Career Decision Making Self-Efficacy Scale Commented [1]: Revise to: Career Decision Making

Self-Efficacy Scale
__________________________

Faculty of the School of Arts and Sciences

University of San Carlos

Cebu City, Philippines

___________________

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirement for the Degree of

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN PSYCHOLOGY

By:

Arias, Annaver Z.

Bacatan, Anne Therese J.

Faburada, Elle Nina V.

Martinez, Hyacinth Britneyripples M.

 2

INTRODUCTION Commented [2]: Basta APA nya unpublished paper,

dapat nay indentions sa sugud sa paragraphs.
“Decisions are a way of defining ourselves. There comes a
time in life when there is nothing else to do but go your own way.
Where you are headed there are no trails, no paths, just your own instincts”.

- Sergio Bambaren

Every day, people are submerged with decisions, big and small. Understanding how

people carefully decide on their choices has received attention. Theories have been generated to

explain how people make decisions and what types of factors influence decision making in the

near future. Making decisions is often difficult because each alternative usually has many aspects

and very seldom does the best alternative excel over all others. In addition, people need to know

the process of improving performance to understand decision making.

Decision making is an important psychological function that permits for an examination

of its process and discovery of its link between thought and action (Radford et al. 1986). It is the

process of choosing between two or more alternatives. Individuals make choices based on their

personal preferences, values, and goals. Every decision has an outcome and involves risks. For

example, when deciding which company to apply, the applicant must weigh the costs and

benefits of each company and come to a decision that maximizes his or her benefits and

minimizes his costs, compared to other choices. It is hard to make decisions, and much harder

when you encounter uncertainty. Uncertain decisions can cloud individual’s judgment and slows

down their ability to think clearly. When facing uncertainty in decision making, we often rely on

heuristics. These are fast and effortless cognitive strategies. Heuristics (or also known as “mental
 3

shortcuts” or “rules of thumb") are efficient mental processes that help humans solve problems

and learn new concepts. These processes can make problems less complex by ignoring some of

the information that is coming into the brain, either consciously or unconsciously (Gigerenzer, &

Gaissmeier, 2011). Commented [c3]: Where is the connection between

decision making and self-efficacy? Please write statements
to make the transition.

Self-efficacy means how better a person will act in challenging situation. A person's self-

efficacy is a strong determinant of their effort, determination; strategizing as well as their

performance (Heslin & Klehe, 2006). The concept of self-efficacy, as developed by Albert

Bandura has become one of the major variables that were used to understand and facilitate

individual career development and it became important in studying organizational and team

effectiveness. Self-efficacy is the strength of one's belief in one's own ability to complete a task

and to achieve goals. High and low self-efficacy determines whether or not someone will choose

to take on a challenging task or not. Psychologists have developed many decision making

theories, which explain the process on how people effectively make decisions. Commented [c4]:
Ngano gisulat nininyu diri dapita na about self-efficacy mani
na section?

Also, asa dapita ang gap na gi fill sa inyu study? Please write
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE here sa last parts.

Commented [c5]: Make a section first describing unsay

flow sa inyu RRL.

Decision Making Commented [6]: Wrong format in heading. Please

follow APA format.

Decision making is defined as the process of evaluating several options or alternatives

and choosing the one which would likely achieve a goal. (Moorehead & Griffin, 2012).

According to James Stoner, decision making is the process of identifying and selecting a

course of action to solve a specific problem. Commented [7]: Citation. Also, why not include other
definitions? Para daghan perspectives.
 4

As defined by Trewartha and Newport, decision making involves the selection of a

course of action from among two or more possible alternatives in order to arrive at a solution for

a given problem.

