running head: determinants of career choice 1

Running head: DETERMINANTS OF CAREER CHOICE 1

Personality and Achievement Motivation as Determinants of Career Choice

Robyn G. Glaser

Bachelor of Arts in Psychology (Honours)

Murdoch University

This thesis is presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Bachelor of Arts (Honours), Murdoch University, 2012.

DETERMINANTS OF CAREER CHOICE 2

I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main

content work which has not previously been submitted for a degree at any tertiary

educational institution.

Robyn Glaser


Copyright Acknowledgement

I acknowledge that a copy of this thesis will be held at the Murdoch University Library.

I understand that, under the provisions of s51.2 of the Copyright Act 1968, all or part of

this thesis may be copied without infringement of copyright where such a reproduction

is for the purposes of study and research.

This statement does not signal any transfer of copyright away from the author.

Signed:

Full Name of Degree: Bachelor of Arts in Psychology (Honours)

Thesis Title: Personality and Achievement Motivation as Determinants of Career Choice

Author: Robyn Glaser

Year: 2012


Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between personality,

achievement motivation, and career choice. One hundred and thirty six participants

recruited through the psychology subject pool at Murdoch University and through

snowball sampling using Facebook completed the 50-Item Set International Personality

Item Pool Big-Five Factor Markers, the Cassidy and Lynn Achievement Motivation

Scale, and the Personality-Related Position Requirements Form. The association

between personality and career choice was generally supportive of those hypothesised

by Raymark, Schmit, and Guion (1997). Achievement motivation was significantly

correlated with extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness. Mediation analysis found

that achievement motivation fully mediated the relationship between extraversion and

general leadership and that between conscientiousness and ambition. The implication of

these findings is that organisations and career advisors could have a better understanding

of what type of job or career an individual prefers based on their personality. Future

research might consider if individuals have had experience in their preferred career. This

could allow for further comparison into whether individuals with similar personalities

have similar jobs.

Keywords: personality, achievement motivation, career choice


Acknowledgments

The contributions of many different individuals have made this thesis possible. I would

like to extend my appreciation especially to the following individuals.

I am thankful to my supervisor, Dr Graeme Ditchburn, for his support, guidance, and

advice throughout the year. Without his guidance I would not have been able to put this

research study together.

Of course, this research study would not have been possible without the contribution of

the participants.

Last but not least, I would like to thank my mum, dad, sister, and grandma for their

unconditional support and understanding during the honours year. It is greatly

appreciated.

http://members.optushome.com.au/raymondyu/pub/thesis/ack.htm


Personality and Achievement Motivation as Determinants of Career Choice

Previous studies such as Barrick and Mount (1991) and Hogan, Hogan, and

Roberts (1996) have explored the ‘personality’ of jobs by examining the relationship

between personality and work. Other studies have only examined the relationship

between personality and career choice (Bipp, 2010) or between achievement motivation

and career choice (Bono & Judge, 2003). Therefore my study will be exploring

personality, achievement motivation, and career choice as they are not usually discussed

in the one study. I will also be re-examining the Raymark, Schmit, and Guion (1997)

study to see if personality can predict the type of job or career an individual prefers.

Career Decision Making

There are a number of career choice theories, while not directly relevant to this

study have elements that can be useful to consider. For instance a lot of the career

choice theories have the core component of personality throughout. Personality can help

explain how and why individuals choose a particular career. Some popular career choice

theories are the theory of vocational choice by Holland, the work adjustment theory, and

the self-concept theory of career development formatted by Super (Leung, 2008).

Individuals base their career decisions career environment, skills, abilities,

attitudes, values, and having meaningful roles (Holland, 1959). If an individual starts a

new job and they are in a good career environment, can show their skills and abilities,

are able to express their attitudes and values, and believe they have a meaningful role

they will most likely stay in the job as they will feel satisfied by their career decision

(Holland, 1959). However if an individual starts a new job and finds they are unable to

use their skills or express their attitudes and values then there is as a low degree of


match between an individuals personality and their work environment (Holland, 1959).

This is more likely to result in an individual feeling they have made the wrong career

decision. It is therefore important for an organisation to understand when selecting an

employee that there needs to be a high degree of match between the employees

personality and their work environment in order for the employee to feel they have made

the right career decision (Leung, 2008).

The theory of work adjustment is similar to the theory of vocational choice as an

individual bases their career decisions on whether the work environment matches their

needs (Dawis & Lofquist’s, as cited in Osipow, 1990). An individual chooses a career

based on their needs, abilities, and if they are able to develop their skills. They are

therefore more likely to perform well in the job if they feel that the work environment

matches with their needs (Dawis & Lofquist, as cited in Osipow, 1990).

Another theory on how individuals make career decisions is the self-concept

theory of career development. Super (1980) suggested that career decisions are based on

a process of developing an individual’s self-concept which includes physical and mental

growth, personal experiences, and environmental characteristics. Therefore an

individual chooses a career based on their interests, abilities, and values (Super, 1980).

All these theories share the view that an individual’s values, attitudes, and

interests are important factors when making a career decision. Also that the work

environment has to match an individual’s values, attitudes, and interests in order for an

individual to feel they have made the right career choice (Leung, 2008). Therefore each

type of job may require different abilities and personality traits which may suit different


individuals according to their abilities, needs, values, interests, traits, and self-concepts

(Super, 1980).

Five Factor Model and Description

Until the 1980s the majority of research on personality especially on workplace

outcomes concluded that personality did not matter (Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001).

This view changed with the emergence of the five factor model of personality (FFM),

which grouped and classified traits into five independent and universal personality traits;

extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, and neuroticism (Barrick et

al., 2001). According to Goldberg (1992) these five personality traits have traditionally

been labeled as; surgency (extraversion), agreeableness, conscientiousness

(dependability), culture, intellect, or openness, and emotional stability (opposite of

neuroticism). These personality traits make up the basic structure of personality

(Goldberg, as cited in Bipp, Steinmayr, & Spinath, 2008) and are a widely accepted way

of categorising personality (Bergner, Neubauer, & Kreuzthaler, 2010).

The FFM can be used to explain and predict individual differences over many

settings such as mental health, job satisfaction, and work performance (Judge, Heller, &

Mount, 2002). Extraversion is described as an individual who is sociable, positive,

assertive, active, bold, energetic, and adventurous (Barrick et al., as cited in Digman,

1990). Agreeableness is the tendency for an individual to be trusting, sympathetic, and

cooperative rather than competitive. Conscientiousness is the degree to which an

individual is organised, ordered, diligent, thorough, reliable, hardworking, determined,

self-disciplined, and achievement striving (Costa & McCrae, 1988). Openness involves

creativity, sophistication, curiosity, and willingness to consider different approaches


(Barrick & Mount, 1991). Neuroticism is the tendency for an individual to experience

psychological distress, for example; depression, anger, embarrassment, insecurity, and

worry (Barrick et al., as cited in Digman, 1990).

Five Factor Model and Career Choice

Individual differences are often taken into account to explain how job

characteristics influence work motivation and performance. Individuals will select, keep,

or quit their jobs based on their personality traits (Bipp, 2010). The FFM has led to an

increase in the study of personality which has led to the conclusion that personality has

important relationships with performance, motivation, and job satisfaction (Parks &

Guay, 2009).

The FFM has been related to different behaviours such as job performance and

achievement (Ozer & Benet-Martinez, 2005). There is research supporting neuroticism

and conscientiousness as predictors of job performance across all types of jobs (Barrick

et al., as cited in Digman, 1990). Conscientiousness is a good predictor of job

performance as a conscientious individual gives the maximum to reach their work

objectives (Touze, 2005). Agreeableness, extraversion, and openness were also valid

predictors of job performance. However the role of these three personality traits varies

across settings and therefore might not be applicable to all jobs (Barrick et al., 2001).

Agreeableness has been found to be predictive of an individual’s learning behaviour and

having social jobs in the workplace (Touze, 2005). Barrick and Mount (as cited in

Touze, 2005) found that extraversion and openness were good predictors of success in

training. The reason for this is that in training sessions an individual is often in a social

interaction type of setting and therefore being sociable and open is important to be


successful in this context (Touze, 2005). It was also found that neuroticism did not have

strong correlations with the different measures of performance. One reason for this is

that individuals with severe emotional problems are usually naturally selected out of the

workplace and so are not in these situations to begin with (Barrick & Mount, as cited in

Touze, 2005).

Studies have found that individuals who scored high on extraversion placed

more emphasis on being able to exert influence in the workplace and were more

attracted to enriched jobs (Furnham, Petrides, Tsaousis, Pappas, & Garrod, 2005).

Extraverted individuals want to obtain rewards in order to be motivated. Since rewards

are obtained by excelling more than others extraverts could be expected to be motivated

by a desire to get ahead of others (Barrick, Stewart, & Piotrowski, 2002). Therefore

individuals who are extraverted are likely to have cognitive motivations consistent with

striving for status (Barrick et al., 2002).

