth and anticipate identifying with their career choices.

For the present study, parental support for career was defined as perceived parental

support while growing up, before entering college, and career identity evaluation

was a combination of exploring career in depth and anticipating identification with

career identity commitment.

Building on findings in extant literature in the areas of career identity evaluation

and career decision self-efficacy/making, the present study had the following ob-

jectives (see Figure 1 for the hypothesized model):



7/21

reer and work experience and career decision self-efficacy predicted career


2. To test the importance of number of jobs held and perceptions of relevant

work experience in predicting career decision self-efficacy and career


3. To explore gender differences in the hypothesized model.

METHOD

Sample and Procedures

Data were collected from students attending a land grant, 4-year university in the

Southeastern United States. They were recruited from large sections of courses on

human development and family studies. Participants completed surveys outside of

class and received extra credit in exchange for participation. The surveys took ap-proximately 20 to 30 minutes to complete and were returned the next class day

(i.e., 2 days later). Of approximately 375 surveys that we distributed, a total of 349

were returned. Of these, 345 were used for analyses (four surveys were completed

by individuals older than 25 when the recruitment was specified for those ages 18

to 25). Of the 345 participants (34.2% male, 63.8% female), the majority of stu-

dents (91.1%) were Caucasian, and ages ranged from 18 to 25 years (M= 20.61,

SD = 1.29). The sample consisted of 11.3% freshmen, 34.8% sophomores, 26.4%

juniors, and 24.6% seniors (2.9% did not report their undergraduate level). Most

participants (85.7%) were raised in two-parent, first marriage families with up-per-middle class incomes. Of the participants, 97.7% reported that they were cur-


FIGURE 1 Hypothesized model predicting career identity evaluation (aperceived relevant

work experience and number of jobs held will be compared).


8/21

Measures

We assessed career identity evaluation using the Utrecht-Management of Identity

Commitments Scale (Crocetti, Rubini,& Meeus, 2008). The Utrecht-Management

of Identity Commitments Scale assesses identification with commitment (five

items), exploration in depth (five items), and reconsideration of commitment

(three items). In the present study, we used the identification-with-commitment

and exploration-in-depth subscales. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale

ranging from 1 (completely untrue) to 5 (completely true). Higher scores yield

greater identification with commitment and greater exploration in depth. Items

were adjusted to refer to the career domain. Because of the design of the study,

items also were adjusted to assess anticipated identification with career identitycommitment (e.g., My career will give me certainty in life) because participants

had not fully entered their occupational careers. The exploration-in-depth items

were worded in present tense (e.g., I think a lot about my career). Internal consis-

tency in two different samples for identification with commitment (as = .89 and

.93) and for exploration in depth (as = .84 and .89) have been good (Crocetti et al.,

2008). The two scales served as indicators of the latent factor, career identity eval-

uation. In the present study, reliability was .87 for identification with career iden-

tity commitment and .83 for career identity exploration in depth.

We measured career decision self-efficacy using the Career Decision Self-Effi-cacy Short Form (Betz et al., 1996), which consists of 25 items that are rated on a

5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (no confidence at all) to 5 (complete con-

fidence). Higher scores indicate higher confidence in dealing with career-related

tasks. There are five subscales containing five items each: accurate self-appraisal

(Choose a major or career that will fit your interests), gathering occupational in-

formation (Identify employers, firms, and institutions relevant to your career pos-

sibilities), goal selection (Decide what you value most in an occupation), mak-

ing plans (Make a plan of your goals for the next five years), and problem

solving (Change majors if you did not like your first choice). Internal consis-tency for the total scale has been found to be .94 (Betz et al.) and has ranged be-

tween .95 and .97 (Gloria & Hird, 1999). Internal consistency for the subscales has

been demonstrated, and construct validity has been supported in previous studies

(see Taylor & Betz, 1983). For the present study, Cronbachs alpha was .74 for oc-

cupational information, .80 for goal selection, .77 for planning, .75 for problem

solving, and .75 for accurate self-appraisal. These five subscales served as indica-

tors for the latent factor of career decision self-efficacy.

We assessed parental support for careerusing the four subscales of the Ca-

reer-Related Parent Support Scale (Turner, Alliman-Brissett, Lapan, Udipi, &Erugun, 2003): instrumental assistance (e.g., help and guidance about educational/



9/21

agement and expectations to participate in activities that help accomplish educa-

tional/career goals), and emotional support (e.g., talking about childs interests and

educational/career goals). The subscales consist of seven items except the verbalencouragement subscale, which has six items. Items are rated on a 5-point

Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Internal

consistency estimates ranged from .78 to .85, and good testretest reliability over a

2-week period has been demonstrated (Turner et al.). For the present study, internal

consistency estimates were .81 for instrumental assistance, .78 for career-related

modeling, .89 for verbal encouragement, and .85 for emotional support. Items

were asked in retrospect with the prompt, Thinking about growing up in your

family of origins home, answer the following questions. These four subscales

served as indicators for the latent factor of parental support for career.We assessed work experience by adapting a portion of the Work Status Ques-

tionnaire (Nurmi & Salmela-Aro, 1995), which was designed to determine how

much a job is commensurate with ones education, after graduating from college.

