Advertisement

Career interests of students in psychology specialties degrees: psychometric evidence and correlations with the RIASEC dimensions

  • Aristides I. Ferreira
  • Rosa I. Rodrigues
  • Paula da Costa Ferreira
Article
First Online:

Abstract

In this study, we present the development of a vocational interest scale for university students studying psychology. Three dimensions were extracted through principal component analysis, namely, organizational, educational, and clinical psychology. A second study with confirmatory factor analysis replicated the same three factors obtained in the first study. We found significant positive correlations between clinical and educational psychology with the social dimension of Holland’s model. The enterprising dimension appeared to be significantly and positively correlated with the organizational psychology component. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

Career interests Vocational guidance Holland’s model 

Résumé

Intérêts professionnels des étudiants en psychologie dans les filières spécialisées: Évidences psychométriques et corrélations avec les dimensions du RIASEC Dans cette étude, nous présentons le développement d’une échelle d’intérêts vocationnels pour les étudiants universitaires en psychologie. Trois dimensions ont été extraites au moyen d’une analyse en composantes principales, nommément, la psychologie du travail et des oganisations, scolaire et clinique. Une seconde étude menée au moyen d’une analyse factorielle confirmatoire a répliqué les même trois facteurs obtenus dans la première étude. Nous avons trouvé des corrélations significatives positives entre la psychologie clinique et scolaire et la dimension sociale du modèle de Holland. La dimension entrepreneuriale apparaît être significativement et positivement corrélée avec la composante de la psychologie du travail et des organisations. Des implications et suggestions pour de futures recherches sont discutées.

Zusammenfassung

Berufliche Interessen von Studierenden in Psychologischen Fachrichtungen: Psychometrische Evidenz und Korrelationen mit den RIASEC Dimensionen In dieser Studie stellen wir die Entwicklung einer Berufsinteressen Skala für Universitätsstudenten in Psychologie vor. Drei Dimensionen wurden durch eine Hauptkomponentenanalyse extrahiert: organisatorische, pädagogische und klinische Psychologie. Eine zweite Studie mit einer konfirmatorischen Faktorenanalyse repliziert die gleichen drei Faktoren wie in der ersten Studie. Wir fanden signifikant positive Korrelationen zwischen klinischer und pädagogischer Psychologie mit der sozialen Dimension des Holland-Modells. Die unternehmerische Dimension schien signifikant und positiv mit der organisationspsychologischen Komponente zu korrelieren. Auswirkungen und Anregungen für die zukünftige Forschung werden diskutiert.

Resumen

Intereses de carrera de los estudiantes de las especialidades de los grados de Psicología: Evidencias psicométricas y correlaciones con las dimensiones del RIASEC En este estudio presentamos el desarrollo de una escala de intereses vocacionales para los estudiantes de psicología. Se extraen tres dimensiones a través del análisis de componentes principales, esto es: psicología educacional, organizacional y clínica. Un segundo estudio con análisis confirmatorio de factores replicó los mismos tres factores obtenidos en el primer análisis. Encontramos correlaciones positivas significativas entre la psicología educacional y clínica y la dimensión social del modelo de Holland. La dimensión de emprendimiento apareció como significativa y positivamente correlacionada con el componente de psicología organizacional. Se discuten también las implicaciones y sugerencias para futuras investigaciones.

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

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was partially supported by the Foundation for Science and Technology, Portugal—PEst-OE/EGE/UI0315/2011.