Mount, Barrick, and Stewart (1998) found a positive correlation between

agreeableness and performance for team oriented jobs. When stressed, agreeable

individuals were found to cope through self sacrifice rather than through superiority

(Costa, Zonderman, & McCrae, as cited in Barrick et al., 2002). Individuals who are

agreeable are therefore likely to have cognitive motivations consistent with goals to

strive for relationships and unity (Barrick et al., 2002).

Individuals who scored high on conscientiousness preferred jobs that allow them

to demonstrate their competence and provide them opportunities for achievement

(Furnham et al., 2005) and were more likely to be disciplined, dependable, methodical,

and purposeful (Costa & McCrae, 1988). Individuals high in conscientiousness also look


for meaningful jobs where they can take responsibility and get recognition for doing

well (Furnham et al., 2005).

Individuals who scored high in openness were more creative and curious.

Furthermore they easily adjusted to novelty and preferred work environments that

offered stimulation and potential for growth or autonomy rather than status (Barrick et

al., 2002). They were also imaginative, adventurous (Costa & McCrae, 1988), and

unconventional (Mount et al., 1998).

Neuroticism has not been found to link to motivational goals and can detract

from performance (Costa & McCrae, 1988). Individuals who scored high on neuroticism

were more likely to experience problems in the workplace, such as stress, fear,

irritability, and anxiety (Barrick & Mount, 1991). Individuals high in neuroticism were

found to be attracted to jobs with mainly extrinsic job factors or found it important to

earn money more than emotionally stable individuals (Furnham et al., 2005).

According to Hogan et al. (1996) different jobs have different personality

profiles. For example studies have found that for sales jobs, extraversion and

agreeableness was predictive of performance. For manual industrial workers

conscientiousness and agreeableness was positively related to job performance and

extraversion and openness was unrelated or in some cases negatively related to

performance (Kierstead, as cited in Hogan et al., 1996).

Raymark, Schmit, and Guion, researchers well respected in the field of selection

and assessment state that the predictive utility of a personality assessment is improved

when the personality profile for a specific job is studied through rational analysis or a

thorough personality oriented job analysis. According to Raymark et al. (1997) the


Personality-Related Position Requirements Form (PPRF) was designed to identify

aspects of work potentially related to individual differences in personality (see

Appendix A for the PPRF). If the personality traits that are relevant for some jobs are

not identified then the individual might be overlooked for selection. The PPRF is a

supplement to other job analysis techniques which allows a thorough examination of the

job performance that is related to personality variables (Raymark et al., 1997).

Individuals rate the job relevance of a number of behaviors that have been linked

to personality dimensions of interest (Raymark et al., 1997). This type of job analysis

can aid in determining non-cognitive characteristics that are important to an occupation

(Jenkins & Griffith, 2004). The behavioral statements on the PPRF are very general in

nature, so that they can be used with any job. These general statements can be linked to

specific tasks that are thought to lead to successful performance. Performance ratings for

these specific tasks might be useful for building either specific or global job

performance criterion measures (Raymark et al., 1997).

The PPRF has 12 dimensions used to measure career choice. General leadership

is the tendency to take charge and influence behaviour (Raymark et al., 1997). Interest

in negotiation is having an interest in mediation between parties (Raymark et al., 1997).

Ambition is the desire to achieve and perform better the next time (Raymark et al.,

1997). Friendly disposition is interacting easily and enjoying socialising (Raymark et al.,

1997). Sensitivity to the interests of others is being caring and concerned for others

(Raymark et al., 1997). Cooperative or collaborative work tendency is the desire to work

with others to achieve a common goal (Raymark et al., 1997). General trustworthiness is

being trusted by following through on a promise and not sharing confidential


information (Raymark et al., 1997). Adherence to a work ethic is being hard working

and complying with the organisations policies (Raymark et al., 1997). Thoroughness and

attentiveness to details is completing a task with attention to every aspect (Raymark et

al., 1997). Emotional stability is having a calm and relaxed approach to situations or

individuals (Raymark et al., 1997). Desire to generate ideas is having a preference for

situations where one can be creative or find new solutions (Raymark et al., 1997).

Tendency to think things through is the tendency to evaluate information and to consider

the consequences (Raymark et al., 1997). It was demonstrated that these 12 dimensions

were useful in differentiating among jobs as 260 job descriptions were clustered into

occupational groups to form several sample job description profiles for different types of

jobs (Raymark et al., 1997).

Achievement Motivation

It is evident from some of the relationships between personality, for example

extraversion and conscientiousness that achievement motivation is also an important

factor in career decision making. Achievement motivation is part of the earliest

psychological theory of motivation which referred to the achievement motive as one of

the three basic human motives (Murray, as cited in Steinmayr & Spinath, 2008). The

theory suggested that achievement related situations are characterised by approach and

avoidance components that trigger hope for success or fear of failure (Murray, as cited

in Steinmayr & Spinath, 2008).

Achievement motivation is the drive to achieve success and is related to

competitiveness, persistence, and striving for perfection (Kaplan & Maehr, 1999). It is

the desire to accomplish a difficult task, overcome obstacles, and attain a high standard


(Salami, 2004). Achievement motivation is also the personal striving of individuals to

attain goals within their social environment (Cassidy & Lynn, 1989). One of the first

researchers to have an interest in achievement motivation was Henry Murray in 1938.

Murray defined need for achievement as: “To accomplish something difficult. To

master, manipulate or organize [sic] physical objects, human beings, or ideas.” (Murray,

p. 164, as cited in Ziegler, Schmidt-Atzert, Buhner, & Krumm, 2007).

McClelland further developed the concept of achievement motivation (Castenell,

1983) and described it as a learned, unconscious drive, where behaviour involves

competition with a standard of excellence. If successful a positive feeling is produced

and if unsuccessful a negative feeling is produced (McClelland, as cited in Castenell,

1983). Although achievement motivation is related to winning and high performance it

is satisfied by succeeding and excelling rather than with extrinsic rewards (McClelland,

as cited in Sagie, 1994).

More recent research suggested that the key to success of an individual is their

achievement motivation level (Heyman, 2008). Researches defined the main

characteristics of achievement motivation as working ambitiously, being self-confident,

and motivated (Tutar, Altinoz, & Cakiroglu, 2011). Other characteristics included;

competitiveness, independence, eagerness to learn, preferring of regular and continuous

work, being focused (Tutar et al., 2011), wanting to attain high performance goals (Hart

& Albarracin, 2009), wanting to be responsible for any decisions made (Heyman, 2008),

enjoying challenges (Ibrahim & Gwari, 2011), having a higher tendency to take risks

(Spence, Pred, & Helmreich, as cited in Tutarl et al., 2011) valuing competence

(McClelland, as cited Collins, Hanges, & Locke, 2004), being creative, having strong


instincts of achieving individual and organisational success (Epstein & Harackiewicz, as

cited in Tutar et al., 2011), and preferring achievement related feedback (Hart &

Albarracin, 2009).

Individuals high in achievement motivation usually find their current

responsibilities inadequate and so consider new responsibilities to fix this, are likely to

respond to failure with increased effort (Kuhl, 1978), respond well to constructive

criticism, and do not fear failure, meaning they persist at tasks more than individuals

low in achievement motivation (Ibrahim & Gwari, 2011). It has been found that

individuals low in achievement motivation were seen as ‘quitters’, expected failure,

avoided meaningful challenges (McClelland, as cited Collins et al., 2004), and were less

likely to respond to failure with increased effort (Kuhl, 1978).

There has been a considerable volume of research on types and levels of

motivation in employment, sports, and social life (Hegarty, 2010). Culture, gender, and

age have been found to influence an individual’s achievement motivation level

(Vermeer, Boekaerts, & Seegers, as cited in Shekhar & Devi, 2012). For example in

collectivist cultures achievement motivation is usually correlated with social versus

individual goals. Also found was cultural differences in perceptions of what it takes to

achieve. For example listening versus participating and collaborating versus working

individually (Trumbull & Rothstein-Fisch, 2011).

Achievement Motivation Theories

The achievement motivation theory evolved from work McClelland began in the

1940s and 1950s. McClelland (as cited in Moore, Grabsch, & Rotter, 2010) suggested

that individuals are motivated in varying degrees by their need for achievement, need for


affiliation, and need for power. These three needs are acquired or learned during an

individual’s lifetime (Lussier & Achua, as cited in Moore et al., 2010).

Another theory, achievement goal theory has become an important framework

for understanding achievement motivation (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). According to

Barron and Harackiewicz (2001) individuals can be motivated to achieve for two

reasons, to increase their competence by learning more (mastery) or by trying to perform

well compared to others (performance). Harackiewicz and Elliot (1993) found that

individuals low in achievement motivation had higher levels of intrinsic motivation

when faced with mastery goals and individuals high in achievement motivation were

most interested when assigned performance goals.

