Gender differences in applying social cognitive career theory in engineering students

By Mercedes Inda, Carmen Rodríguez, J. V. Peña. 2013

129 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract This study tested Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) in predicting engineering interest and major choice goals among male and female college students. Participants were 579 sophomore engineering students who completed measures of self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, interests, goals and social supports and barriers. Findings confirmed that the SCCT model produced a good fit to the data across gender. The findings also corroborated that women have less self-efficacy beliefs and interest than men. However, there are no statistically significant differences in measures relating to outcome expectations and goals. Moreover, women are more likely to perceive support, especially from peers and family, while men are more likely to perceive family barriers than women. For other supports and barriers there are no gender differences. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

Subfields: Education, Media Technology, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/002c2cf9f4b0915968dbbdc51c723e3d3d1e12ef

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Media Technology

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

SCCT Research in the International Context (2017, background): “Jiang and Zhang (2012) found that in a sample of engineering students in China, social supports and barriers predicted major choice goals directly and indirectly via self-efficacy and outcome expectations and that interest fully mediated the relations of self-efficacy and outcome expectations to cho”
Stereotype threat as a barrier to women entering engineering careers (2017, background): “, 2001, 2003), and predict engineering persistence intentions and career goals across numerous studies among engineering students (Inda et al., 2013; Lee, et al., 2015; Lent, Lopez, Lopez, & Sheu, 2008; Lent, Sheu, et al., 2008; Lent et al., 2003, 2014; Lent, Sheu, Gloster, & Wilkins, 2010).”