The effects of doctoral socialization on career decision-making self-efficacy

Dean Campbell
<cecildec@usc.edu>

Abstract

The purpose of this literature review is to identify the role that sources of career development self-efficacy precepts play in the socialization of doctoral students and to determine what effect CDSE has on student persistence. The review will dedicate special consideration to graduate students of color. Findings regarding the influence of self-efficacy beliefs on doctoral students' career decision-making will be explored. The importance of social cognitive career theory will be explored as it relates to doctoral student socialization and persistence.

Introduction

Few studies have focused on individual psycho-cognitive abilities and individual differences doctoral students need to succeed in graduate school. Socialization studies pertaining to doctoral student persistence have focused on structural features (faculty advising; financial support, etc.) rather than how the individual psycho-cognitive domain relates to persistence and success in doctoral study. Graduate training programs are not adequately structured to enhance career decision-making for graduate students of color.

In Weidman, Twale and Stein (2001) the authors define graduate student socialization as "the process through which individuals gain the knowledge, skills, and values necessary for successful entry into a professional career requiring an advanced level of specialized knowledge and skills" (p. iii). In the monograph, the authors argue non-linear socialization models are better than linear models in which students are trained uniformly. In non-linear models students experience socialization with more simultaneous interaction across the multiple conceptual contexts which include personal and professional communities in and outside of the training program. In a study of doctoral student attrition, Lovitts (2001) similarly refers to a distribution of structures or a model of contexts that work together to integrate doctoral students into the graduate school experience.

In a critique of traditional socialization and career development theory application to doctoral training, Antony (2000) argues that doctoral student experience psychological dissonance before surrendering their own personal values for those of the faculty. The students do this willingly for career advancement although they remain dissatisfied with the graduate experience. Additional discussion of the psycho-cognitive domain follows.

In the socialization process doctoral students enter the program with their pre-existing self-efficacy constructs. Self-efficacy is "people's judgment in their capabilities to organize and execute a course of action required to attain designated types of performance" (Bandura, 1986, p. 391). The sources of self-efficacy expectation are (1) performance accomplishments; (2) vicarious learning; (3) emotional arousal; (4) and verbal persuasion. The interaction between the components of the environment (e.g., curriculum, faculty, etc.) and the individuals' self-system (Bandura, 1986) interact with one another to produce reciprocal determinism (Bandura, 1978a, 1986 in Pajares) in a social context. In the career area, Holland (1973) developed an individual and environment theory links six personality types and six occupational domains (realistic; investigative; social; enterprising; and conventional). Two assumptions of the theory are that people search for work environments that are a match of their personality and occupational interests, and interaction between the personality and environment determine behavior (Holland, 1973, p. 4).

Returning the idea of reciprocal determinism, the self-system and the socialization process intersect both operate within social cognitive career theory. Gainor and Lent define (1998) social cognitive career theory (SCCT) that extends upon the work of Bandura (1986) and emphasize three social cognitive mechanisms that seem especially relevant to career development: self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and goal mechanisms. Outcome expectations refer to the expected consequences of a particular action; goals, or intentions, reflect one's determination to pursue a given action (p. 404). These sources interact with the students' self-efficacy and impact persistence in the graduate program.

Review of the Literature

Articles for this review were obtained by searching two online article-indexing databases, ERIC Journals and PsycInfo. The keywords used for searching the databases were self-efficacy and college students; graduate students and graduate education; and career development. The search was limited to articles published between the years 1996 and 2001. In addition, the following journals were hand searched to locate recent articles: Journal of Career Development; Journal of Career Assessment; Journal of Counseling Development; Journal of Counseling Psychology; Journal of Student Development.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this paper, persistence will stand for uninterrupted enrollment and graduation from the Ph.D. program in a timely manner. Niles et al. (1997) define career self-efficacy as judgments of personal efficacy in relation to the wide range of behavior involved in career choice and adjustment (p. 479). Whiston (1996) defines career decision-making self-efficacy (CDSE) as "the degree to which an individual feels confident in completing career decision making tasks" (p. 138) such as gathering information about careers.

Graduate training and self-efficacy

The direct experiences of graduate students exemplify the first source of self-efficacy, or performance accomplishment (Bandura, 1986). These experiences are career related and are developmental. These training experiences give doctoral students the belief that they will succeed in future roles as faculty professionals. Studies identify specific domains of these experiences in graduate clinical training, the job search process, and in-session learning performance.