Atkinson and Feather (as cited in Ibrahim & Gwari, 2011) proposed a theory of

achievement motivation with an individual’s achievement behaviour being based on the

individual’s predisposition to achievement, the probability of success, and the

individual’s perception of the value of the task (Atkinson & Feather, as cited in Ibrahim

& Gwari, 2011). An individual’s perception of probability of achieving a task causes the

need to achieve and fear of failure. When it comes to probability of success an

individual high in achievement motivation prefers moderate risk. An individual low in

achievement motivation does not want to take any risks and if are forced to, choose an

easy task where they could not fail or a task so difficult that it was not expected to be

completed successfully (Atkinson & Feather, as cited in Ibrahim & Gwari, 2011).

Achievement Motivation and Personality

Correlations between the FFM and achievement motivation have been found in

previous studies (Schuler & Prochaska, as cited in Bergner et al., 2010). Achievement


motivation was found to be positively correlated with conscientiousness and

extraversion, and negatively with neuroticism, impulsiveness, and fear of failure (De

Guzman, Calderon, & Cassaretto, as cited in Komarraju, Karau, & Schmeck, 2009). The

reason for this might be because there are similarities between descriptions of an

individual who is high achievement motivation, conscientious, and extraverted.

Achievement motivation might have been negatively correlated with neuroticism,

impulsiveness, and fear of failure as a neurotic individual was found to worry a lot,

experience negative emotions, and not want to attempt a hard task for the fear of failure,

which does not fit with the description of an individual high in achievement motivation

(De Guzman et al., as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009). According to Dweck and Leggett

(1988) openness and achievement motivation was positively correlated as being creative

allowed an individual to work in an environment that offered stimulation, a chance to be

ambitious, and to take risks.

Emotional stability was found to relate to self-efficacy motivation, believing that

one is capable of successfully performing a given activity (Judge, Erez, & Bono, as cited

in Parks & Guay, 2009). The reason for this is because emotionally stable individuals

were more effectively able to control their negative emotions when performing required

tasks and so had higher self-efficacy motivation (Park & Guay, 2009). Eggens,

Hendriks, Bosker, and Van der Werf (2010) found that emotionally stable individuals

were less likely to be concerned with achieving compared to individuals low in

emotionally stability. Eggens et al. (2010) suggested the reason for this is that

individuals who are low in emotional stability are easily overwhelmed and therefore

work harder to try and reduce these feelings.

http://0-www.sciencedirect.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/science/article/pii/S1041608008000587#bib12




Achievement Motivation and Career Choice

Motivation effects achievement, level of occupation achieved, and career

satisfaction (Atkinson, as cited in Farmer, 1985). Achievement motivation is strongly

linked with organisational effectiveness, predicting job satisfaction, determinants of job

performance (Bono & Judge, 2003), and career success (Bergner et al., 2010).

According to Jenkins (1987) once an individual selects a job its structure of roles

and rewards shapes the individual's motives in work values, perceptions, and

satisfactions. Differently motivated individuals may respond differently to the same

structure in a job (Jenkins, 1987). Also similarly motivated individuals may respond

differently in differently structured work situations. For example an individual may

respond more to a job where they receive recognition for completing a task well

(Jenkins, 1987). Therefore working conditions and resulting satisfactions may affect an

individual’s motivation level (Jenkins, 1987).

Previous research found that individuals high in achievement motivation

performed better under working conditions of challenge, autonomy, and rapid feedback

(Jenkins, 1987). It was found that career involved women who were high in

achievement motivation at university valued status mobility, working with individuals,

and reported job satisfaction from competition (Jenkins, 1987). Men high in

achievement motivation were more aware of achievement related aspects of their job

and became bored more quickly than those low in achievement motivation (Veroff &

Feld, as cited in Jenkins, 1987).

Many studies have found a significant relationship between work values and

vocational interests, occupational choice and job specific skills, and achievement


motivation and occupation choice (Salami, 2004). Achievement motivation significantly

influenced individuals in making an occupational choice (Salami, 2004). High

achievement motivation and low fear of failure individuals differed from those in terms

of their occupational choice who were low in achievement motivation and high in fear

of failure (Salami, 2004). This difference is because the high achievement motivation

and low fear of failure individuals possessed more accurate occupational perceptions

and aspired to higher level occupations (Tseng & Carter, as cited in Salami, 2004). Also

individuals high in achievement motivation had high self-efficacy expectations and

believed they had the ability to be successful in difficult tasks, meaning they were more

likely to pursue challenging careers such as nursing, science, or engineering (Salami,

2004). Therefore Salami (2004) suggested that achievement motivation significantly

predicted career choice.

McClelland (as cited in Collins et al., 2004) argued that individuals high in

achievement motivation are more likely to pursue careers that allowed for more control

over outcomes, provided more direct and immediate feedback on performance, and

offered moderate levels of risk. Therefore an individual high in achievement motivation

was found to prefer an entrepreneurial environment as they had more opportunity to take

advantage of the characteristics associated with high achievement motivation

(McClelland, as cited in Collins et al., 2004). Individuals high in achievement

motivation were also more attracted to management positions within a business setting

rather than to other types of positions that did not involve management in a business

setting such as politics, secretaries, or engineers (McClelland, as cited in Collins et al.,

2004).


Current Study

My study is re-examining the Raymark et al. (1997) study to see if I find the

same significant positive correlations Raymark et al. (1997) found between the five

personality traits and the 12 dimensions on the PPRF. Table 1 shows the hypotheses for

my study derived from the table Raymark et al. (1997) used in their study. It is slightly

different to the Raymark et al. (1997) table as I did not use the NEO PI-R or include

secondary predictors. Table 1 also indicates which PPRF dimensions and personality

traits I anticipated to be correlated with achievement motivation, which was not in the

Raymark et al. (1997) table.

My study is also examining the relationship between personality, achievement

motivation, and career choice. Specifically it is anticipated that extraversion,

conscientiousness (De Guzman et al., as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009), and openness

(Dweck & Leggett, 1988) will be significantly postively correlated with achievement

motivation. A stepwise multiple regression between personality and career choice and

between personality and achievement motivation will be run to determine what

personality traits predict career choice and achievement motivation.

My study also wants to determine if achievement motivation acts as a mediator

between personality and career choice. Specifically I will run two mediations, the first

between extraversion, achievement motivation, and general leadership and the second

between conscientiousness, achievement motivation, and ambition. I have chosen

extraversion and general leadership as I expect to find a significant positive correlation

between extraversion and general leadership (Raymark et al., 1997), extraversion and

achievement motivation (De Guzman et al., as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009), and


general leadership and achievement motivation (McClelland, as cited in Collins et al.,

2004). Therefore it would be anticipated that a full mediation will occur as all three

variables are expected to be linked. I have chosen the variables conscientiousness and

ambition as I expect to find a significant correlation between conscientiousness and

ambition (Raymark et al., 1997), conscientiousness and achievement motivation (De

Guzman et al., as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009), and ambition and achievement

motivation (Tutar et al., 2011). It would therefore be anticipated that a full mediation

will occur as all three variables are expected to be linked.

Table 1

Hypothesised Relationships Between Individual Differences and Career Dimensions

Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Openness Emotional

stability

Achievement

motivation

General leadership * * *

Interest in negotiation * *

Ambition * * *

Friendly disposition *

Sensitivity to others *

Cooperative work * *

General trustworthiness * *

Work ethic * * *

Thoroughness to details * *

Desire to generate ideas * *

Think things through * *

PPRF emotional stability * *

Achievement motivation * * *

Note. Sensitivity to interest of others = Sensitivity to others; Cooperative or collaborative work tendency = Cooperative work; Adherence to a work ethic = Work

ethic; Thoroughness and attentiveness to details = Thoroughness to details; Tendency to think things through = Think things through.

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

2

2

DETERMINANTS OF CAREER CHOICE 23 23

Method

Participants and Procedure

My study comprised of 152 participants who were recruited through the

psychology subject pool at Murdoch University and through snowball sampling using

Facebook. Age and gender data was not available. Of the 152 questionnaires 16

responses were excluded from the data as they were incomplete. Participants who were

recruited through the psychology subject pool at Murdoch University received 0.5 credit

hours for participating. The participants were directed online to a page with an

information letter (see Appendix B) explaining the study. Friends, relatives, and

acquaintances of the researcher were sent information letters through Facebook.

Participants were told that the study was designed to explore the relationships between

career choice and personality. Participants completed a consent form online before being

able to proceed onto the questionnaire page. The questionnaire took approximately 25

minutes to complete. Participants were recruited between May 2012 and August 2012.

Materials

Measure of personality. The 50-Item Set International Personality Item Pool

(IPIP) Big-Five Factor Markers (see Appendix C) was published on the IPIP website

and can be freely downloaded from the internet for use in research. Responses were

provided using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Very Inaccurate and 5 = Very Accurate).