Self-concept theory of career development by Super suggests that career choice and

development is a process of developing and implementing a person’s self-concept. Super stated

that “self-concept is a product of complex interactions among a number of factors, including

physical and mental growth, personal experiences and environmental characteristics and

stimulation.” (Super, 1990). According to Super’s life stage developmental framework which

involves five stages, each stage has to properly manage the vocational developmental tasks that

are socially expected of people given a specific age range. the five stages include growth,

expectation, establishment, maintenance or management, and disengagement. For instance, in the

stage of exploration (ages 15-24), an adolescent has to adjust to the vocational developmental

tasks of crystallisation which is a cognitive process that involves an understanding of one’s

interest, skills and values and to pursue career goals, specification which involves making

temporary and specific choices. And lastly, implementation which involves taking steps to

actualize career choices. Commented [c8]: Nganu gasturya man mo about self-
concept?
The Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) developed by Robert W. Lent, Steven D. Dba this section is supposed to be about CAREER decision
making?
Brown, and Gail Hackett in 1994, is based on Albert Bandura’s self efficacy theory which
Ayaw mug talk about things na irrelevant na. focus sa mos
career decision making.
postulated a mutual relationship between people and the environment. SCCT aims to explain

three interlocking aspects of career development ( a) the development of academic and

vocational interest, (b) how individuals make educational and career choices, and (c) educational

and career performance and stability (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2002; Lent, 2005). SCCT’s career

choice model arises from self efficacy and outcomes expectations. Occupational and educational
 5

choice goals stem from career interests, for instance, an interest to pursue a specific career path.

When these goals are clear, specific, strong and supported upon by significant others, it is more

likely that a person will take action to achieve these goals. Subsequent performance, whether

successful or not, will provide valuable feedback that can either strengthen or weaken self

efficacy and outcomes expectations and can help a person change or confirm choices. Scct also

puts an emphasis on how self efficacy greatly influences choices in career (Lent,2005). Commented [c9]: Please summarize the important points
of this theory and emphasize it’s connection with career
decision making. Ayaw nag include ang other aspects sa
Factors Affecting Decision Making theory na dli related sa career decision making.

There are several factors that would affect decision making. These include past Commented [10]: Put heading here about factors
affecting decision making
experiences, cognitive biases, escalation of commitment and sunk outcomes, age, socioeconomic

status (SES), and cognitive abilities influences, to name a few. According to Juliusson, Karlsson,

and Garling (2005), past decisions influence decisions people make in the future. Given this

reason, when a positive event resulted from decision, more likely, people would decide similarly

when faced with the same situation. However, future decisions based on past experiences does

not necessarily mean they are the best decisions. In financial decision making, successful

business men do not make decisions based on past sunk costs but rather by evaluating options

regardless of past experiences. (Juliusson et al., 2005). Cognitive bias is another factor that could

affect decision making. This is defined as “thinking patterns based on observations and

generalizations that may lead to memory errors, inaccurate judgments, and faulty logic” (Evans,

Barston, & Pollard, 1983; West, Toplak, & Stanovich, 2008). Cognitive bias influences decision

making in a way that people would depend on expected observations and previous knowledge

rather than evaluating the bigger picture. Though this would lead to faulty decisions, this can be

efficient with the aid of heuristics. (Shah & Oppenheimer, 2008). These would sometimes lead to Commented [c11]: Please emphasize if this applies to
CAREER decision making pod. Para klaro ang connection.
 6

faulty logic and inaccurate judgments. (Evans, Barston, & Pollard, 1983; West, Toplak, &

Stanovich, 2008). Commented [12]: Please write a statement about how

self-efficacy affects decision making. One or two would
do then elaborate in the next section on self-efficacy.
Successful decisions depend on the individual’s confidence in his/her ability and self-
Commented [13]: Kaning dapita, itransfer nis RRL
section. Dli pani I elaborate kay intro pani.
efficacy, which help him or her to go ahead on those decisions. Self-efficacy beliefs are
Commented [14]: Improve this transition statement.
Rewrite.
important predictors of what occupations people choose to enter and how people go about

making their choices (the process of career choices; Hackett & Betz, 1995). Commented [c15]: Mao ni nga statement ako pasabut na
connection between career decision making and self-
efficacy. Dapat kita ko ani sa intro palang. Okay ra bsan one
statement lang sa since naman moy separate section na mu
connect juds duha.

Self-Efficacy Commented [c16]: Unsa ni?