Three studies focus on graduate clinical work and teaching. Heppner et al. (1998) found no direct linear relationship between student-counselor self-efficacy and client process and outcome variables in a counselor-client training study (p. 400). Another study (O'Brien et al., 1997) evaluated the counseling practices of graduate counseling students and confirmed the validity of a scale that measured counseling self-efficacy of the students. Prieto and Meyers (1999) surveyed graduate assistants and found that formal training has a positive, statistically significant effect on their sense of self-efficacy toward teaching.

A study by Bikos and Furry (1999) with international graduate students did not find any significant gains in performance accomplishment in career decision-making, although significant increases were found in self-efficacy for vocational identity for occupation choice that the subjects reported (p. 6, paragraph 6). Shea and Howell (2000) found in a study with graduate business students that efficacy-performance relationships and self-correcting efficacy-performance relationships support Bandura's reciprocal causation theory (p. 9, paragraph 5).

Studies show disagreement over the role graduate student CDSE plays in domains specific to the professional fields of practice. Heppner et. al (1998) found no direct relationship in counseling self-efficacy and client outcomes; Prieto and Meyers (1999) found a positive, statistically significant effect in the teaching domain. Other studies show the significance of self-efficacy in vocational identity, occupational choice (Bikos and Furry, 1999) as well as the relationship between self-efficacy increases and self-correcting performance (Shea and Howell, 2000).

Anxiety/goal setting and motivation.

Bandura (1986) asserts that anxiety and motivation originate from the third source of self-efficacy expectations, emotional arousal. Graduate students feel anxious and motivated due to a diversity of experiences they encounter in their training programs and throughout their career development. Studies demonstrate the varying sources of experiences in graduate training from which graduate students internalize anxiety and motivation.

Three studies identify sources of anxiety in graduate student training. Griffin and Griffin (1997) found that reciprocal peer tutoring among education graduate students "may help students achieve higher level learning objectives" and may reduce test anxiety among students who tutor peers (p. 207). A study by Szymanski et al. (1998) found that in rehabilitation education masters students "contextualized research instruction decreased research anxiety and increased the perceived utility of research and confidence in research ability" (p. 356). In a study by Stubblebine (1998) undergraduate students who performed well on statistics exams yet surprisingly classified their performance feedback as threatening; students who scored poorly classified the performance feedback as positive and non-threatening.

Two studies identify sources of motivation in graduate student training. A study by Schlosser and Gelso (2001) found reliability and validity for an instrument, Advisory Working Alliance Inventory (AWAI), that measured the graduate advising relationship between the faculty advisor and student from the perspective of the student. They found that an empirical emotion connection, called "rapport," existed between the advisor and student (p. 165), although they did not evaluate the impact of this rapport on motivating student performance. In a study by Schwartz and Gredler (1998) masters students in a teacher education program demonstrated no significant gains in self-efficacy self-regulated learning after receiving goal-setting instruction.

Graduate training provides graduate students various sources of motivation and anxiety for career development. Tutoring and innovative pedagogy (e.g., contextualized research instruction) reduced test and research anxiety by instilling confidence in graduate students. Healthy rapport between faculty advisor and graduate mentee demonstrated promise for tracking emotional connections between the two. Students can perceive feedback as both threatening and frustrating. Goal-setting instruction showed no gains in increasing self-efficacy.

Research self-efficacy.

Research self-efficacy relates to, but is not limited to, the emotional arousal source of career self-efficacy mentioned above. Therefore, an expanded discussion of research self-efficacy will follow here because research is one of three core domains of the academic profession: teaching, research, and service. Research is a critical aptitude doctoral students learn to master in training. To an extent, some doctoral students enter graduate school with prior experience in conducting research in their undergraduate programs; others have no experience. Varying levels of confidence and self-efficacy with research ability exist among graduate students within the same department.

