Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2017 Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory Mary Catherine Schenkenfelder Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.edu/etd Part of the Counseling Psychology Commons, Other Education Commons, and the Social Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Schenkenfelder, Mary Catherine, "Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory" (2017). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.edu/etd/15411 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact digirep@iastate.
Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory by Mary Schenkenfelder A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Psychology Program of Study Committee: Lisa M. Larson, Major Professor Patrick Armstrong Daniel Russell The student author and the program study committee are solely responsible for the content of this thesis. The Graduate College will ensure this thesis is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2017 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES.
iv LIST OF FIGURES. vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION. 1 The Importance of Academic Major Satisfaction in a Counseling Context. 1 Academic Major Satisfaction and Self-Determination Theory.
2 Environmental Supports for Academic Major Satisfaction. 4 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. 9 Self-Determination Theory. 9 Academic Major Satisfaction.
15 Measuring Environmental Factors. 22 Basic Psychological Needs and the Environment. 26 The Present Study. PERCEIVED VOLITIONAL AUTONOMY.
ACADEMIC SELF-EFFICACY SUBSCALE. PERCEIVED RELATEDNESS SUBSCALE. THE ACADEMIC MAJOR SATISFACTION SCALE. ACADEMIC MAJOR CERTAINTY SCALE.
91 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for All Variables under Examination for All Participants. Summary of Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for All Variables under Examination for Males and Females. Bootstrap Analysis of Magnitude and Statistical Significance of Indirect Effects of Faculty and Student Integration on Academic Major Satisfaction through Perceived Volitional Autonomy, Perceived Competence and Perceived Relatedness (Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction) in the Adjusted Fully Mediated Model.
Bootstrap Analysis of Magnitude and Statistical Significance of Indirect Effects of Faculty and Student Integration on Academic Major Satisfaction through Perceived Volitional Autonomy, Perceived Competence and Perceived Relatedness (Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction) in the Fully Mediated Model. 71 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The Hypothesized Partially Mediated Model. The Hypothesized Fully Mediated Model.
The Adjusted Hypothesized Partially Mediated Model. The Adjusted Hypothesized Fully Mediated Model. The Adjusted Partially Mediated Model. The Adjusted Fully Mediated Model.
The Partially Mediated Model. The Fully Mediated Model. The Adjusted Fully Mediated Model without Faculty Integration. The Adjusted Fully Mediated Model without Student Integration.
79 vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Lisa Larson, without whom this document would not exist. Her unwavering support, high expectations, and complete belief in my competence are at the heart of this project. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr.
Patrick Armstrong and Dr. Dan Russell, for their expertise, particularly in vocational psychology and statistical measurement. I would like to acknowledge my friends (both in my cohort and out) who kept me feeling relatively sane and stable by providing care and support at times and by providing a much- needed distraction from work at other times. Additionally, I would like to thank Patrick Heath and Rachel Brenner for their invaluable statistical support, given so generously and enthusiastically.
I would also like to acknowledge my family: Karen (who has always been my biggest cheerleader), Chris (who has never not been proud of me), and Dan (who has always been a better big brother than I deserve). Without them I would not have had the opportunity to make it this far. And lastly, perhaps most importantly, I would like to acknowledge my fiancé, Taylor, who somehow managed to live with me every day of this project and come out the other end still liking me enough to marry me. I feel lucky to have someone at my side who is so willing to be my partner as I pursue my goals.
vii ABSTRACT 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 self- determination 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. Keywords: academic major satisfaction, perceived autonomy, perceived competence, perceived relatedness, perceived autonomy, faculty integration, student integration 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION The Importance of Academic Major Satisfaction in a Counseling Context When doing career counseling with college students, counselors have two options for the focus of the counseling. Career counselors can focus on finding a job the student will be satisfied with and a major that will allow the client to eventually do that job.
Or they can focus on what major a student will be satisfied with and explore which jobs a student might get after graduating with that major. Neither of these approaches is perfect. A focus only on academic major satisfaction might lead a student to choose a major that leads to limited career options or career options that are not attractive to the student. In contrast, focusing only on potential satisfaction of a future job (as opposed to potential satisfaction with a current major) means student and counselor will have to focus more on hypotheticals, instead of being able to focus on the present.