According to Goldberg (2001) the internal consistency reliability estimates (coefficient

alpha) for each of the five domains are .87 (extraversion), .82 (agreeableness), .79

(conscientiousness), .84 (openness), and .86 (emotional stability). The IPIP scales have


good internal consistency and relate strongly to major dimensions of personality

assessed by the NEO-FFI (Gow, Whiteman, Pattie, & Deary, 2005).

Measure of achievement motivation. The original Cassidy and Lynn

Achievement Motivation Scale (CLAMS) consisting of 49 items has strong internal

reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of .87 (Hart, Karau, Stasson, & Kerr, 2004). In order

to manage the possible impact of survey fatigue the number of items was reduced to 28

based on weighted factor loadings as cited in Cassidy and Lynn (1989). The CLAMS is

available in Appendix D. Using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 =

Strongly Agree), participants were asked to report the degree to which they think or

behave in a specific manner.

Measure of career choice. The PPRF was used to measure career choice.

Participants provided responses to 36 items arranged in 12 sets designed to tap each of

the Big Five personality traits. There were three items for each set. Responses were

provided using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Not At All and 5 = Extremely). The 12 sets are

effective in the differentiation of occupational categories. The intrarater reliability for 11

of the 12 sets ranged between .72 and .92. Work Ethic was less reliable at .60 (Raymark

et al., 1997).

Results

Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alphas for the

PPRF, The 50-Item Set IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers, and achievement motivation. All

scales were sufficiently reliable (Nunnally, as cited in Cortina, 1993) with the exception

of cooperative or collaborative work tendency which was .54.


Table 3 shows the correlations between personality and career choice and

indicates which were significant. Table 4 shows my hypotheses and indicates which

were significant. Table 5 shows the correlations between achievement motivation and

career choice and indicates which were significant.

Correlations between achievement motivation and personality were run (see

Appendix E for the correlation table). The significant positive correlations between

achievement motivation and extraversion (r = .33, p < .001), conscientiousness (r = .20,

p = .021), and openness (r = .28, p = .001) support the hypotheses of De Guzman et al.

(as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009) and Dweck and Leggett (1988).


Table 2

Means, Standard Deviations, and Cronbach’s Alphas for the PPRF, the 50-Item Set

IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers, and Achievement Motivation

Variable M SD Cronbach’s

alpha

General leadership 3.67 .63 .68

Interest in negotiation 3.38 .92 .85

Ambition 3.98 .61 .76

Friendly disposition 3.37 .94 .82

Sensitivity to others 3.41 .78 .64

Cooperative work 3.54 .72 .54

General trustworthinessa 3.76 .69 .69

Work ethica 4.04 .70 .73

Thoroughness to detailsa 3.54 .90 .84

Desire to generate ideasa 3.70 .80 .74

Think things througha 3.60 .67 .81

PPRF emotional stabilitya 3.58 .78 .77

Extraversion 3.30 .77 .90

Agreeableness 4.16 .54 .82

Conscientiousness 3.66 .60 .81

Openness 3.74 .48 .72

Emotional stability 3.06 .72 .86

Achievement motivation 3.46 .42 .67

Note. N = 136. a n = 135.

22


Table 6 shows the stepwise multiple regression between personality and career

choice. Table 7 shows the second stepwise multiple regression between personality and

achievement motivation. These stepwise multiple regressions were run to determine

what personality traits predict career choice and achievement motivation.

Table 8 shows the mediation between extraversion and general leadership with

achievement motivation as the mediator. Table 9 shows the second mediation between

conscientiousness and ambition with achievement motivation as the mediator. These

mediations were run as it was expected from the significant correlations (Baron &

Kenny, 1986) that a full mediation should occur.

Table 3

Bivariate Correlations Between Personality and Career Choice

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

1 - .15 -.03 .20* .21* .20* .21* .09 .47** .14 .19* .02 .08 -.02 .13 -.06 .05

2 - .17* .25** .01 .05 .21* .17* .06 .24** .09 .08 .23** -.06 .08 .04 .003

3 - .06 .15 .10 -.10 .23** -.14 -.06 .03 .09 .19* .17 -.002 .08 .03

4 - .01 .18* .05 .21* .12 .11 .08 .12 .11 .11 .27** .26** .13

5 - .08 -.12 -.13 -.17 -.09 -.02 .05 .20* -.03 .01 -.07 .19*

6 - .47** .52** .32** .42** .33** .38** .47** .43** .35** .46** .37**

7 - .34** .45** .64** .42** .23** .24** .29** .52** .30** .36**

8 - .21* .39** .37** .44** .52** .34** .51** .50** .38**

9 - .37** .36** .14 .11 .17 .26** .15 .21*

10 - .63** .47** .40** .46** .45** .43** .46**

11 - .39** .27** .37** .48** .41** .49**

12a - .48** .46** .34** .54** .50**

13a - .36** .35** .42** .35**

14a - .34** .54** .49**

15a - .61** .45**

16a - .49**

17a -

Note. 1= Extraversion; 2 = Agreeableness; 3 = Conscientiousness; 4 = Openness; 5 = Emotional stability; 6 = General leadership; 7 = Interest in negotiation; 8 =

Ambition; 9 = Friendly disposition; 10 = Sensitivity to interest of others; 11 = Cooperative or collaborative work tendency; 12 = General trustworthiness; 13 =

Adherence to a work ethic; 14 = Thoroughness and attentiveness to details; 15 = Desire to generate ideas; 16 = Tendency to think things through; 17 = PPRF

emotional stability. a n = 135.

* p < .05. ** p < .01.

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

CH

OIC

E

28

Table 4

Results of the Hypothesised Relationships Between Individual Differences and Career Dimensions

Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Openness Emotional

stability

Achievement

motivation

General leadership *(.20*) *(.18*) *(.62**)

Interest in negotiation *(.21*) *(.05)

Ambition *(.09) *(.23**) *(.54**)

Friendly disposition *(.06)

Sensitivity to others *(.24**)

Cooperative work *(.09) *(.03)

General trustworthinessa *(.09)

*(.31**)

Work ethica *(.19*) *(.20*)

*(.41**)

Thoroughness to detailsa *(.17)

*(.33**)

Desire to generate ideasa *(.27**)

*(.31**)

Think things througha *(.26**)

*(.38**)

PPRF emotional stabilitya *(.19*)

*(.29**)

Achievement motivation *(.33**) *(.20*) *(.28**)

a n = 135.

*p < .05. **p < .01.

28

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

29

Table 5

Bivariate Correlations Between Achievement Motivation and Career Choice

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1 - .47** .52** .32** .42** .33** .38** .47** .43** .35** .46** .37** .62**

2 - .34** .45** .64** .42** .23** .24** .29** .52** .30** .36** .36**

3 - .21* .39** .37** .44** .52** .34** .51** .50** .38** .54**

4 - .37** .36** .14 .11 .17 .26** .15 .21* .32**

5 - .63** .47** .40** .46** .45** .43** .46** .34**

6 - .39** .27** .37** .48** .41** .49** .22*

7a - .48** .46** .34** .54** .50** .31**

8a - .36** .35** .42** .35** .41**

9a - .34** .54** .49** .33**

10a - .61** .45** .31**

11a - .49** .38**

12a - .29**

13 -

Note. 1 = General leadership; 2 = Interest in negotiation; 3 = Ambition; 4 = Friendly disposition; 5 = Sensitivity to interest of others; 6 = Cooperative or

collaborative work tendency; 7 = General trustworthiness; 8 = Adherence to a work ethic; 9 = Thoroughness and attentiveness to details; 10 = Desire to generate

ideas; 11 = Tendency to think things through; 12 = PPRF emotional stability; 13 = Achievement motivation. a n = 135.

* p < .05. ** p < .01.

29

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

30


Table 6

Stepwise Multiple Regression Analysis for Personality Variables Predicting PPRF

Dimensions

Criterion Predictors B SE(B) β t

General

leadership

Extraversion .17 .07 .20 2.41*

R² = .04, F(1,

134) = 5.80*

Interest in

negotiation

Extraversion .25 .10 .21 2.45*

R² = .04, F(1,

134) = 5.99*

Ambition Conscientiousness .24 .09 .23 2.77**

R² = .05, F(1,

134) = 7.66**

Sensitivity to

others

Agreeableness .35 .12 .24 2.85**

R² = .06, F(1,

134) = 8.14**

Work ethic Conscientiousness .22 .10 .19 2.27*

R² = .04, F(1,

133) = 5.15*

Desire to

generate ideas

Openness .44 .14 .27 3.17**

R² = .07, F(1,

133) = 10.02**

Think things

through

Openness .36 .12 .26 3.09**

R² = .07, F(1,

133) = 9.52**

PPRF emotional

stability

Emotional

stability

.21 .09 .19 2.27*

* p < .05. ** p < .01.