Briefly, as originally proposed by Albert Bandura (1977), self-efficacy expectations refer

to a person’s beliefs concerning his or her ability to successfully perform a given task or

behavior. They are postulated by Bandura to be major mediators of behavior and behavior

change. Low self-efficacy expectations regarding a behavior or behavioral domain lead to

avoidance of those behaviors, whereas stronger self-efficacy expectations should lead to

approach behavior. Thus, self-efficacy expectations can be useful in understanding and

predicting behavior (Bandura, 1977). Self-efficacy can also determine what goals we choose to

pursue, how we go about accomplishing those goals, and how we reflect upon our own

performance.

Bandura suggests that self-efficacy can benefit a person's sense of well-being in a number

of ways. Since, individuals with high self-efficacy look at difficulties as challenges rather than

threats, they tend to be more intrinsically interested in the tasks they pursue. Difficulty and

failure don't mean defeat; instead, these individuals redouble their efforts and look for new ways

to overcome. They remain optimistic and confident in their abilities, even when things become
 7

difficult. On the other hand, people who are low in self-efficacy tend to see difficult tasks as

threats they should avoid. As a result, they also tend to avoid setting goals and have low levels of

commitment to the ones they do make. When setbacks happen, they tend to give up quickly.

Because they don't have much confidence in their ability to achieve, they are more likely to

experience feelings of failure and depression. Stressful situations can also be very hard to deal

with and those with low self-efficacy are less resilient and less likely to bounce back (Bandura,

1977).

According to Snyder and Lopez (2007), self-efficacy is what an individual believes he or

she can accomplish using his or her skills under certain circumstances. For example, Employee

A has high ability and a great deal of experience in creating graphs, but does not have confidence

that he can create a high quality graph for an important conference. Employee B has only

average ability and only a small amount of experience in creating graphs, yet has great

confidence that she can work hard to create a high quality graph for the same conference.

Because of Employee A's low self-efficacy for graph creation, he lacks the motivation to create

one for the conference and tells his supervisor he cannot complete the task. Employee B, due to

her high self-efficacy, is highly motivated, works overtime to learn how to create a high quality

graph, presents it during the conference, and earns a promotion.

Sources of Self-Efficacy

Based on the observations in academic settings, Mayer (1998) refers to the existence of

four important sources of self-efficacy. These four sources of self-efficacy are as follows: the

interpretation of the person’s own performance, the interpretation of the performance of others,

others’ assessment of one’s own capability, and the assessment of physiological states.
 8

Self-efficacy based on the interpretation of the person’s own performance, people assess

their own performance when they accomplish or learn a task. Based on these assessments, their

long-term motivation and efficiency will be enhanced when they think they are making progress

in performing or learning something. When successfully completing homework assignments,

clients recognize their own capability. Commented [c17]: Citations pls

Self-efficacy based on the interpretation of the performance of others, people can judge

their own state by observing the performance of others in similar situations. For example, the

individual may think, “If others are able to do it, I can do it as well.” This kind of observation

and assessment helps people by enhancing their own feelings of self-efficacy. Commented [c18]: Citations pls

Self-efficacy based on others’ assessment of one’s own capability, people around us

observe and evaluate our own performance. For example, teachers evaluate students’

performance and offer feedback. Based on the nature of this feedback, the students’ judgment of

self-efficacy increases or decreases. Wood and Bandura (1989) demonstrated empirically that

others’ assessment of people’s own performance has an effect on their motivation. Providing

feedback to clients in or between problem solving test sessions enhances their sense of self-

efficacy.

Self-efficacy based on the assessment of physiological states, people’s feelings of self-

efficacy may develop from the interpretation of their physiological state. For instance, a

gentleman may interpret his physiological changes like sweating or voice trembling during

interactions with women as a proof of his inefficacy and incompetency. Or, if these changes are

absent, he will evaluate himself as efficient and competent. In the first case, his view of self-

efficacy will be low while in the second case it will be high. The level of self-efficacy will be a
 9

determining factor in the behavioral outcomes, i.e., whether or not the client is comfortable

initiating a relationship with a woman.

