The self-efficacy-interest relationship and RIASEC type: Which is figure and which is ground? Comment on Armstrong and Vogel (2009).
Armstrong and Vogel (2009) proposed that the differences between self-efficacy and interests are a matter of measurement artifact rather than substance. In tests of this hypothesis, they conceived of self-efficacy and interest as observed indicators of larger RIASEC (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional) types and as response method factors. We revisit the authors' theoretical assumptions, measurement procedures, analyses, and interpretation of findings. When viewing this study in the context of the larger literature, we find ample support for the construal of self-efficacy and interests as distinct but related constructs. In addition, we examine the authors' reanalysis of earlier longitudinal findings, reaching different conclusions than they did about the nature of the temporal relations among the social cognitive variables. Ultimately, whether one wishes to highlight or minimize the differences between interest and self-efficacy may largely depend on whether one's purpose is explanation (e.g., how do people make career-relevant choices?) or classification (e.g., which RIASEC type does a person most resemble?).
Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, University of Maryland, College Park, 20742, USA. boblent@umd.edu
Robert W
RW
Lent
Hung-Bin
HB
Sheu
Steven D
SD
Brown
D001290:Attitude; D015982:Bias; D002321:Career Choice; D003469:Culture; D006801:Humans; D007206:Individuality; D009042:Motivation; D010555:Personality Inventory / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011582:Psychological Theory; D011594:Psychometrics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D020377:Self Efficacy; D014830:Vocational Guidance