SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2

Validating the Turkish versions of the Career Decision-Making Outcome Expectancies and the Career Decision-Making Exploratory Intentions Scales in undergraduate students

Lisans öğrencilerinde Kariyer Karar Verme Sonuç Beklentileri Ölçeği ve Kariyer Karar Verme Araştırma Niyetleri Ölçeğinin Türkçe versiyonlarının geçerliliği

Ersoy Çarkıt(NEVSEHIR HACI BEKTAS VELI UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-9811-9135
Pages
884–895
Publication Date
2024-06-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results provide evidence that the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions are valid, reliable, and thus potentially useful for practice and research on career decision outcome expectations and intentions of Turkish undergraduate students.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study evaluated the construct validity, concurrent validity, convergent validity, reliability, and measurement invariance of the Turkish version of the Career Decision-Making Outcome Expectancies Scale (CDMOES) and the Career Decision-Making Exploratory Intentions Scale (CDMEIS) among 297 Turkish undergraduate students (59.9% women and 40.1% men).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) demonstrated a single-factor construct for each of the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results provide evidence that the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions are valid, reliable, and thus potentially useful for practice and research on career decision outcome expectations and intentions of Turkish undergraduate students.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kariyer karar verme · Sonuç beklentileri · Araştırma niyetleri

Abstract

This study evaluated the construct validity, concurrent validity, convergent validity, reliability, and measurement invariance of the Turkish version of the Career Decision-Making Outcome Expectancies Scale (CDMOES) and the Career Decision-Making Exploratory Intentions Scale (CDMEIS) among 297 Turkish undergraduate students (59.9% women and 40.1% men). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) demonstrated a single-factor construct for each of the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions. As expected, the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions were positively correlated with self-efficacy in career decision-making. Multi-group CFAs demonstrated that the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions had measurement invariance across gender. Furthermore, the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions demonstrated high reliability (α = .92 and α = .91). The results provide evidence that the CDMOES and CDMEIS Turkish versions are valid, reliable, and thus potentially useful for practice and research on career decision outcome expectations and intentions of Turkish undergraduate students.

Özet

Bu çalışma Kariyer Karar Verme Sonuç Beklentileri ve Kariyer Karar Verme Araştırma Niyetleri Ölçeklerinin yapı geçerliği, eş zamanlı geçerliği, yakınsak geçerliği, güvenirliği ve ölçüm değişmezliğini incelemiştir. Veriler, 297 Türk lisans öğrencisinden (%59,9 kadın ve %40,1 erkek) toplanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları her iki ölçeğin de tek faktörlü yapısını doğrulamıştır. Beklenildiği gibi ölçeklerin Türkçe versiyonları kariyer karar verme öz yetkinliği ile pozitif yönde ilişkili bulunmuştur. Çok gruplu doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları, ölçeklerin Türkçe versiyonlarının cinsiyete göre ölçüm değişmezliğine sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca ölçeklerin Türkçe versiyonları yüksek iç tutarlılığa sahiptir (α = .92 ve α = .91). Sonuçlar, Kariyer Karar Verme Sonuç Beklentileri ve Kariyer Karar Verme Araştırma Niyetleri Ölçeklerinin Türkçe versiyonlarının geçerli, güvenilir ve dolayısıyla Türk lisans öğrencilerinin kariyer karar verme sonuç beklentileri ve niyetleri ile ilgili uygulama ve araştırmalar için kullanışlı olduğuna dair kanıtlar sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çarkıt, E. (2024). Validating the Turkish versions of the Career Decision-Making Outcome Expectancies and the Career Decision-Making Exploratory Intentions Scales in undergraduate students. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2, 884–895. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1470007

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (39)