References

  1. American Psychological Association Center for Workforce Studies. (2013). Current major field of APA members by membership status. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/workforce/publications/13-member/table-3.pdf. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.
  2. Arbuckle, J. L. (2011). AMOS 20 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Armstrong, P. I., Allison, W., & Rounds, J. (2008). Development and initial validation of brief public domain RIASEC marker scales. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 287–299. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2008.06.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Armstrong, P. I., & Vogel, D. L. (2009). Interpreting the interest–efficacy association from a RIASEC perspective. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 392–407. doi: 10.1037/a0016407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnold, J. (2004). The congruence problem in John Holland’s theory of vocational decisions. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 77, 95–113. doi: 10.1348/096317904322915937 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bikos, L. H., Krieshok, T. S., & O’Brien, K. M. (1998). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Missouri Occupational Card Sort. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 135–155. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1996.1572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Borges, N. J., Savickas, M. L., & Jones, B. J. (2004). Holland’s theory applied to medical specialty choice. Journal of Career Assessment, 12, 188–206. doi: 10.1177/1069072703257755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, D., & Brooks, L. (Eds.). (2002). Career choice and development: Applying contemporary theories to practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 132–166). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, D., & Lent, R. W. (2008). Handbook of counseling psychology (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Bueno, J. M., Lemos, C. G., & Tomé, F. A. (2004). Interesses profissionais de um grupo de estudantes de psicologia e suas relações com inteligência e personalidade. [Professional interests of a group of psychology students and their relation to intelligence and personality]. Psicologia em Estudo, 9(2), 271–278. doi: 10.1590/S1413-73722004000200013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Camp, C. C., & Chartrand, J. M. (1992). A comparison and evaluation of interest congruence indices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 41, 162–182. doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(92)90018-U.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cassin, S., Singer, A., Dobson, K., & Altmaier, E. (2007). Professional interests and career aspirations of graduate students in professional psychology: an exploratory survey. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 1, 26–27. doi: 10.1037/1931-3918.1.1.26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cobb, H. C., Reeve, R. E., Shealy, C. N., Norcross, J. C., Schare, M. L., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2004). Overlap among clinical, counselling, and school psychology: Implications for the profession and combined–integrated training. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 939–955. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coelho, V. (2012). Retrato de uma profissão: Quem somos, quantos somos. [The image of a profession: Who we are, how many are we?]. PSIS21, 3, 21–23.Google Scholar
  18. Crozier, W. R. (2009). The psychology of education: Achievements and challenges. Oxford Review of Education, 35, 587–600. doi: 10.1080/03054980903216317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Houwer, J., Teige-Mocigemba, S., Spruyt, A., & Moors, A. (2009). Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 347–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing LISREL. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. EFPA. (2013). EuroPsy—The European certificate in psychology. Retrieved from http://www.europsy-efpa.eu/sites/default/files/uploads/EuroPsy%20Regulations%20July%202013.pdf. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.
  22. Ferreira, A. I., Almeida, L., & Prieto, G. (2012). Construction of a memory battery for computerized administration, using item response theory. Psychological Reports, 111(2), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Gage, N., & Berliner, D. (1998). Educational psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  25. Galbraith, J. R. (2014). Designing organizations: Strategy, structure, and process at the business unit and enterprise levels. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  26. Gatchel, R. J., & Oordt, M. (2003). Clinical health psychology and primary care. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  27. Guilera, G., Gómez-Benito, J., Hidalgo, M., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (2013). Type I error and statistical power of the Mantel–Haenszel procedure for detecting DIF: A meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 18, 553–571. doi: 10.1037/a0034306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  29. Hartung, P. J., & Leong, F. T. (2005). Career specialty choice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holland, J. L. (1963). Explorations of a theory of vocational choice and achievement: A four-year prediction study. Psychological Reports, 12, 547–594. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1963.12.2.547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  32. Holland, J. L., Fritzsche, B. A., & Powell, A. B. (1994). SDS: Self-directed search technical manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  33. Horn, R. A., McGowan, M. R., Mitchell, D. R., Mellott, R. N., Lilly, K., & Martinez, L. (2007). A pilot study examining the longer term stability of the scientist–practitioner model of training. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 830–841. doi: 10.1177/0002764206297580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. INE (2012). Censos 2011 resultados definitivos—Portugal [Census 2011 definitive results - Portugal]. Lisbon, Portugal: Instituto Nacional de Estatística.Google Scholar
  36. Jones, S., & Allen, J. (2012). Evaluating psychology students’ library skills and experiences. Psychology Teaching Review, 18(2), 94–115.Google Scholar
  37. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  38. Kline, P. (2000). A psychometrics primer. London, UK: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  39. Krapp, A. (2007). An educational–psychological conceptualization of interest. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 7, 5–21. doi: 10.1007/s10775-007-9113-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Krumboltz, J. D. (1994). Improving career development theory from a social learning perspective. In R. Lent & M. Savickas (Eds.), Convergence in career development theories: Implications for science and practice (pp. 9–31). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  41. Lee, K. C. (2013). Training and educating international students in professional psychology: What graduate programs should know. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 7, 61–69. doi: 10.1037/a0031186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Leong, F. T., Pearce, M., & Huang, J. L. (2013). Assessing scientist and practitioner orientations in industrial/organizational psychology. Journal of Career Assessment, 21, 452–468. doi: 10.1177/1069072712475180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Leong, F. T. L. & Zachar, P. (1991). Development and validation of the scientist–practitioner inventory for psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 331–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leong, F. T., Zachar, P., Conant, L., & Tolliver, D. (2007). Career specialty preferences among psychology majors: Cognitive processing styles associated with scientist and practitioner interests. The Career Development Quarterly, 55, 328–338. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-0045.2007.tb00087.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Linacre, J. M. (2005). A user’s guide to WINSTEPS. Chicago, IL: MESA.Google Scholar