Such self-efficacy beliefs are important predictors of what occupations people choose to

enter (the content of career choices) and how people go about making their choices (the process

of career choices; Hackett & Betz, 1995).

Link between Decision-Making and Career Self- Efficacy

There is a substantial research to show that career decision-making self-efficacy is a

major predictor of career indecision (Betz & Voyten, 1997). The concept of self-efficacy

originated from Bandura’s (1986) contention that people who believe in their ability to

successfully complete the tasks required to achieve an outcome, are more likely to engage in and

persist at those tasks. This idea has been extended to career development and has become an

important variable in understanding the career decision-making process (Hackett, 1995; Hackett

& Betz, 1992; 1995).

Hackett and Betz (1981) hypothesized that career efficacy beliefs play a more powerful

role than interests, values, and abilities in the restriction of women’s career choices. They argued Commented [c19]: Elaborate on this

that self-efficacy theory provides a heuristic framework for understanding the cognitive and

affective mediators of women’s gender-role socialization. Commented [c20]: Unsay connection ani? Murag di
naman ni necessary istate

There are four major sources of efficacy information; the performance accomplishments,

vicarious learning, physiological arousal and affective states, and verbal persuasion. Several

experimental studies have been conducted to test the hypothesis that performance
 10

accomplishments influence individuals in making a career decision. It is largely independent of

which careers are being considered (Bandura, 1995).

Career decision-making self-efficacy appears to influence the extent of career exploratory

behavior (Blustein, 1989); the more confidence people have in their decision-making

capabilities, the more likely they will actively pursue information about their career options.

Most of the research on self-efficacy and occupational or career choice has focused on

understanding the choices of women and members of minority groups, partly because these

groups have traditionally been more restrained in their career and occupational roles and choices

by societal norms (Byars & Hackett, 1998). Men and women usually express equivalent efficacy

beliefs for most (but not all) traditionally female-dominated occupations, but women usually

express lower self-efficacy for traditionally male-dominated occupations than for traditionally

female-dominated occupations (Hackett & Betz, 1995).

Career decision-making self-efficacy (CDSE), which refers to one's confidence in one's

ability to engage in educational and occupational planning and decision making, is a critical

indicator of adolescent career competence. CDSE typically serves as an important trigger to

promote career outcomes, including career decision-making skills. CDSE is especially critical

during high school years when adolescents are supposed to make important career-related

decisions. (Luzzo, 1993).

Related/Existing Scales to Career Decision Making Self-Efficacy

 11

Career decision self-efficacy was originally defined by Taylor and Betz (1983) as an

individual’s beliefs that he or she has the ability to complete successfully the tasks related to

decision making in relation to his or her career.

Betz and Taylor (1983) developed the Career Decision Making Self-Efficacy (CDMSE)

Scale to assess perceptions of efficacy. Their assumption in this research is that effective career

decision making involves not only the development of skills but also the confidence of

individual’s decision making abilities. Betz and Taylor (1983) hypothesized that individuals with

weak decision making self-efficacy could interfere career decision exploratory behavior and the

development of decision-making skills, and thus may be predictive of career indecision and other

problems in making career decision (Bandura, 1995).

As the original CDSES was fairly lengthy (i.e., 50 items) and time consuming, Betz,

Klein, and Taylor (1996) published a short form of the questionnaire (Career Decision Self-

Efficacy scale – short form (CDSES-SF), which included 25 items (5 for each factor) with a

confidence continuum identical to that of the previous version. In 2005 a version was made with

the same number of items but with a 5-level confidence continuum – 1 being ‘no confidence at

all’ and 5 referring to ‘complete confidence’ (Betz, Hammond, & Multon, 2005). CDSES-SF

total scores have displayed moderate to strong correlations with scores on measures of career

search activity, vocationally exploratory behaviors, career commitment, career indecision,

vocational identity and career maturity, and patterns of career choices (Miller et al., 2009). The

scale scores can be reviewed to indicate an individual’s pattern of higher and/or lower

confidence areas as they relate to career decision making competencies. These scores can also be

used to identify students at risk for academic or decisional difficulties and, hence, those students
 12

needing career or academic intervention. The score patterns can suggest which areas of decision

are most in need of intervention. Furthermore, the scale scores can be utilized to evaluate the

effectiveness of educational and career interventions.