Table 7

Stepwise Multiple Regression Analysis for Personality Variables Predicting

Achievement Motivation

Criterion Predictors B SE(B) β t

Achievement

motivation

R² = .11, F(1,

134) = 16.56**

Extraversion .16 .04 .30 3.70**

R² = .16, F(2,

133) = 12.40**

Conscientiousness .18 .07 .21 2.60**

R² = .19, F(3,

132) = 10.62**

Openness .14 .06 .19 2.47*

* p < .05. ** p < .01.


Table 8

Mediation Analysis Between Extraversion, Achievement Motivation, and General

Leadership

R R² R² change Beta

Analysis one:

General

leadership on

extraversion

.20 .04* .20*

Analysis two:

Achievement

motivation on

extraversion

.33 .11** .33**

Analysis three:

Step 1: General

leadership on

achievement

motivation

.62 .38** .62**

Step 2: General

leadership on

extraversion

.62 .38 .000 -.002

* p < .05. ** p < .01.


Table 9

Mediation Analysis Between Conscientiousness, Achievement Motivation, and Ambition

R R² R² change Beta

Analysis one:

Ambition on

conscientiousness

.23 .05** .23**

Analysis two:

Achievement

motivation on

conscientiousness

.20 .04* .20*

Analysis three:

Step 1: Ambition

on achievement

motivation

.54 .30** .52**

Step 2: Ambition

on

conscientiousness

.56 .31 .02 .13

* p < .05. ** p < .01.


Figure 1 illustrates the results of the mediation between extraversion,

achievement motivation, and general leadership. Figure 2 illustrates the results of the

mediation between conscientiousness, achievement motivation, and ambition.

R² = .11

.33* .62* R² = .38

(.11**)

.20* (-.002 ns)

*p < .05. ** p < .01.

Figure 1. The relationship between extraversion and general leadership as mediated by

achievement motivation.

Achievement

motivation

General

leadership Extraversion


R² = .04

.20* .52* R² = .30

(.11**)

.23* (.13 ns)

*p < .05. ** p < .01.

Figure 2. The relationship between conscientiousness and ambition as mediated by


The size of the indirect effect is calculated as the product of the direct effects of

the independent variable on the mediator variable and the mediator variable on the

dependent variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986). The indirect effect of extraversion on

general leadership (.33)(.62) = .20, and its direct effect is .20, yielding a total effect

coefficient of .40. Accordingly .20/.40, 50% of the effect of extraversion on general

leadership is mediated through achievement motivation, and .20/.40 = 50% is direct.

The indirect effect of conscientiousness on ambition (.20)(.52) = .10, and its direct effect

is .23, yielding a total effect coefficient of .33. Accordingly .10/.33, 30% of the effect of

conscientiousness on ambition is mediated through achievement motivation, and .23/.33

= 70% is direct.

The effect was significant using the Sobel test, z = 4.65, p < .001, and revealed

that achievement motivation was mediated by extraversion and general leadership. The

Conscientiousness Ambition

Achievement

motivation


effect was significant using the Sobel test, z = 2.01, p = .044, and revealed that

achievement motivation was mediated by conscientiousness and ambition.

Discussion

Personality and Career Choice

In terms of the correlations analyses, the results replicated some of the findings

of Raymark et al. (1997). These findings could help career advisors when making

recommendations to an individual as they may have a better idea of what job or career

an individual prefers based on their personality. The desire to pursue certain types of

jobs does not change in an individual but having certain personality characteristics may

predispose an individual to want to seek out a certain kind of job or career. In order to

explore this further a stepwise multiple regression analysis was also run to see what

personality traits most predict the PPRF dimensions. Constraints do not allow for a full

consideration of all the correlations and stepwise multiple regressions. However I will

discuss the ones most strongly correlated.

As hypothesised by Raymark et al. (1997) extraversion was significantly

positively correlated with general leadership. This may have been found as according to

Barrick et al. (2002) an extraverted individual are predicted to have cognitive

motivations consistent with striving for status which is similar to the Raymark et al.

(1997) definition of general leadership which included taking charge. Also Furnham et

al. (2005) described extraverts as wanting to have influence in the workplace, another

characteristic of general leadership (Raymark et al., 1997). This may indicate why

extraversion and general leadership was significantly positively correlated, as they have

similar characteristics to describe them. Therefore an individual who is extraverted may


prefer a job that allows them to pursue a leadership role. Although openness was also

found to be correlated with general leadership the stepwise multiple regression indicated

that extraversion is the sole determinant and openness adds no predictive power.

Therefore extraversion might be the best personality trait to predict if an individual

prefers to seek out a job that may require leadership.

As hypothesised by Raymark et al. (1997) extraversion was significantly

positively correlated with interest in negotiation. Extraverts are likely to strive for status

(Barrick et al., 2002) and want to have an influence in the workplace (Furnham et al.,

2005). An extravert may therefore lead the negotiations between others (Raymark et al.,

1997) in order to have their say and have an influence. In the stepwise multiple

regression it was found that extraversion was the sole determinant of interest in

negotiation, which could indicate that an individual who is extraverted might be more

likely to seek out a job that allows them to negotiate and help others negotiate.

As hypothesised by Raymark et al. (1997) conscientiousness was significantly

positively correlated with ambition. High conscientiousness means that an individual is

focused, committed to the task, and purposeful (Costa & McCrae, 1988). Ambition is

about working to excel rather than working to only perform a required task (Raymark et

al., 1997). Therefore adherence to a work ethic and ambition might have both been

significantly positively correlated to conscientiousness as the characteristics that

describe conscientiousness such as purposeful could indicate that they are likely to be

ambitious as they have a reason for completing a task rather than doing it because it is a

requirement of their job. In the stepwise multiple regression it was found that

conscientiousness was the sole determinant of ambition which may suggest that an


individual who is conscientiousness may seek out a job where they are able to work to

achieve rather than work to complete assigned tasks.

As hypothesised by Raymark et al. (1997) agreeableness was significantly

positively correlated with sensitivity to interest of others. Raymark et al. (1997)

described sensitivity to interest of others as an individual having genuine concern for

others. This definition can be seen as similar to an agreeable individual who Costa and

McCrae (1988) described as trusting and sympathetic. An individual who is trusting and

sympathetic might be thought of as genuine in their concern for others. An individual

who is agreeable is more likely to prefer working as a unified team (Barrick et al., 2002)

which could demonstrate that an agreeable individual could want everyone to agree and

get along in the team, therefore showing their sensitivity to interest of others. In the

stepwise multiple regression it was found that agreeableness was the sole determinant of

sensitivity to interest of others which may indicate that an individual who is agreeable is

more likely to seek out a job where they can engage in team projects, not be in a

competitive environment (Mount et al., 1998), and listen to others with work related

problems (Raymark et al., 1997).

As hypothesised by Raymark et al. (1997) openness was significantly positively

correlated with a desire to generate ideas. Given that individuals high in openness are

creative, curious (Barrick et al., 2002), and imaginative (Costa & McCrae, 1988) they

might prefer to come up with unconventional ideas that have been considered before

(Mount et al., 1998). Therefore an individual high in openness may prefer a job where

they are allowed to come up with their own ideas as they prefer an environment where

they can be stimulated and have the potential to grow (Barrick et al., 2002).


There were some results that differed from what Raymark et al. (1997)

hypothesised. A reason for these differences is that Raymark et al. (1997) used the NEO

PI-R (which has six facets to describe each of the five traits) to see which of the six

facets correlated with each of the PPRF dimensions. Therefore some of the Raymark et

al. (1997) significant findings were based on one or two of the facets correlating with a

PPRF dimension. My study measured personality differently, using a shorter measure.

Therefore using the NEO PI-R may have allowed me to find more of the same results as

Raymark et al. (1997).

Openness and interest in negotiation which Raymark et al. (1997) hypothesised

to be significantly correlated was found to be non-significant. The reason for this may

have been that openness and interest in negotiation might not be related in the first

place. For example an individual high in openness is willing to consider different

approaches (Barrick & Mount, 1991) and so may not want to negotiate. They might be

happy to try a new approach to solving a problem or completing a task and so not see

the need to try and convince others to come to an agreement. Instead they may think that

everyone has good ideas that could work as individuals high in openness were also

found to be adventurous (Costa & McCrae, 1988). Therefore an open individual may

prefer to work in a job where negotiations are not always needed as employees are

willing to try new ideas.

Extraversion and ambition which Raymark et al. (1997) hypothesised to be

significantly correlated was found to be non-significant. An individual high in

extraversion was found to be sociable and adventurous (Barrick et al., as cited in

Digman, 1990). An individual who is ambitious is described as focused on their job and


wants to achieve (Raymark et al., 1997). The correlation between extraversion and

ambition may have been non-significant as an extraverted individual might prefer a job

where they can be sociable. Therefore an extraverted individual might be seen as less

concerned with achieving when compared to an individual high in ambition who is

focused on the their job and not on socialising.