This approach could be problematic if it leads a student to think about what she might be interested in, rather than what she is interested in now. Focusing on future job satisfaction might also mean that a student ends up in a major she doesn’t enjoy—a concern that should not be ignored, since most students will be in their major for at least four significant years of their life. Since academic major satisfaction has been linked to life satisfaction among college students, we know that ignoring major satisfaction will lead to less-than-optimal outcomes in career counseling (Sovet, Park, & Jung, 2014). Major satisfaction is associated with both positive current outcomes and positive future outcomes for students.
Students are less likely to drop out of school when they are satisfied with their majors (Nauta, 2007) and are more likely to have a higher GPA (Leach & Patall, 2013; McIlveen, Beccaria, & Burton, 2013; Nauta, 2007). Choosing a major students will be satisfied with may be easier for them than choosing a job they will be satisfied with, since major is more 2 temporally relevant. Together, these advantages suggest that major satisfaction is a relevant and important topic for career counseling. It is important, then, to understand what predicts academic major satisfaction so that career counselors might best help students find majors that will fit for them.
Almost all of the research around academic major satisfaction has focused on how individual differences contribute to students’ major satisfaction. The most studied topic in this area is interest (Allen, 1996; Nadziger, Holland, & Gottfredson, 1975; Logue, Lounsbury, Gupta, & Leong, 2007; Tranberg, Slane, & Ekeberg, 1993). Intrinsic motivation for a subject (Deemer, 2015), personality (Logue et al., 2007), and patterns of thinking, such as counterfactual thinking (Dahling & Thompson, 2012; Leach & Patall, 2013), also have been linked to major satisfaction. This research helps us understand what we should know about students who have come in for career counseling, in order to be able to direct them toward a major they will be satisfied with.
What it does not tell us is what environmental characteristics are predictive of major satisfaction. Academic Major Satisfaction and Self-Determination Theory One promising model for understanding how environmental factors support major satisfaction is self-determination theory (SDT), a theory of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1980, 1991; Baumeister, 1994). An important subset of SDT is basic psychological needs theory, which suggests that intrinsic motivation (motivation to act for the sake of the action itself, instead of an external reward) can lead to well-being in many domains. The theory also suggests that in order to be intrinsically motivated, we must perceive three needs as being met: volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
For these three needs to be met, factors in the 3 environment must support them. If these environmental supports are absent, students’ needs are thwarted, and they are less happy and less effective. The research connecting SDT and major satisfaction is limited, and the connections between the two are indirect. Jadidian & Duffy (2012) examined the relations between academic major satisfaction and work volition (which is conceptually related to perceived volitional autonomy, defined as the feeling that one is able to make one’s own decisions despite barriers), and found that work volition positively predicted academic major satisfaction.
Other researchers have explored the relations between academic major satisfaction and academic self-efficacy (which is conceptually related to perceived competence, defined as a student’s feeling that he or she can be successful at academic tasks), and found that academic self-efficacy positively predicted academic major satisfaction (Larson, Toulouse, Ngumba, Fitzpatrick, & Heppner, 1994). The evidence that factors conceptually similar to perceived volitional autonomy and competence have been predictive of major satisfaction suggests that perceived volitional autonomy and perceived competence should be predictive of major satisfaction. In another study, college students’ experiences of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom predicted student ratings of teachers and courses. Specifically, higher perceived volitional autonomy and competence predicted higher ratings of courses, and higher perceived volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness predicted higher teacher ratings (Filak & Sheldon, 2003).
This suggests that environmental support for needs is predictive of course and teacher satisfaction, and since classes are related to major satisfaction, it seems likely that perceived volitional autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness will also be predictive of major satisfaction. Additionally, researchers found that students in natural sciences courses reported lower perceived volitional autonomy and perceived relatedness than 4 those in social science or humanities classes (Filak & Sheldon, 2003). This suggests that there may be a difference in the way psychological needs are supported across academic subjects, and possibly across majors. Additionally, academic major satisfaction is part of a larger concept of career well-being, which is influenced by perceptions of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
For college students, choosing an academic major and engaging in the tasks of that major constitute the developmentally appropriate tasks that contribute to career well-being, since what major one chooses, how well one does in that major, and how satisfied one is in that major will contribute to a person’s career path. One study has suggested that perceived volitional autonomy and perceived competence partially mediate the relation between environmental supports—namely, parental volitional autonomy support—and career well-being (Pesch, Larson, & Surapaneni, 2015). Additionally, perceptions of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness have been found to predict job satisfaction (which is conceptually related to major satisfaction; Boezeman & Ellemers, 2009; Gillet, Colombat, Michinov, Pronost, & Fouquereau, 2013).