Three studies (Kahn and Scott, 1997; Gelso, Mallinkrodt, and Judge, 1996; Bieschke, Ebertz, Bard, and Croteau, 1998) found research self-efficacy to be important for doctoral student persistence. Kahn and Scott (1997) found valid predictors of research efficacy in the training environment, particularly predictors of research productivity and science-related career goals. Gelso, Mallinkrodt, and Judge, (1996) tested the validity of a scale measuring the relationship between the research training environment and attitudes toward research training in doctoral counseling psychology students during graduate school. They found the scale to be valid and that multiple elements of the research training environment shape student attitudes differently. Bieschke et al. (1997) applied the social cognitive career theory in a review of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) research-training environments of counseling psychology doctoral training programs. They concluded that the research training environments are not "intentionally affirming of LGB issues" (p. 737), but that research training environments can be structured to accommodate LGB research interests and foster LGB research productivity.

Studies prove the research-training environment is a domain that shapes career self-efficacy attitudes in doctoral students in varying ways. These attitudes relate to research productivity, career goals in academic or scientific professions (Kahn and Scott, 1997); in-program graduate research training (Gelso, Mallinkrodt, and Judge, 1996); and unsupportive structures of research training environments (Bieschke et al., 1997). The extent to which the research training environment shapes student attitudes towards research shapes career development as students work toward becoming faculty.

Undergraduates

Women and minorities

Numerous studies focus on career development self-efficacy in undergraduate students. Career development is an on-going process; graduate students bring their undergraduate career development experiences with them into the graduate training experience. Therefore, it is appropriate to apply findings from undergraduate studies to the graduate career development experience. Some individual differences - gender, race, disability, etc. - play a distinctive role in career development self-efficacy. This role exists because of reciprocity determinism (see above) that exists among the students, their environment, and their self-efficacy beliefs.

Sullivan and Mahalik (2000) found in a study of sixty-one college women that career-decision making self-efficacy in women increased following a group intervention that used the four sources of self-efficacy modification (Bandura, 1986). The study confirmed the validity and utility of group intervention for women who self-report that career development is more complex and restricted due to sociocultural barriers. Schaefers, Epperson, and Nauta (1997) conducted a study in which they found no significant difference in persistence between women and men in a college engineering program. The study did reveal factors that added significantly to persistence including, ability, self-efficacy, support barriers, and interest congruence. Luzzo and Hawley (2001) reported that female subjects were more likely than the males to expect to experience negative comments (e.g., insults or rude jokes) about their sex, and to have a harder time getting hired than people of the opposite sex (p. 65).

Ethnic minority students reported significantly lower coping-efficacy for perceived career-related barriers than European American students reported (Luzzo and Hawley, 2001, p. 79). In another study, Luzzo and McWhirter (2001) found evidence that coping-efficacy in ethnic minorities and women can offset the negative effect perceived barriers or obstacles have on success and accomplishment in career development (p. 62). Gainor and Lent (1998) argue that Black students who show interest in math-related majors are more likely to pursue math-related careers (e.g., engineering and physical science) even in fields where sociocultural barriers account for under representation of minorities in these fields. The study found that Black students' math self-efficacy and outcome expectations were jointly predictive of the math-related interests" (Gainor and Lent, 1998, p. 409). The results also "offer tentative support for the applicability of social cognitive career theory across different racial/ethnic groups" (p. 410). Gloria and Hird (1999) found that racial and ethnic minority students had both higher trait anxiety and lower career self-efficacy compared to white students. They explained that "because professional occupations are predominately occupied and dominated by Whites, racial and ethnic minority (REM) students may not believe or expect that their decision making will result in placement in their chosen occupation" (p. 6).

Gender and REM status shape career decision making and career self-efficacy precepts in undergraduate students. Studies (Schaefers, Epperson, and Nauta, 1997; Gainor and Lent, 1998) show sometimes-conflicting evidence that these individual differences impede performance and self-efficacy development in academic and professional fields where women and minorities are underrepresented. Both gender and REM status shape undergraduate student career expectations - sometimes negatively through trait anxiety, anticipation of negative comments or lower job opportunities, and sometimes positively through the presence of coping-efficacy. Both gender and REM status indicate the operationalization of social cognitive career theory in action.

Key variables: age, family, co-curricular work and athletics, disability.

Students in the training environment are not all alike; they have varying pre-training life experiences, academic expectations, and career expectations. Students' career decision-making abilities vary, as do their self-efficacy beliefs about those abilities. Individual differences including age, family background, disability status interact with other elements of the training environment and shape career self-efficacy.