Conscientiousness and general trustworthiness which Raymark et al. (1997)

hypothesised to be significantly correlated was found to be non-significant. This could

be because general trustworthiness is considered a distinctive trait from

conscientiousness (Moberg, 1997) and therefore may not be related to begin with.

Therefore it may have been feasible to find a non-significant correlation between

general trustworthiness and conscientiousness.

Other correlations which differed from what Raymark et al. (1997) hypothesised

included agreeableness and friendly disposition, conscientiousness and thoroughness

and attentiveness to details, and agreeableness and conscientiousness and cooperative or

collaborative work tendency. It may have been expected that agreeableness and friendly

disposition could have been significantly positively correlated as an individual high in

agreeableness is more likely to have social jobs at work (Touze, 2005) and having a

friendly disposition involves being social in the workplace (Raymark et al., 1997). It

may have also been expected that conscientiousness and thoroughness and attentiveness

to details was significantly positively correlated as an individual high in

conscientiousness is thorough (Costa & McCrae, 1988) which is part of the description

of thoroughness and attentiveness to details. Agreeableness and conscientiousness could

have both been expected to be significantly positively correlated with cooperative or


collaborative work tendency as a cooperative or collaborative work tendency is

described as an employee preferring to work with one or more employees to complete

an assigned project (Raymark et al., 1997). This fits with the description of an agreeable

individual as Mount et al. (1998) found that agreeable individuals preferred team

oriented jobs. This also fits with the description of a conscientiousness individual as

they may prefer to work as a team in order to receive recognition for doing well

(Furnham et al., 2005). Therefore these correlations may have been non-significant as

there was a restricted range of responses for participants to choose from. The

participants were forced to choose a response even if they did not agree with any of the

options. This could have led to responses that might not have been a true reflection of

the participant’s views.

Achievement Motivation and Personality

Results from my study give support for achievement motivation being

significantly positively correlated with extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness.

This supports previous research by De Guzman et al. (as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009)

who found that extraversion and conscientiousness were positively correlated with

achievement motivation and Dweck and Leggett (1988) who found openness to

positively correlate with achievement motivation. Therefore this may indicate that

individuals who are extraverted, conscientious, and open are more likely to be high in


As hypothesised by De Guzman et al. (as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009)

extraversion and achievement motivation was significantly positively correlated. An

extraverted individual attracted to enriched jobs (Furnham et al., 2005). An individual




high in achievement motivation usually finds their current responsibilities inadequate so

consider new responsibilities to fix this (Kuhl, 1978). Therefore an extraverted

individual may prefer a job that is stimulating and allows them to take on more

responsibility if they feel their current responsibilities are insufficient.

As hypothesised by De Guzman et al. (as cited in Komarraju et al., 2009)

conscientiousness and achievement motivation was significantly positively correlated.

As discussed previously conscientiousness was significantly positively correlated with

ambition. Ambition is a characteristic of achievement motivation (Tutar et al., 2011) and

therefore conscientiousness could be expected to be correlated with achievement

motivation if conscientiousness was found to be correlated with ambition. Therefore an

individual who is conscientious might prefer a job where they can have regular and

continuous work, work ambitiously (Tutar et al., 2011), and attain high performance

goals (Hart & Albarracin, 2009) as these are characteristics of achievement motivation.

As hypothesised by Dweck and Leggett (1988) openness and achievement

motivation was significantly positively correlated. The reason could be that an

individual who is open is creative and prefers work environments that offer stimulation

(Dweck & Leggett, 1988). These are also characteristics of an individual high in

achievement motivation (Epstein & Harackiewicz, as cited in Tutar et al., 2011).

Therefore an individual high in openness may prefer a job where they can be creative

which will keep them stimulated, a characteristic of an individual high in achievement

motivation (Tutar et al., 2011).

As found by Bergner et al. (2010) agreeableness was non-significantly correlated

with achievement motivation. The reason for this could be that agreeableness is the least


relevant of the five personality traits (Bergner et al., 2010) and so may not be important

in determining if an individual will be high in achievement motivation. Emotional

stability was also non-significantly correlated with achievement motivation. The reason

for this could be that emotionally stable individuals are less likely to be concerned with

achieving compared to individuals who are low in emotional stability (Eggens et al.,

2010). Since individuals who are low in emotional stability are easily overwhelmed they

are more likely to work harder in their job to try and fix this and therefore compared to

emotionally stable individuals might be more concerned about achieving (Eggens et al.,

2010).

In the stepwise multiple regression it was found that extraversion,

conscientiousness, and openness were the determinants of achievement motivation.

From examining the beta weights it is evident that extraversion has the largest followed

by openness, and then conscientiousness. Extraversion contributes the most in

explaining the variance as it has the highest beta weight. Therefore extraversion might

be the best personality trait to predict if an individual is high in achievement motivation.

Achievement Motivation and Career Choice

Constraints do not allow for a full consideration of all correlations between

achievement motivation and career choice. However the most strongly correlated will be

discussed. The significant positive relationship between achievement motivation and

general leadership supports the argument by McClelland (as cited in Collins et al., 2004)

that individuals high in achievement motivation were more attracted to management

positions within a business setting than to other types of positions. Therefore individuals

high in achievement motivation might prefer leadership roles in an organisation


compared to individuals low in achievement motivation as they have more of a need to

be competitive and strive for perfection and opportunities (Kaplan & Maehr, 1999).

As hypothesised by Tutar et al. (2011) achievement motivation and ambition was

significantly positively correlated. This might be because individuals high in

achievement motivation are more likely to have strong instincts of achieving individual

success (Epstein & Harackiewicz, as cited in Tutar et al., 2011), believe they can

succeed even when completing a difficult task (Salami, 2004), and work ambitiously

(Tutar et al., 2011), which all demonstrate characteristics of being ambitious (Raymark

et al., 1997). Therefore an individual high in achievement motivation may prefer a job

or career where they can be ambitious, be challenged and set performance goals in order

to improve on previous performances (Raymark et al., 1997).

Achievement motivation was significantly positively correlated to adherence to a

work ethic which supports Epstein and Harackiewicz (as cited in Tutar et al., 2011) who

found that individuals high in achievement motivation had strong instincts of achieving

organisational success. This fits with the Raymark et al. (1997) definition of adherence

to a work ethic which included a definition of an individual wanting to put the

organisations goals high on their priority list. Therefore an individual who is high in

achievement motivation and adheres to a work ethic may prefer a job where they are

able to achieve individual success and also help the organisation achieve success

(Epstein & Harackiewicz, as cited in Tutar et al., 2011).

Personality, Achievement Motivation, and Career Choice

A mediation was run between extraversion, achievement motivation, and general

leadership and between conscientiousness, achievement motivation, and ambition. It


was evident that a full mediation occurred as the correlation between the independent

variable and the dependent variable was reduced to a non significant level when the

mediator was controlled for (Kenny, 2011).

It is evident that 50% of the effect of extraversion on general leadership was

mediated through achievement motivation and 50% was direct. This indicates that

extraversion was linked to achievement motivation and then achievement motivation

determined general leadership. For the mediation between conscientiousness,

achievement motivation, and ambition it was evident that 30% of the effect of

conscientiousness on ambition was mediated through achievement motivation and 70%

was direct. This indicates that conscientiousness was linked to achievement motivation

and then achievement motivation determined ambition. Therefore this indicates that

personality, on at least two occasions was related to career choice but indirectly through


The mediation indicated that being extraverted leads to one being high in

achievement motivation and subsequently being high in achievement motivation leads to

one being a leader. For example an extraverted individual is assertive (Barrick et al., as

cited in Digman, 1990) and prefers enriched jobs (Furnham et al., 2005) which indicates

they might be high in achievement motivation as they are self-confident and find their

current responsibilities inadequate and so consider new responsibilities to fix this (Kuhl,

1978). This self-confidence and wanting new responsibilities may draw an individual to

apply for a leadership role in a job. Therefore achievement motivation and general

leadership are linked.


In the second mediation I found that being conscientious leads to one being high

in achievement motivation and subsequently being high in achievement motivation leads

one to being ambitious. For example a conscientiousness individual is determined,

hardworking, and strives to achievement (Costa & McCrae, 1988) which indicates they

might be more likely to be high in achievement motivation as they want to achieve

(Kaplan & Maehr, 1999). Striving to achieve could then indicate that an individual is

ambitious as Raymark et al. (1997) described ambition as wanting to achieve. Therefore

achievement motivation and ambition are linked.

These results may help an organisation determine what type of worker an

employee might be and what job best suits them based on their personality and whether

they are high or low in achievement motivation. An organisation may then be able to

better predict an employee’s performance as they are more likely to have placed them in

a suitable position. However this could bring up the issue of efficacy as if an

organisation uses assessments to help predict personality and type of work that is most

suitable for an employee then an employee’s performance could be expected to improve.

