Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Choice of Academic Major at a Public Research University: The Role of Gender and Self-Efficacy

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Females are underrepresented in certain disciplines, which translates into their having less promising career outlooks and lower earnings. This study examines the effects of socio-economic status, academic performance, high school curriculum and involvement in extra-curricular activities, as well as self-efficacy for academic achievement on choices of academic disciplines by males and females. Disciplines are classified based on Holland’s theory of personality-based career development. Different models for categorical outcome variables are compared including: multinomial logit, nested logit, and mixed logit. Based on the findings presented here, first generation status leads to a greater likelihood of choosing engineering careers for males but not for females. Financial difficulties have a greater effect on selecting scientific fields than engineering fields by females. The opposite is true for males. Passing grades in calculus, quantitative test scores, and years of mathematics in high school as well as self-ratings of abilities to analyze quantitative problems and to use computing are positively associated with choice of engineering fields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Williams (2009) suggests use of heterogeneous choice models for binary and ordinal dependent variables. While use of mixed logit models allows to incorporate heterogeneity of individuals in the model, we could not find a study devoted to a comparison of mixed logit coefficients across groups. Hence, we took a conservative approach by comparing expected probabilities and directions and significances of coefficients within groups.

  2. Partial derivatives—the logistic regression coefficients multiplied by a given probability and 1 minus a given probability—illustrate this point (Pampel 2000). “The effect [of b in terms of logged odds] will be at its maximum when P equals 0.5 since 0.5 × 0.5 = 0.25; 0.6 × 0.4 = 0.24, 0.7 × 0.3 = 0.21, and so on. The closer P comes to the ceiling or floor, the smaller the value of P × (1 − P), and the smaller the effect of a unit change in X has on the probability” (ibid, p. 25).

References

  • Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121(2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adelman, C. (2003). Postsecondary attainment, attendance, curriculum, and performance: Selected results from the NELS: 88/2000 Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. D. (1999). Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups. Sociological Methods and Research, 28(2), 186–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcidiacono, P. (2004). Ability sorting and the returns to college major. Journal of Econometrics, 121, 343–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–337). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, M. C. (1988). Predicted future earnings and choice of college major. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 41, 418–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E. (1994). Basic issues and concepts in career counseling for women. In W. N. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career counseling for women (pp. 1–41). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E., & Gwilliam, L. R. (2002). The utility of measures of self-efficacy for the Holland themes in African American and European American college students. Journal of Career Assessment, 10(3), 283–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1983). The relationship of mathematics self-efficacy expectations to the selection of science-based college majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23(3), 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E., Harmon, L. W., & Borgen, F. H. (1996). The relationship of self-efficacy for the Holland themes to gender, occupational group membership, and vocational interests. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43(1), 90–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bubany, S. T., & Hansen, J. I. (2010). Ability self-estimates and self-efficacy: Meaningfully distinct? Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43(3), 168–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014–2015). Occupational outlook handbook. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from http://www.bls.gov/ooh.

  • Cole, J. (2012). Using BCSSE and NSSE data to investigate first-year student financial stress and engagement. NSSE Webinar. Retrieved June 12, 2015, from http://www.nsse.indiana.edu/webinars/.

  • Croissant, Y. (2015). Estimation of multinomial logit models in R: The mlogit Packages. Retrieved March 19, 2015, from http://www.cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mlogit/vignettes/mlogit.pdf.

  • Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (1997). Fields of study, college selectivity, and student inequalities in higher education. Social Forces, 75(4), 1417–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiPrete, T. A.,& Buchmann, C. (2013). The rise of women: The growing gender gap in education and what it means for American schools. Russell Sage Foundation. Kindle Edition.

  • Dow, J. K., & Endersby, J. W. (2004). Multinomial probit and multinomial logit: A comparison of choice models for voting research. Electoral Studies, 23, 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eide, E., & Waehrer, G. (1998). The role of the option value of college attendance in college major choice. Economics of Education Review, 17(1), 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, L. F., & Weitzman, L. (1992). Women’s career development: Theory and practice from a feminist perspective. In Z. Leibowitz & D. Lea (Eds.), Adult career development: concepts, issues, and practices (pp. 125–157). Alexandria: National Career Development Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouad, N. A. (2002). Cross-cultural differences in vocational interests: Between-group differences on the strong interest inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49(3), 283–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Görlitz, K., & Gravert, K. (2015). The Effects of a High School Curriculum Reform on University Enrollment and the Choice of College Major. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Paper No.8983. Retrieved January 5, 2016, from http://www.ftp.iza.org/dp8983.pdf.

  • Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 545–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goyette, K., & Mullen, A. (2006). Who studies the Arts and Sciences? social background and the choice and consequences of undergraduate field of study. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(3), 497–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. C. (1992). After the boom: Management majors in the 1990s. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoetker, G. P. (2004). Confounded coefficients: Extending recent advances in the accurate comparison of logit and probit coefficients across groups. Available at SSRN 609104.

  • Hole, A. R. (2007). Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood. The Stata Journal, 7(3), 388–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. (1966). The psychology of vocational choice. Waltham: Blaisdell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. (1973). Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. (1987). Current status of Holland’s theory of careers: Another perspective. Career Development Quarterly, 36, 24–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. L., & Lutz, S.W. (1967). Predicting a Student’s Vocational Choice. American College Testing Program. Retrieved March 17, 2015, from http://www.act.org/research/researchers/reports/pdf/ACT_RR18.pdf.

