Hackett and Betz’s (1981) work on self-efficacy is a recent addition to the career field derived from Bandura’s general theory on social cognition. Bandura (1986) defined self-efficacy as “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performance” (p. 391) and postulated self-efficacy impressions help to determine a person’s choice of activities and environments. Research conducted with regard to self-efficacy by Hackett and Lent (1992) and Multon, Brown, and Lent (1992) showed self-efficacy to be predictive of academic and career-related choice and performance within these same areas. Taylor and Betz (1983) developed the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale (CDMSES) to assess self-efficacy expectations as they apply to career decision-making tasks and behaviors.
Adding to Hackett and Betz’s original work has been Lent, Brown, and Hackett’s (1994; 1996) social cognitive framework linking three aspects of career development; career interests, academic and career choice options, and performance and persistence in undertakings. Lent et al. saw their work as theory integration explaining “central, dynamic processes and mechanisms through which (a) career and academic interests develop, (b) career-relevant choices are forged and enacted, and (c) performance outcomes are achieved” (p. 80). From Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory, Lent et al. took triadic reciprocity in which personal attributes, external environmental factors, and overt behaviors act upon and are acted upon by each other. While other theories of career development stress that vocational choices are determined by persons and their environments, these same theories also fail to take into account the behavior of the individual in influencing particular situations which can in turn then affect their thoughts and subsequent behaviors. Lent et al. stated these static career development theories fail to take into account interactions occurring between constantly developing individuals and their ever-changing contexts.
Lent et al. (1994; 1996) saw self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and goals as being particularly relevant within the field of career development. Self-efficacy is an important component in that a set of self-beliefs specific to performance interacts with other personal, behavioral, and contextual factors. Outcome expectations are the individual’s imagined consequences of particular behaviors, such as physical reward, social approval, self-satisfaction, or the inverse of any or all of these. With goal setting, people are providing ways and means of organizing and guiding their behaviors over extended periods of time, thereby, increasing the likelihood that desired outcomes will be realized.
Lent et al. (1994) developed the following specific propositions to lay out their ideas behind social cognitive theory:
Proposition 1. An individual’s occupational or academic interests at any point in time are reflective of his or her concurrent self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations (p. 91).
Proposition 2. An individual’s occupational interests also are influenced by his or her occupational relevant abilities, but this relation is mediated by one’s self-efficacy beliefs (p. 92).
Proposition 3. Self-efficacy beliefs affect choice goals and actions both directly and indirectly (p. 96).
Proposition 4. Outcome expectations affect choice goals and actions both directly and indirectly (p. 97).
Proposition 5. People will aspire to enter (i.e., develop choice goals for) occupations or academic fields that are consistent with their primary interest areas (p. 97).
Proposition 6. People will attempt to enter occupations or academic fields that are consistent with choice goals, provided that they are committed to their goal, and their goal is stated in clear terms, proximal to the point of actual entry (p. 97).
Proposition 7. Interests affect entry behaviors (actions) indirectly through their influence on choice goals (p. 98).
Proposition 8. Self-efficacy beliefs influence career-academic performance both directly and indirectly through their effect on performance goals. Outcome expectations influence performance only indirectly through their effect on goals (p. 100).
Proposition 9. Ability (or aptitude) will affect career/academic performance both directly and indirectly through its influence on self-efficacy beliefs (p. 100).
Proposition 10. Self-efficacy beliefs derive from performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and physiological reactions (e.g., emotional arousal) in relation to particular educational and occupationally relevant activities (p. 103).
Proposition 11. As with self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations are generated through direct and vicarious experiences with educational and occupationally relevant activities (p. 103).
Proposition 12. Outcome expectations are also partially determined by self-efficacy beliefs, particularly when outcomes (e.g., successes, failures) are closely tied to the quality or level of one’s performance (p. 104).
While dealing with developmental tasks occurring prior to career entry, Lent et al. (1994; 1996) suggested their framework could be viewed across the life span to include work adjustment, career and life milestones, and retirement. In agreement with Super’s (1990) view of cognitive learning theory as “cement”, holding together various segments of career development theory, Lent et al. (1994) saw their framework as an effort at unifying rather than proliferating additional theories and should also be viewed as “evolving constructions, subject to further empirical scrutiny” (p. 118).
Comments are closed