Flexibility and satisfaction with college major.

Sherrick, Michael F.; Davenport, Charles A.; Colina, Thomas L.

doi:10.1037/h0031509

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Much of this early research reported specific traits that differed between students from some different academic majors. Some studies reported differences between science majors and humanities and social science majors (Banth & Mohan, 1985; Sherrick, Davenport, & Colina, 1971). Other studies reported differences between engineering majors (Nixon & Parsons, 1989) or business majors (Kipnis, Lane, & Berger, 1967; Lounsbury, Smith, Levy, Leong, & Gibson, 2009; Pringle, Dubois, & Yankee, 2010) and students from other majors.…”

Section: Personality Academic Major and Academic Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Major Changes

Pozzebon

Ashton

Visser

2013

Journal of Career Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a sample of 346 college students, we compared students of different academic major areas in their personality characteristics, mental abilities, and vocational interests, and we examined the congruence between vocational interests and academic major as a predictor of academic outcomes (grade point average, satisfaction, and change of major). Results were mainly consistent with predicted differences between the four academic major groups (arts/humanities, business, science, and helping/child related), and several of the observed differences were moderately large. However, congruence between interests and major was unrelated to academic outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Personality Academic Major and Academic Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Major Changes

Pozzebon

Ashton

Visser

2013

Journal of Career Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Global (as opposed to facet) major satisfaction has infrequently been assessed. When major satisfaction is assessed globally, it is typically measured with a single item (e.g., Chartrand et al, 1992;Leong et al, 2005;Sherrick, Davenport, & Colina, 1970;Wachowiak, 1972;Ware & Pogge, 1980) that may lack reliability or with a measure that has unknown psychometric properties (e.g., Morrow, 1971;Nelson, 1982). Consequently, the need for a multi-item satisfaction measure with sound psychometric properties has been identified Lounsbury, Park, Sundstrom, Williamson, & Pemberton, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing College Students' Satisfaction With Their Academic Majors

Nauta

2007

Journal of Career Assessment

182

264

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A six-item measure of global satisfaction with one's major, the Academic Major Satisfaction Scale (AMSS), was developed and validated. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggested a unidimensional structure. The measure had high internal consistency and distinguished between students who remained in their majors versus those who changed majors during 1- and 2-year periods. AMSS scores were positively associated with career decision self-efficacy and negatively associated with career choice anxiety and generalized indecisiveness. AMSS scores were also associated with indices of socially desirable responding, but social desirability did not account for the relationships between major satisfaction and the career decision-making variables. Implications for theory and ideas for using the AMSS in research and practice are presented.

show abstract

“…Career adaptability (a measure of flexibility) has been correlated with major satisfaction (r = .35;. An analysis of variance comparing social science majors and natural science majors in terms of flexibility and major satisfaction found that social science majors who were more, as opposed to less, flexible were also more satisfied, but that natural science majors who were less, as opposed to more, flexible were more satisfied (F = 4.56, df = 2,112, p < .05; Sherrick, Davenport, & Colina, 1971). In a multiple regression, the personality trait emotionality was found to predict major satisfaction (β = -.12; Pozzebon, Ashton, & Visser, 2014).…”

Section: Academic Major Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory

Schenkenfelder¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental factors (faculty integration and student integration) and self-determination theory factors (perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness) were used to predict academic major satisfaction. It was hypothesized that environmental factors and self-determination factors would directly predict major satisfaction. In line with this, it was predicted that a path model which included environmental factors would prove to be a better fit than a model that did not. It was also predicted that environmental factors would directly predict self-determination factors, and that self-determination factors would mediate the relation between environmental factors and major satisfaction. Path analysis was used to test the hypotheses. In a sample of 332 college students, it was found that environmental factors did not directly predict major satisfaction, and a path model which included environmental factors was not a better fit. Environmental factors did indirectly predict major satisfaction, with selfdetermination factors as a mediator. Self-determination factors were directly predicted by environmental factors, and did directly predict major satisfaction. Implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed.

show abstract

Flexibility and satisfaction with college major.

Cited by 5 publications

References 10 publications

Major Changes

Major Changes

Assessing College Students' Satisfaction With Their Academic Majors

Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About