  46. Linacre, J. M., & Wright, B. D. (2000). WINSTEPS: multiple-choice, rating scale, and partial credit Rasch analysis [computer program]. Chicago, IL: MESA.Google Scholar
  47. Magalhães, M., Straliotto, M., Keller, M., & Gomes, W. B. (2001). Eu quero ajudar as pessoas: a escolha vocacional da psicologia [I want to help people: The choice for vocational psychology]. Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão, 21(2), 10–27. doi: 10.1590/S1414-98932001000200003.Google Scholar
  48. Martins, M. A. P. S. (2012). Os tipos de personalidade do modelo de Holland e as escolhas vocacionais em alunos de cursos profissionais [The personality types of Holland’s model and the vocational choices of students in professional courses]. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  49. Noronha, A. P. P., & Ambiel, R. A. M. (2008). Estudo correlacional entre escala de aconselhamento profissional e selfdirected search (SDS) [Correlation study between the professional counseling scale and the self-directed search (SDS)]. Interação em Psicologia, 12, 21–33.Google Scholar
  50. Noronha, A. P. P., Freitas, F., & Ottati, F. (2003). Análise de instrumentos de avaliação de interesses profissionais [An analysis of professional interest assessment instruments]. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 19(3), 287–291. doi: 10.1590/S0102-37722003000300011.Google Scholar
  51. O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analyis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32, 396–402. doi: 10.3758/BF03200807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pasquali, L. (1999). Instrumentos psicológicos: manual prático de elaboração [Psychological Instruments: Practical manual for development]. Brasília, Brazil: IBAPP.Google Scholar
  53. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rodrigues, R. I., Ferreira, A. I., & Bártolo-Ribeiro, R. (2013). Construção e desenvolvimento de um questionário de interesses para a Psicologia [Construction and development of a questionnaire of interessts in Psychology]. Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico e Avaliação Psicológica, 36(2), 99–116.Google Scholar
  55. Rottinghaus, P. J., Gaffey, A. R., Borgen, F. H., & Ralston, C. A. (2006). Diverse pathways of psychology majors: Vocational interests, self-efficacy, and intentions. The Career Development Quarterly, 55, 85–93. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-0045.2006.tb00007.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ruiz-Palomino, P., & Martinez-Cañas, R. (2013). Ethical culture and employee outcomes: the mediating role of person-organization fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 116, 173–188. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1453-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Savickas, M. L., & Spokane, O. (1999). Vocational interests: meaning, measurement and counselling use. Palo-Alto, CA: Davies-Black.Google Scholar
  58. Schmidt, M., Perels, F., & Schmitz, B. (2010). How to perform idiographic and a combination of idiographic and nomothetic approaches: a comparison of time series analyses and hierarchical linear modeling. Journal of Psychology, 218(3), 166–174. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409/a000026.Google Scholar
  59. Silva, P. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Super, D. E. (1984). Career and life development. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (pp. 192–234). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.Google Scholar
  61. Teixeira, M. O., Barros, A., & Janeiro, I. (2010). Análise transcultural dos interesses, resultados do SDS em amostras de Portugal e do Brasil [Transcultural analysis of interests, results of the SDS in samples from Portugal and Brasil]. Actas do VII Simpósio Nacional de Investigação em Psicologia (pp. 3796–3805). Minho, Portugal: University of Minho.Google Scholar
  62. Tracey, T. (2002). Development of interests and competency beliefs: A 1-year longitudinal study of fifth- to eighth-grade students using the ICA-R and structural equation modeling. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 49, 148–163. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.49.2.148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Velicer, W. F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 321–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vittengl, J. R., Bosley, C. Y., Brescia, S. A., Eckardt, E. A., Neidig, J. M., Shelver, K. S., & Sapenoff, L. A. (2004). Why are some undergraduates more (and others less) interested in psychological research? Teaching of Psychology, 31, 91–97. doi: 10.1207/s15328023top3102_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vorst, H. C. M. (2002). Study choice interest test. Manual and references. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: University of Amsterdam, Psychological Methods Department.Google Scholar
  66. Wicherts, J. M., & Vorst, H. C. (2010). The relation between specialty choice of psychology students and their interests, personality, and cognitive abilities. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 494–500. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2010.01.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago, IL: MESA.Google Scholar
  68. Zachar, P., & Leong, F. T. (1992). A problem of personality: Scientist and practitioner differences in psychology. Journal of Personality, 60, 665–677. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00925.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zachar, P., & Leong, F. T. (1997). The changing nature of the science of vocational psychology. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 262–274.Google Scholar
  70. Zachar, P., & Leong, F. T. (2000). A 10-year longitudinal study of scientists and practitioner interests in psychology: Assessing the Boulder model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 575–580. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.31.5.575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zieky, M. (1993). Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in item development. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 337–364). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aristides I. Ferreira
    • 1
  • Rosa I. Rodrigues
    • 1
  • Paula da Costa Ferreira
    • 2
  1. 1.Business Research UnitInstituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL)LisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Faculty of PsychologyUniversity of LisbonLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options