Peterson and delMas (1998) found that career decision making self-efficacy consisted of two distinct components for under prepared college students of varying ages and registration patterns: information gathering and decision making. Gianakos (1996) found that adult learners over age 25 reported significantly greater levels of overall career decision making self-efficacy compared to younger, traditional-aged college students in terms of five related career choice competencies: goal setting, occupational information;, problem solving, planning, and self-appraisal (p. 220).

Whiston (1996) found in her study that "there are family dimensions related to career indecision and career decision making self-efficacy. . . but the findings in this study are not consistent with other research that indicates that family conflict and cohesion may influence career variables" (p. 146). Luzzo (1996) reported college students who overcame family-related barriers in the past increased the confidence in career decision-making self-efficacy (p. 246).

Kornspan and Etzel (2001) found in a study of junior college student athletes that psychological variables were significant predictors or career maturity for junior college student athletes, and that career self-efficacy was the third most influential variable behind career locus of control and gender (p. 128). Luzzo, McWhirter, and Hutcheson (1997) found in their study of employed college students that "students who were employed in occupations congruent with their career interests exhibited significantly more of an internal career locus of control than their peers" (p. 170). Luzzo, Hitchings, and Retish (1999) found that college students with disabilities "exhibited more problematic social cognitive career decision-making attitudes and beliefs than did students without disabilities" (p. 6).

Studies show that age had a significant effect on the career development self-efficacy Ð perhaps because older students have more life and career-related experiences. Opposing results from studies show that family influence on career self-efficacy has varying effects on career decision-making in individuals, and that past family barriers are surmountable. Studies of conditions including co-curricular athletic and employment responsibilities revealed locus of control varied in individuals. Similarly, students with disability status may experience loss of locus of internal control because parents and teachers make vocational decisions on their behalf. Luzzo, Hitchings, and Retish (1999) concluded that one possible reason "is that parents and teachers tend to make the majority of educational and vocational decisions for students with disabilities" (p. 6).

Future expectations and sources of self-efficacy.

Bandura (1986) proposed that expectations for future action are based upon past experiences. Doctoral students develop the professional skills needed for professional roles during their doctoral training. Their training experiences serve as exemplars for future expectations of success the students encounter as faculty. These exemplars reflect the theory of self-efficacy Bandura proposed. Furthermore, individual personality traits shape the kinds of experiences and career self-efficacy doctoral students have in training environment.

Internal and external sources of self-efficacy account for the sources of self-efficacy expectations. Two studies reveal the relationship between internal sources of confidence in future abilities based on current skills and performance. Brown, Lent, and Gore (2000) conducted a clarifying study to differentiate between self-rated abilities and self-efficacy beliefs. Prussia, Anderson, and Manz (1998) found that "self-leadership positively influences self-efficacy and self-efficacy affects performance" (p. 535) specifically in the collegiate educational setting. A study of an internal source of self-efficacy by Niles, Erford, Hunt, and Watts (1997) found that the dominant decision-making styles that related positevely to career decision making self-efficacy and accomplishment in career development tasks was systematic decision-making and adaptive vocational behavior (p. 485).

Fisher and Stafford (1999) found the primary external influences on career decision-making was teacher influence; others influences were negative social events; parental influence; high school academic experiences and self-efficacy; and ethnic-gender expectations; and friends' influence. Tuel and Betz (1998) found significant statistical correlations between the skills confidence inventory, a measure of self-efficacy expectations via the Holland themes, and those of the Myers-Briggs personality type indicator a study of undergraduate students.

Studies have identified internal sources of confidence that are distinguishable from self-efficacy and that also increase individual confidence or self-efficacy. A related indicator that assists career development is systematic decision-making. Another internal source, personality type, also correlates with self-efficacy expectations and vocational expectations. External sources that influence career decision-making are numerous; high school teacher influence in one study was the primary influence.

Conclusion

Doctoral students do not divorce their pre-training life experiences from the graduate experience, so their CDSE shapes how they relate to the doctoral socialization and professionalization processes. Student motivation can be reduced when a disconnect arises within the socialization and training process for students of color for the CDSE expectations students of color have for their future careers.

Two categories of studies were reviewed: one that relates to graduate students self-efficacy, the other relates to undergraduate career self-efficacy. This paper will infer that conclusions found from undergraduate career self-efficacy relate to graduate training because career development is a continuous, life-long process that carriers over from the undergraduate to the graduate years and beyond.