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.
  2. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
  3. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
  4. Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
  5. Betz, N. E., & Voyten, K. K. (1997). Efficacy and outcome expectations influence career exploration and decidedness. The Career Development Quarterly, 46(2), 179-189. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.1997.tb01004.x
  6. Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137-164). Sage.
  7. Brown, N. (2018). Psychoeducational groups: Process and practice. Routledge.
  8. Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (2019a). Social cognitive career theory at 25: Progress in studying the domain satisfaction and career self-management models. Journal of Career Assessment, 27(4), 563-578. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072719852736
  9. Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (2019b). A social cognitive view of career development and guidance. In J. A. Athanasou & H. N. Perera (Eds.), International handbook of career guidance (2nd ed., pp. 147-166). Springer.
  10. Chan, C. C. (2020). Factors affecting career goals of Taiwanese college athletes from perspective of social cognitive career theory. Journal of Career Development, 47(2), 193-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845318793234
  11. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
  12. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  13. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
  14. Çarkıt, E. (2024). Adaptation to Turkish of the Career Exploration and Decision Self-Efficacy Scale. The Career Development Querterly.
  15. Dimitrov, D. M. (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43(2), 121-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175610373459
  16. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage.
  17. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 002224378101800104
  18. Fouad, N. A., & Guillen, A. (2006). Outcome expectations: Looking to the past and potential future. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 130-142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072705281370
  19. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.
  20. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Issues, concepts, and applications (pp. 76-99). Sage.
  21. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  22. Ireland, G. W., & Lent, R. W. (2018). Career exploration and decision-making learning experiences: A test of the career self-management model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 106, 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.11.004
  23. Kleine, A. K., Schmitt, A., & Wisse, B. (2021). Students' career exploration: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 131, 103645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103645
  24. Lent, R. W. (2004). Toward a unifying theoretical and practical perspective on well-being and psychosocial adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(4), 482–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.4.482
  25. Lent, R. W. (2005). A social cognitive view of career development and counseling. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 101-127). John Wiley.
  26. Lent, R. W. (2013). Social cognitive career theory. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (2nd ed., pp. 115-146). John Wiley.
  27. Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2006). On conceptualizing and assessing social cognitive constructs in career research: A measurement guide. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 12-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072705281364
  28. Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2008). Social cognitive career theory and subjective well-being in the context of work. Journal of Career Assessment, 16(1), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072707305769
  29. Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2013). Social cognitive model of career self-management: Toward a unifying view of adaptive career behavior across the life span. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(4), 557-568. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033446
  30. Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2019). Social cognitive career theory at 25: Empirical status of the interest, choice, and performance models. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, Article 103316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.06.004
  31. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp: 255-311). Jossey-Bass.
  32. Lent, R. W., do Céu Taveira, M., Soares, J., Marques, C., Cardoso, B., & Oliveira, Í. (2022). Career decision-making in unemployed Portuguese adults: Test of the social cognitive model of career self-management. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 69(1), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000565
  33. Lent, R. W., Ezeofor, I., Morrison, M. A., Penn, L. T., & Ireland, G. W. (2016). Applying the social cognitive model of career self-management to career exploration and decision-making. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 93, 47-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.12.007
  34. Lent, R. W., Ireland, G. W., Penn, L. T., Morris, T. R., & Sappington, R. (2017). Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations for career exploration and decision-making: A test of the social cognitive model of career self-management. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 99, 107-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.01.002
  35. Lent, R. W., Morris, T. R., Penn, L. T., & Ireland, G. W. (2019). Social-cognitive predictors of career exploration and decision-making: Longitudinal test of the career self-management model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 66(2), 184-194. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000307
  36. Rajabi, S., Papzan, A., & Zahedi, G. (2012). Application of social cognitive career theory to investigate the effective factors of the career decision-making intention in Iranian agriculture students by using ANN. Sage Open, 2(4), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012467024
  37. Rogers, M. E., & Creed, P. A. (2011). A longitudinal examination of adolescent career planning and exploration using a social cognitive career theory framework. Journal of Adolescence, 34(1), 163-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.010
  38. Rogers, M. E., Creed, P. A., & Glendon, A. I. (2008). The role of personality in adolescent career planning and exploration: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(1), 132-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.02.002
  39. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research, 3(1), 4-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002