So far, these are the only existing scales related to Career Decision-Making Self Efficacy

that we have found. Hence, we would like to make our own version of Career Decision Making

Self-Efficacy Scale in the Filipino context. Commented [c21]: State nganu mag make mo for the
Filipino setting.

Also state unsa ka lahi inyu gihimo na scale with the existing
ones to further justify nganu mag make mos scale.

REFERENCES: Commented [22]: Wrong heading format.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in adaptation of youth to changing societies. Chapter: Self-

efficacy in career choice and development, 232-258.

Betz, N. & Voyten, K. (1997). Efficacy and outcome expectations influence career exploration

and decidedness. The Career Development Quarterly, 46, 179-189.

 13

Betz, N. E., Klein, K. L. & Taylor, K. M. (1996). Evaluation of a short form of the Career

Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 47-57.

Betz, N. E., Hammond, M. S., & Multon, K. D. (2005). Reliability and validity of five-level

response continua for the Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career

Assessment, 13, 131-149.

Blustein, K. L. (1989). The role of goal instability and career self-efficacy in the career

exploration process. Journal of Vocational, 35, 194-203.

Byars, A. M., & Hackett, G. (1998). Applications of social cognitive theory to the career

development of women of color. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 7, 255-267.

Evans, J.ST., Barston, J.L., & Pollard, P. (1983). On the conflict between logic and belief in

syllogistic reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 295-306.

Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmeier, W. (2011). “Heuristic decision making.” Annual Review of

Psychology, vol. 62, pp. 451-482.

Hackett, G. (1995). Self-efficacy in career choice and development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-

efficacy in changing societies (pp. 232-258). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hackett, G., & Betz, N.E. (1992). Self- efficacy perceptions and the career- related choices of

college students. In D. H. Schunk, & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the

classroom (pp. 229-246). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Hackett, G., & Betz, N., (1995). Self-efficacy and career choice and development. In J. E.

Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and

application (pp. 249-280). New York: Plenum Press.

 14

Heslin, P.A., & Klehe, U.C. (2006). Self-efficacy. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of

industrial and organizational psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2:705-708.

Jullisson, E.A., Karlsson, N., & Garling, T. (2005). Weighing the past and the future in decision

making. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17(4), 561-575. DOI:

10.1080/09541440440000159.

Lent, R. W. (2005). A social cognitive view of career development and counseling. In S. D.

Brown & R. T. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and

research to work (pp. 101–127). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown &

Associate (Eds.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 255–311). San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.

Luzzo, D. A. (1993). Value of career-decision-making self-efficacy in predicting career-

decision-making attitudes and skills. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40(2), 194-199.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.40.2.194

Mayer, R.E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving,

Instructional Science, Vol. 26, 49-63.

Miller, M. J., Roy, K. S., Brown, S. D., Thomas, J., & McDaniel, C. (2009). A confirmatory test

of the factor structure of the short form of the Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale.

Journal of Career Assessment, 17(4), 507-519.

Moorehead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (2012). Understanding Organizational Behavior. Chapter 8:

Problem solving and decision making, 179.

 15

Radford, M., Mann, L., & Kalucy, R. (1986). Psychiatric disturbance and decision-making.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 20:210-217.

Shah, A.K., & Oppenheimer, D.M. (2008). Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction

framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 207-222. DOI: 1.1037/0033-2909.134.2.207.

Super, D. E. (1990). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. In D. Brown & L.

Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development: Applying contemporary approaches to

practice (2nd ed., pp. 197–261). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2007). Positive psychology: The scientific and practical

explorations of human strengths. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

West, R.F., Toplak, M.E., & Stanovich, K.E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical

thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 100(4), 930-941. DOI: 10.1037/a0012842.