The problem here identified is that graduate training programs are not adequately structured to enhance CDSE in graduate students of color. The academic departments need to be more purposeful in developing minority students' career development by responding with multiple developmental interventions outside of the traditional areas of faculty work: teaching, research, and service activities.

The studies of graduate students and CDSE reviewed in this paper largely discussed structural aspects of the training experience and how they help students gain confidence. Yet in domain specific tasks and activities related to the work of faculty in graduate training programs the results are not always conclusive. On one hand, Heppner et. al (1998) found no direct relationship in counseling self-efficacy and client outcomes. Even when counseling students performed counseling tasks effectively the study indicated that student self-efficacy directly accounted for the intended client outcome. On the other hand, Prieto and Meyers (1999) found a positive, statistically significant effect in the teaching domain. Other studies reviewed above pointed to two structural components in the graduate training environment that contributed to feelings of confidence in the training experience: innovative pedagogy and the faculty mentoring experience.

Studies of undergraduate students were various and focused on the effects multiple variables make on CDSE. Similar to studies with graduate students and CDSE there were findings that were contradictory. Of particular significance in the undergraduate studies was the import of social cognitive in the analysis of CDSE. Contradictory findings from studies by Schaefers, Epperson, and Nauta, (1997) and Gainor and Lent (1998) show gender and REM status shape undergraduate student career expectations - sometimes negatively through trait anxiety, anticipation of negative comments or lower job opportunities, and sometimes positively through the presence of coping-efficacy. Results of the study by Luzzo and McWhirter (2001) also indicate ethnic minorities and women may demonstrate lower levels of coping efficacy. These variables continue to play an important role in career development for all college students, but particularly for women and minorities in majors and professional fields where they are underrepresented.

Doctoral students come to graduate education with varying levels of CDSE. They do not study in isolation, but shape their career self-efficacy with pre-program experiences and those they encounter during their studies. Race and ethnicity and gender can significantly shape the career self-efficacy precepts of students (see Gloria and Hird), and equally important, the variables shape the behaviors of others in the environment with in turn shapes individual career self-efficacy. Gloria and Hird write "ethnic identity is a vocational task such that one's career development is a function off one's ethnic group identification and one's reference group perspective" (p. 1 paragraph. 2).

Implications

Currently, career counseling and career services are available to undergraduate students in many postsecondary institutions and even in many high school districts. However, the career counseling process is not a major service in graduate training programs in the humanities and social sciences. As this literature shows, doctoral students enter graduate training programs with varying levels of CDSE, but programs often do not systematically evaluate the levels of CDSE in doctoral students to alter the training pedagogy appropriately. For example, graduate programs could provide individualized training and career development or administer personality and occupational preference tests for students with different levels of coping self-efficacy in light of the multiple pressures all doctoral students face in the training experience.

One public policy implication this review reveals is to prioritize career development for doctoral programs. The anticipated shortage of faculty in postsecondary education will soon be a reality with the aging professorate. Career development interventions in graduate programs that focus on coping-efficacy, minority populations in graduate education, and women will contribute to building a more diverse professorate needed in postsecondary education in the 21^st century.

References

Antony, J. (in press). Reexamining doctoral student socialization and professional development: Moving beyond the congruence and assimilation orientation. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research.

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

Bieschke, K., Eberz, A., Bard, C., & Croteau, J. (1998). Using social cognitive theory to create affirmative lesbian, gay, and bisexual research training environments. The Counseling Psychologist, 26(5), 735-753.

Bikos, L., & Furry, T. (1999). The job search club for international students: an evaluation. The Career Development Quarterly, 48(1), 31-44.

Dinter, L. (2000). The relationship between self-efficacy and lifestyle patterns. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 56(4), 462-473.

Fisher, T., & Stafford, M. (1999). Reliability and validity of the career influence inventory: a pilot study. Journal of Career Assessment, 7(2), 187-202.

Gainor, K., & Lent, R. (1998). Social cognitive expectations and racial identity attitudes in predicting the math choice intentions of black college students. Journal of Counseling Development, 45(4), 403-413.

Gelso, C., Mallinkrodt, B., & Judge, A. (1996). Research training environment, attitudes toward research, and research self-efficacy: The revised research training environment scale. The Counseling Psychologist, 24(2), 304-322.

Gianakos, I. (1996). Career development differences between adult and traditional-aged learners. Journal of Career Development, 22(3), 211-223.

Gloria, A., & Hird, J. (1999). Influences of ethnic and non-ethnic variables on the career decision-making self-efficacy of college students. The Career Development Quarterly, 48(2), 157-174.

Griffin, B., & Griffin, M. (1997). The effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on graduate students' achievement, test anxiety, and academic self-efficacy. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65(3), 197-209.

Heppner, M., Multon, K., Gysbers, N., Ellis, C., & Zook, C. (1998). The relationship of trainee self-efficacy to the process and outcome of career counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45(4), 393-402.

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

Kahn, J., & Scott, N. (1997). Predictors of research productivity and science-related career goals among counseling psychology doctoral students. The Counseling Psychologist, 25(1), 38-67.

Kornspan, A., & Etzel, E. (2001). The relationship of demographic and psychological variables to career maturity of junior college student-athletes. Journal of College Student Development, 42(2), 122-132.

Lent, R., Brown, S., & Gore, J., P. (1997). Discriminant and predictive validity of academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, and mathematics-specific self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(3), 307-315.

Lovitts, B. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Luzzo, D. (1996). Exploring the relationship between the perception of occupational barriers and career development. Journal of Career Development, 22(4), 239-249.

Luzzo, D., Hitchings, W., & Retish, P. (1999). Evaluating differences in college students' career decision making on the basis of disbility status. The Career Development Quarterly, 48(2), 142-156.

Luzzo, D., & McWhirter, E. (2001). Sex and ethnic differences in the perception of educational and career-related barriers and levels of coping efficacy. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 61-67.

Luzzo, D., McWhirter, E., & Hutcheson, K. (1997). Evaluating career decision-making factors associated with employment among first-year college students. Journal of College Student Development, 38(2), 166-171.

Niles, S., Erford, B., Hunt, B., & Watts, R. (1997). Decision-making styles and career development in college students. Journal of College Student Development, 38(5), 479-488.

O'Brien, K., Heppner, M., Flores, L., & L., B. (1997). The career counseling self-efficacy scale: Instrument development and training applications. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(1), 20-31.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.

Peterson, S., & delMas, R. (1998). The component structure of career decision-making self-efficacy for under prepared college students. Journal of Career Development, 24(3), 209-225.

Prussia, G., Anderson, J., & Manz, C. (1998). Self-leadership and performance outcomes: The mediating influence of self-efficacy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 523-538.

Schaefers, K., Epperson, D., & Nauta, M. (1997). Women's career development: Can theoretically derived variables predict persistence in engineering majors? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(2), 173-183.

Schlosser, L., & Gelso, C. (2001). Measuring the working alliance in advisor-advisee relationships in graduate school. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48(2), 157-167.

Schwartz, L., & Gredler, M. (1998). The effects of self-instructional materials on goal-setting and self-efficacy. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 31(2), 83-89.

Shea, C., & Howell, J. (2000). Efficacy-performance spirals: an empirical test. Journal of Management, 26(4), 791-812.

Stubblebine, P. (1998). Effect of threatening feedback on expected grade, self-efficacy, and motivation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 67-77.

Sullivan, K., & Mahalik, J. (2000). Increasing career self-efficacy for women: evaluating a group intervention. Journal of Counseling Development, 78(1), 54-62.

Szymanski, E., Swett, E., Watson, E., Lin, S., & Chan, S. (1998). The effects of contextualized research instruction on research anxiety, perceived utility of research, and confidence in research ability. Rehabilitation Education, 12(4), 347-360.

Tuel, B., & Betz, N. (1998). Relationships of career self-efficacy expectations to the Myers-Briggs type indicator and the personal styles scales. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 3, 150-163.

Weidman, J., Twale, D. & Stein, E. (2001). Socialization of graduate and professional students in higher education: A perilous passage? San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Whiston, S. (1996). The relationship among family interaction patterns and career indecision and career decision-making self-efficacy. Journal of Career Development, 23(2), 137-149.

Academic Exchange Extra invites reader responses to any writings in this issue--especially articles advancing the scholarly debate of issues raised.

Page Viewed:   / Created: January 2002 / Updated: Tuesday, 8 January 2002