Practice and research in career counseling and development—2003

Career Development Quarterly, Dec, 2004 by John C. Dagley, Shannon K. Salter

How can ability assessment, focused as it is on a person's maximal performance, and interest assessment, focused as it is on typical performance, be integrated to help inform career choice? Darcy and Tracey suggested that the construct of self-efficacy, or self-assessment of ability, can serve quite usefully as the bridge between maximal and typical, or ability and interest, assessment. Further, they suggested that self-efficacy estimates may have more utility than cognitive career assessments because they are more of a typical, everyday assessment of preferences--unless the general response factor (or g factor) in self-assessments biases self-estimates through a response set, social desirability, or acquiescence style. Darcy and Tracey concluded that the g factor in interest assessment can be interpreted as "flexibility" of interest, not too biasing in any given direction, and as such can be seen as a moderating influence on a person's congruence with his or her environment. A person with a higher g factor is more satisfied and congruent.

Assessment Research

New and improved measures for use in career development research and practice continue to add significantly to the profession's annual literature. Betz et al. expanded the Skills Confidence Inventory (SCI; Betz, Borgen, & Harmon, 1996) to assess self-efficacy regarding the Basic Interest dimensions of the Strong Interest Inventory (SII). The authors developed 17 new confidence scales, conducted initial testing with a college student sample, and conducted final scale evaluation with an employed adult sample. Coefficient alphas ranged from .84 to .94 in the college sample and from .80 to .94 in the adult sample. The scales also demonstrated concurrent validity, because there was a large difference across eight occupational groups examined.

Betz et al. found interesting differences by gender and population. Men reported higher levels of confidence on Using Technology, Mechanical, Mathematics, Science, and Data Management, and women reported higher confidence on Cultural Sensitivity, Teamwork, and Project Management, with all effect sizes d > .20. When working with clients, it is important to consider confidence and self-efficacy across a variety of dimensions because so many occupations require a diverse skill set.

In a follow-up and expansion of the developmental study, Rottinghaus, Betz, and Borgen examined the validity of the newly developed Expanded Skills Confidence Inventory (E-SCI) in a study of 715 college students by comparing E-SCI scores with the parallel 17 basic interest scales of the SII. The results demonstrated strong internal consistency, with coefficient alphas of .82 to .92. Once again, men and women showed differences in confidence levels in predicted dimensions: Men reported higher confidence on Math, Mechanical Technology, Science, and Data Management, whereas women reported higher confidence on Cultural Sensitivity, Teamwork, and Helping. Patterns of correlations with the SII's themes and basic interest scales were very similar to the earlier study, all as predicted theoretically. Moreover, in this study, the researchers found the use of the parallel measures of confidence and interests together led to greater power over either alone in predicting educational aspirations, academic majors, and career preferences.