  • Huss, M. T., Randall, B. A., Patry, M., Davis, S. F., & Hansen, D. J. (2002). Factors influencing self-rated preparedness for graduate school: A survey of graduate students. Teaching of Psychology, 29(4), 275–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. A. (1986). The sex-segregation of fields of study: Trends during the college years. Journal of Higher Education, 57(2), 134–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, E., Nabeel, A., Conaty, J., & To, D. (1989). College quality and future earnings: where should you send your child to college? American Economic Review, 79, 247–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, W. A. (2011). Variation among academic disciplines: An update on analytical frameworks and research. Journal of the Professoriate, 1(6), 9–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Lackland, A. C. (2001). Students’ choices of college majors that are gender traditional and nontraditional. Journal of College Student Development, 42(1), 39–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, J.S. (2009). Group Comparisons in Logit and Probit Using Predicted Probabilities. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~jslsoc/files_research/groupdif/groupwithprobabilities/groups-with-prob-2009-06-25.pdf.

  • Long, J. S., & Freeze, J. (2014). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using stata. College Station: Stata Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Y. (2009). Family socioeconomic status, parental involvement and college major choices—gender, race/ethnic, and nativity patterns. Sociological Perspectives, 52(2), 211–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Y., & Savas, G. (2014). Which is more consequential: Fields of study or institutional selectivity? Review of Higher Education, 37(2), 221–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mood, C. (2010). Logistic Regression: Why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 67–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Colleges and Employers (2014). NACE salary survey. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/uploadedFiles/Content/static-assets/downloads/executive-summary/2014-january-salary-survey-executive-summary.pdf.

  • National Science Foundation (2014). Science and engineering indicators, SESTAT (1993–2010). Retrieved March 15, 2015, from http://www.sestat.nsf.gov.

  • Nauta, M. M. (2010). The development, evolution, and status of Holland’s theory of vocational personalities: Reflections and future directions for counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(1), 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students in science and mathematics. Review of Research in Education, 16, 153–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paglin, M., & Rufolo, A. (1990). Heterogeneous human capital, occupational choice, and men-women earnings differences. Journal of Labor Economics, 8, 123–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pampel, F. C. (2000). Logistic regression: A primer. Sage University Papers Series on quantitative applications in the social sciences, 07–132. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Patrick, J., Niles, S., Margetiak, C. J., & Cunning, T. J. (1993). The longitudinal relationship between extracurricular activities and congruence between initial and final major among college students. NACADA Journal, 13(1), 28–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, W., & McMahon, M. (1999). Career development and systems theory: A new relationship. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2006). College major choice: An analysis of person–environment fit. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), 429–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psathas, G. (1968). Toward a theory of occupational choice for women. Sociology and Social Research, 52, 253–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randahl, G. J. (1991). A typological analysis of the relations between measured vocational interests and abilities. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 38(3), 333–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J. M., Tracey, T. J. G., & Rounds, J. (1996). Generalizability of Holland’s structure of vocational interests across ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic status. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43(3), 330–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider and Overton. (1983). Holland personality types and academic achievement. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30(2), 287–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., Feldman, K. A., & Ethington, C. A. (2000). Academic disciplines: Holland’s theory and the study of college students and faculty. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, T. D., & Dillow, S. A. (2012). Digest of Education Statistics, 2011. Washington: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved August 30, 2012, from http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012001.

  • Solnick, S. (1995). Changes in women’s majors from entrance to graduation at women’s and coeducational colleges. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48(3), 505–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, C., & Glick, J. E. (2004). College attendance and choice of college majors among asicn-american students. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), 1401–1421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, J. L. (1992). The structure of vocational interests for African-American college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 40(2), 144–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, J. L. (1993). Integrated assessment of vocational interests and self-rated skills and abilities. Journal of Career Assessment, 1(1), 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Train, K. E. (2009). Discrete choice models with simulation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Train, K., & Croissant, Y. (2015). Kenneth train’s exercises using the mlogit package for R. Retrieved March 19, 2015, from http://www.cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mlogit/vignettes/Exercises.pdf.

  • Trusty, J., Robinson, C. R., Plata, M., & Ng, K.-M. (2000). Effects of gender, socioeconomic status, and early academic performance on postsecondary educational choice. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78(4), 463–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, S., & Bowen, W. G. (1999). Choice of major: The changing (via changing) gender gap. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 52(2), 289–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. (2009). Using heterogeneous choice models to compare logit and probit coefficients across groups. Sociological Methods & Research, 37(4), 531–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Drew Clark, Kyrylo Kobzyev, Robert Toutkoushian, and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. All errors remain our own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of Institutional Research, Auburn University, 203 Samford Hall, Auburn, AL, 36849-5111, USA

    Iryna Y. Johnson

  2. Department of Mathematics, Columbus State University, 218 University Hall, Columbus, GA, 31907, USA

    William B. Muse

Authors
  1. Iryna Y. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William B. Muse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iryna Y. Johnson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johnson, I.Y., Muse, W.B. Choice of Academic Major at a Public Research University: The Role of Gender and Self-Efficacy. Res High Educ 58, 365–394 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-016-9431-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-016-9431-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation