Theoretical and methodological issues with testing the SCCT and RIASEC models: Comment on Lent, Sheu, and Brown (2010) and Lubinski (2010).
The current article replies to comments made by Lent, Sheu, and Brown (2010) and Lubinski (2010) regarding the study "Interpreting the Interest-Efficacy Association From a RIASEC Perspective" (Armstrong & Vogel, 2009). The comments made by Lent et al. and Lubinski highlight a number of important theoretical and methodological issues, including the process of defining and differentiating between constructs, the assumptions underlying Holland's (1959, 1997) RIASEC (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional types) model and interrelations among constructs specified in social cognitive career theory (SCCT), the importance of incremental validity for evaluating constructs, and methodological considerations when quantifying interest-efficacy correlations and for comparing models using multivariate statistical methods. On the basis of these comments and previous research on the SCCT and Holland models, we highlight the importance of considering multiple theoretical perspectives in vocational research and practice. Alternative structural models are outlined for examining the role of interests, self-efficacy, learning experiences, outcome expectations, personality, and cognitive abilities in the career choice and development process.
Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames, 50010, USA. pia@iastate.edu
Patrick Ian
PI
Armstrong
David L
DL
Vogel
D000124:Achievement; D001076:Aptitude; D002321:Career Choice; D006801:Humans; D007206:Individuality; D007389:Internal-External Control; D008960:Models, Psychological; D009042:Motivation; D010555:Personality Inventory / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011594:Psychometrics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D020377:Self Efficacy; D012931:Social Environment; D014830:Vocational Guidance