The portion of the Work Status Questionnaire included in the present study asked

participants to write down all the jobs they had had, including internships and vol-

unteer work. For each job, they were asked to evaluate the extent to which it was a

job that was commensurate with their earlier education, on a 3-point scale, with

0 representing no, 1 representing to some extent, and 2 representingyes. For

the present study, this question was adapted by asking participants to evaluate theextent to which the skills learned/used at each job were relevant for their career

choice on a 3-point scale, with 0 representing not relevant, 1 representing

somewhat relevant, and 2 representing relevant. We calculated relevant work ex-

perience scores by taking the mean of all work experience relevance ratings;

higher scores indicated more relevant work experience. We calculated number of

jobs by summing the number of jobs participants reported having.

RESULTS

Preliminary Analyses

Before testing the study hypotheses, we calculated the means and standard devi-

ations (see Table 1). The sample was relatively high in levels of identification

with commitment, exploration in depth, career decision self-efficacy, and paren-

tal support for career. On average, participants had jobs that were somewhat rel-

evant with their anticipated careers and the average of number of jobs held was

2.58 (SD = 1.71).We conducted independent samples ttests to test for gender differences for the



10/21

identity commitment, career identity exploration in depth, and three subscales of

the Career Decision Self-Efficacy Short Form (i.e., goal selection, planning, andproblem solving; see Table 1). Although men and women differed in their mean

levels for many of the variables in the hypothesized model, what remains a ques-

tion is whether gender moderates the associations among the variables. Therefore,

we examined gender differences using multiple group analysis when testing the

hypothesized models. We also examined age differences using a one-way analysis

of variance, and participants were significantly different in their number of jobs

held depending on age. The effect of age was controlled by residualizing the num-

ber of jobs on age.

Bivariate Associations

Examination of the zero-order correlations (see Table 2) indicated that the hypoth-

esized relations were supported with the exception of the association between per-

ceived relevant work experience and the indicators of career identity evaluation.

Furthermore, relevant work experience only correlated significantly with two of

the career decision self-efficacy subscales (i.e., planning and self-appraisal).

Measurement Model


TABLE 1

Means and Standard Deviations

Full sample Male Female

Variable M SD M SD M SD

Relevant work experience*** 1.01 0.69 0.83 0.70 1.10 0.66

Number of jobs*** 2.58 1.71 2.05 1.54 2.86 1.74

Identification with career identity commitment 4.10 0.67 4.09 0.68 4.10 0.67

Exploration in depth 3.96 0.75 3.87 0.74 4.01 0.75

Occupational information** 4.01 0.61 3.88 0.64 4.08 0.70

Goal selection 3.82 0.63 3.77 0.62 3.85 0.64

Planning 3.88 0.65 3.79 0.68 3.93 0.62

Problem solving 3.71 0.64 3.63 0.69 3.78 0.62Self-appraisal* 3.97 0.57 3.88 0.54 4.01 0.56

Instrumental assistance*** 3.90 0.74 3.64 0.76 4.03 0.70

Career-related modeling*** 4.19 0.78 3.96 0.79 4.31 0.74

Verbal encouragement*** 4.45 0.63 4.15 0.75 4.61 0.49

Emotional support*** 3.84 0.80 3.54 0.79 3.99 0.77

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001; indicates significant gender differences


11/21

TABLE

2

Correlations

(N=

345)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

orkRelevance

umberofJobs

.24***

ent.w/Com.

.09

.13*

xplor.in

Depth

.09

.15**

.24***

ccup.In

fo.

.07

.12*

.24***

.35***

oalSelection

.09

.13*

.22***

.22***

.61***

anning

.20***

.19***

.25***

.37***

.69***

.65***

oblemSolving

.08

.01

.19***

.28***

.58***

.63***

.72***

elf-appraisal

.16**

.17**

.26***

.29***

.62***

.71***

.70***

.71***

str.Ass

istance

.07

.00

.08

.21***

.19***

.22***

.25***

.27***

.27***

areerM

odeling

.10

.05

.17**

.28***

.32***

.29***

.36***

.30***

.23***

.53***

erbalEn

c.

.03

.06

.12*

.17**

.29***

.21***

.27***

.24***

.29***

.60***

.53***

motiona

lSup.

.05

.03

.15**

.24***

.24***

.18***

.23***

.23***

.19***

.68***

.55***

.56***

ote.CareerIdentityEvaluation:items34

CareerDecisionSelf-Efficacy:item

s59

ParentalSupportforCareer:items1013

career identity

Documents