This therefore could make an organisation more accountable if the employee’s

performance does not improve or is worse than expected. Another implication for these

findings is that career advisors could use assessments to determine an individual’s

personality and achievement motivation level to help indicate the type of job or career

that might be best suited to that individual.

Limitations

Although my study has reached its aims there are some unavoidable limitations.

The first is regarding the sample used as it was mainly Murdoch University psychology


students, and so was not a representative sample. Therefore the results of my study may

not be generalisable. However there has been debate around this and a counter argument

which suggests that with increasing numbers and more of a variety of individuals

attending university over the years this limitation may not be as significant as it used to

be as a representative sample can appear from using mainly university students in a

study (Hummel, Whatley, Monetti, Briihl, & Adams, 2009).

Another limitation is that my study did not use the full Big Five personality trait

measure, the NEO PI-R. If I had used the NEO PI-R to measure the five personality

traits rather than the 50-Item Set IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers I would have used more

than 10 questions to measure each of the five personality traits and therefore may have

found more of the same significant correlations that Raymark et al. (1997) found.

Another limitation is that my study did not collect descriptive data from the

participants such as age and gender. While it did not directly affect my results it might

have been useful to have this information as it could have allowed for more comparison

between the personality, achievement motivation and career choice. For example I could

have further explored the influence of age and gender on an individual’s achievement

motivation level as found by Vermeer et al. (as cited in Shekhar & Devi, 2012).

My study was based on self-reported data which can lead to biases (Visser,

Krosnick, & Lavrakas, 2000). Examples of some biases that may have occurred when

participants completed the questionnaire in my study include; selective memory,

recalling events that occurred at one time as if they occurred at another time, attributing

positive events and outcomes to one's own effort but attributing negative events and


outcomes to external forces, and exaggerating responses (Visser et al., 2000). It is

therefore important to be aware of these biases when using self-reported data.

Future Research

The mediation indicated that achievement motivation fully mediated the

relationship between extraversion and general leadership and that between

conscientiousness and ambition. Future research might consider exploring other

personality and career choice variables such as openness, which was also found to be

significantly correlated with achievement motivation and general leadership as this was

correlated with openness to see if mediation occurs. This could help organisations with

selecting and promoting individuals to the right job positions based on their personality.

Future research might also consider the type of jobs individuals have as. This

could allow for further comparison into whether individuals with similar personalities

also have similar jobs as this has been researched previously by Hogan et al. (1996).

Experience could also be explored in future research. For example an individual might

say they would like a leadership role but may not have experienced what it would be

like and so once in a leadership role may realise they do not want it. Therefore if an

individual has had experience in what they believe is their preferred career choice it is

more likely that the relationship found between personality and career choice might be

more accurate compared to if the individual only thinks this might be their preferred

career choice without having experienced it.

Conclusion

My study is one of the first to re-examine the Raymark et al. (1997) study by

exploring further into the relationship between personality and career choice. I found


that the association between personality and career choice was generally supportive of

those hypothesised by Raymark et al. (1997). Achievement motivation was found to be

significantly positively correlated to extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness. My

study also found that achievement motivation mediates the relationship between

extraversion and general leadership and that between conscientiousness and ambition.

My study may help organisations with selection and promotion and also help

career advisors have a better understanding of the relationship between personality and

career choice. By knowing an individual’s personality a career advisor could

recommend a job or career that will best match the individual. Therefore my study has

tried to show that having certain personality characteristics may predispose an

individual to want to seek out a certain kind of job or career.


References

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986).The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical

considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job

performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.

doi:10.1111/ j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x

Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at

the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go

next? Personality and Performance, 9(1-2), 9-30. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00160

Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., & Piotrowski, M. (2002). Personality and job

performance: Test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales

representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 43-51.

doi:10.1037//0021-9010.87.1.43

Barron, K. E., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2001). Achievement goals and optimal

motivation: Testing multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 80, 706-722. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.5.706

Bergner, S., Neubauer, A. C., & Kreuzthaler, A. (2010). Broad and narrow personality

traits for predicting managerial success. European Journal of Work and

Organizational Psychology, 19, 177-199. doi:10.1080/13594320902819728

http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

http://0-search.proquest.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/docview.lateralsearchlink:lateralsearch/sng/author/Harackiewicz,+Judith+M./$N?t:ac=614404360/fulltext&t:cp=maintain/resultcitationblocks

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13594320902819728


Bipp, T. (2010). What do people want from their jobs? The Big Five, core

self-evaluations and work motivation. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, 18(1), 28-39. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00486.x

Bipp, T., Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2008). Personality and achievement motivation:

Relationship among Big Five domain and facet scales, achievement goals, and

intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1454-1464.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.001

Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: A review of the trait and its

role in job satisfaction and job performance. European Journal of Personality,

17(1), 5-18. doi:10.1002/per.481

Cassidy, T., & Lynn, R. (1989). A multifactorial approach to achievement motivation:

The development of a comprehensive measure. Journal of Occupational

Psychology, 62(4), 301-312.

Castenell, L. A. (1983). Achievement motivation: An investigation of adolescents'

achievement patterns. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 503-510.

doi:10.3102/000283 12020004503

Collins, C. J., Hanges, P. J., & Locke, E. A. (2004). The relationship of achievement

motivation to entrepreneurial behaviour: A meta-analysis. Human Performance,

17(1), 95-117. doi:10.1207/S15327043HUP1701_5

Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and

applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.001



Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal

study of self-reports and personality ratings on the NEO personality inventory.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 853-863.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.853

Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model.

Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.

doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221

Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and

personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.

doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256

Eggens, L., Hendriks, A. A. J., Bosker, R. J., & Van der Werf, M. P. C. (2010).

Personality, procrastination and achievement motivation. Retrieved from

http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/gmw/2011/l.eggens/06_c6.pdf

Farmer, H. S. (1985). Model of career and achievement motivation for women and men.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 363-390.

doi:10.1037/0022-0167.32.3.363

Furnham, A., Petrides, K.V., Tsaousis, I., Pappas, K., & Garrod, D. (2005). A

cross-cultural investigation into the relationships between personality traits and

work values. The Journal of Psychology, 139(1), 5-32.

doi:10.3200/JRLP.139.1.5-32

Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure.

Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26-42. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26


http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256

http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/gmw/2011/l.eggens/06_c6.pdf


http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26


Goldberg, L. R. (2001). International personality item pool. Retrieved from

http://ipip.ori.org/

Gow, A. J., Whiteman, M. C., Pattie, A., & Deary, I. J. (2005). Goldberg’s ‘IPIP’

Big-Five factor markers: Internal consistency and concurrent validation in

Scotland. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 317-329.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.011

Harackiewicz, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1993). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 904-915.

doi:10.1037/0022-3 514.65.5.904

Hart, J. W., Karau, S. J., Stasson, M. F., & Kerr, N. A. (2004). Achievement motivation,

expected coworker performance, and collective task motivation: Working hard

or hardly working? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 984-1000.

doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02580.x

Hart, W., & Albarracin, D. (2009). The effects of chronic achievement motivation and

achievement primes on the activation of achievement and fun goals. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1129-1141. doi:10.1037/a0017146

Hegarty, N. (2010). Application of the academic motivation scale to graduate school

students. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 6(2), 48-55.

Retrieved from http://hraljournal.com/Page/6%20Niall%20Hegarty.pdf

Heyman, G. D. (2008). Talking about success: Implications for achievement motivation.

Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 361-370.

doi:10.1016/j.appd ev.2008.06.003

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.011


http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0017146

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.06.003


Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and

employment decisions: Questions and answers. American Psychologist, 51, 469-

477. doi:10.1037/000 3-066X.51.5.469

Holland, J. L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology,

6(1), 35-45. doi:10.1037/h0040767

Hummel, J. H., Whatley, M. A., Monetti, D. M., Briihl, D. S., & Adams, K. S. (2009,

October). Using the 6th edition of the APA manual: A guide for students. A

paper presented at the annual meeting of the Georgia Educational Research

Association, Savannah, GA. Retrieved from

http://coefaculty.valdosta.edu/lschmert/gera/volume-

7/APA%206th%20GERA%20Journal%20Final.pdf

Ibrahim, M., & Gwari, P. (2011). A study of achievement motivation of low and high

level volleyball players. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(11-12), 14-17.

Retrieved from

http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/878/798

Jenkins, M., & Griffith, R. (2004). Using personality constructs to predict performance:

Narrow or broad bandwidth. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 255-269.

doi:10.1007/s10869-004-0551-9

Jenkins, S. R. (1987). Need for achievement and women's careers over 14 years:

Evidence for occupational structure effects. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 53, 922-932. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.5.922


http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0040767

http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/878/798



Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and

job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–541.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.530

Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (1999). Achievement goals and student well-being.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 330-358.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.0993

Kenny, D. A. (2011). Mediation. Retrieved from http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm

Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., & Schmeck, R. R. (2009). Role of the Big Five personality

traits in predicting college students' academic motivation and achievement.

Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1), 47-52.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.07.001

Kuhl, J. (1978). Standard setting and risk preference: An elaboration of the theory of

achievement motivation and an empirical test. Psychological Review, 85, 239-

248. doi:10.1037/00 33-295X.85.3.239

Leung, S. A. (2008). The big five career theories. In J. A. Athanasou & R. Van Esbroeck

(Eds.), International handbook of career guidance. Hong Kong, China: Springer

Science. Retrieved from http://www.realtutoring.com/career/bigFiveTheory.pdf

Moberg, D. J. (1997). Trustworthiness and conscientiousness as managerial virtues.

Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 16(1-3), 171-194.

doi:10.5840/bpej1997161/2/34


http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.0993

http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.07.001



Moore, L. L., Grabsch, D. K., & Rotter, C. (2010). Using achievement motivation

theory to explain student participation in a residential leadership learning

community. Journal of Leadership Education, 9(2), 22-34. Retrieved from

http://leadershipeducators.org/Resources/Documents/jole/2010_summer/JOLE_9

_2.pdf#page=33

Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Stewart, G. L. (1998). Five factor model of personality

and performance in jobs involving interpersonal interactions. Human

Performance, 11, 145-165. doi:10.1080/08959285.1998.9668029

Osipow, S. H. (1990). Convergence in theories of career choice and development:

Review and prospect. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36, 122-131.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(90)90020-3

Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2005). Personality and the prediction of

consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401-421.

doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190127

Parks, L., & Guay, R. P. (2009). Personality, values, and motivation. Personality and

Individual Differences, 47, 675-684.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.06.002

Raymark, P. H., Schmit, M. J., & Guion, R. M. (1997). Identifying potentially useful

personality constructs for employee selection. Journal of Personnel Psychology,

50, 723-736. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00712.x

Sagie, A. (1994). Assessing achievement motivation: Construction and application of a

new scale using Elizur's multifaceted approach. The Journal of Psychology,

128(1), 51-61. doi:10.1080/00223980.1994.9712711

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(90)90020-3

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.0%206.002


Salami, S. O. (2004). A path model to examine factors influencing career orientations of

school-going adolescents in Nigeria. International Journal for the Advancement

of Counselling. 26(1), 79-94. doi:10.1023/B:ADCO.0000021551.61838.0a

Shekhar, C., & Devi, R. (2012). Achievement motivation across gender and different

academic majors. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 2,

105-109. doi:10.5539/jedp.v2n2p105

Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2008). Sex differences in school achievement: What are

the roles of personality and achievement motivation? European Journal of

Personality, 22, 185-209. doi:10.1002/per.676

Super, D. W. (1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of

Vocational Behavior, 16, 282-298.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(80)90056-1

Touze, P. A. (2005). Personality and prediction of performance in the workplace. A

Bilingual and Multi-Disciplinary Journal of Human Factors, 68(1), 37-53.

doi:10.3917/th.681.0037

Trumbull, E., & Rothstein-Fisch, C. (2011). The intersection of culture and achievement

motivation. The School Community Journal, 21(2), 25-54. Retrieved from

http://www.adi.org/journal/2011fw/TrumbullRothstein-FischFall2011.pdf

Tutar, H., Altinoz, M., & Cakiroglu, D. (2011). The effects of employee empowerment

on achievement motivation and the contextual performance of employees.

African Journal of Business Management, 5, 6318-6329.

doi:10.5897/AJBM11.085

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.676

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(80)90056-1


Visser, P. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Lavrakas, P. (2000). Survey research. In H. T. Reis &

C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology. New

York: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from

http://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/visser/Visser,%20Krosnick,%20

&%20Lavrakas%20(2000).pdf

Ziegler, M., Schmidt-Atzert, L., Buhner, M., & Krumm, S. (2007). Fakability of

different measurement methods for achievement motivation: Questionnaire,

semi-projective, and objective. Psychology Science, 49(4), 291-307. Retrieved

from http://p16277.typo3server.info/fileadmin/download/PschologyScience/4-

2007/01_Ziegler.pdf

http://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/visser/Visser,%20Krosnick,%20&%20Lavrakas%20(2000).pdf

http://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/visser/Visser,%20Krosnick,%20&%20Lavrakas%20(2000).pdf

Appendix A

Copy of the Personality-Related Position Requirements Form

Personality-Related Position Requirements Form

Please indicate to what extent you would like a job/career that requires you

to:

Not At

All

Very

Little

Moderately Very

Much

Extremely

1. Take control in group situation NA VL M VM E

2. Make decisions when needed NA VL M VM E

3. Motivate people to accept change NA VL M VM E

4.Negotiate on behalf of the work unit for a fair share of organisational

resources

NA VL M VM E

5. Help people in work groups settle interpersonal conflicts that interfere

with group functioning

NA VL M VM E

6. Help settle work-related problems, complaints, or disputes among

employees or organisational units

NA VL M VM E

7. Work to excel rather than work to perform assigned tasks NA VL M VM E

8. Try always to do the best possible work, not settling for work that is

merely "good enough"

NA VL M VM E

9. Seek challenging tasks NA VL M VM E

10. Interact with others in social situations where the person is representing

the organisation

NA VL M VM E

11. Arrange and host work-related social activities NA VL M VM E

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

60

12. Represent and promote the organisation in social contacts away from

work

NA VL M VM E

13. Listen attentively to the work-related problems of others NA VL M VM E

14. Give constructive criticisms tactfully NA VL M VM E

15. Work with dissatisfied customers or clients NA VL M VM E

16. Work in pairs or small groups where each person's work is dependent on

or influenced by the work of others

NA VL M VM E

17. Provide assistance to clients or customers throughout the work day NA VL M VM E

18. Help co-workers solve work-related problems or reach common goals NA VL M VM E

19. Refuse to share of release confidential information NA VL M VM E

20. Make commitments and follow through on them NA VL M VM E

21. Keep one's word about doing things, even when it is inconvenient or

unpleasant to do so

NA VL M VM E

22. See things that need to be done and do them without waiting for instructions

NA VL M VM E

23. Work until a task is done rather than stopping at quitting time NA VL M VM E

24. Meet specified deadlines NA VL M VM E

25.Examine all aspects of written reports to be sure that nothing has been

omitted

NA VL M VM E

26. Inspect his or her own work (or the work of co-workers or subordinates)

carefully and in detail

NA VL M VM E

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

61

27. Remain attentive to details over extended periods of time NA VL M VM E

28.Adapt easily to changes in work procedures NA VL M VM E

29. Keep cool when confronted with conflicts NA VL M VM E

30. Accept unplanned changes to work schedules or priorities NA VL M VM E

31. Present unconventional ways to do things that decrease costs or improve

work effectiveness

NA VL M VM E

32. Help find solutions for the work problems of other employees or clients NA VL M VM E

33. Develop innovative approaches to old everyday problems NA VL M VM E

34. Solve complex problems one step at a time NA VL M VM E

35. Analyse past mistakes when faced with similar problems NA VL M VM E

36. Critically evaluate information presented to support a proposed decision

or course of action

NA VL M VM E

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

62


Appendix B

Information Letter Given to Participants Regarding Research Study

Information Letter

Career Choice and Personality

Previous studies have explored the ‘personality’ of jobs but few have explored whether

personality is associated with the choice of career. We invite you to participate in a

research study exploring the relationships between career choice and personality. This

study is part of my Honours Degree in Psychology, supervised by Dr Graeme Ditchburn

at Murdoch University.

What the Study will Involve

If you decide to participate in this study you will need to be currently employed. You

will be asked to complete an anonymous online questionnaire which will take

approximately 25 minutes to complete. The link to complete the online questionnaire is

http://scored.murdoch.edu.au/survey/TakeSurvey.aspx?SurveyID=961Mn73

Voluntary Participation and Withdrawal from the Study

Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary and you may withdraw at any time

without discrimination or prejudice. All information is treated as confidential and no

names or other details that might identify you will be collected for this study.

Once you have submitted your questionnaire online your data cannot be withdrawn due

to the lack of any identifiable information.

https://sinprd0111.outlook.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=AcMe3kzmFUy8N5ur00eSnDzDBdvOJ88IBYw5h27pE-gkkLZdT6239KV-5QxJ74fG4_X6ONEwgbk.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fscored.murdoch.edu.au%2fsurvey%2fTakeSurvey.aspx%3fSurveyID%3d961Mn73


Benefits of the Study

It is possible that there may be no direct benefit to you from participation in this study.

While there is no guarantee that you will personally benefit, the knowledge gained from

your participation may help others in the future with regards to their career choices.

Possible Risks

There are no specific risks anticipated with participation in this study.

If you have any questions about this study please feel free to contact either myself,

Robyn Glaser at [email protected] or my supervisor, Dr Graeme

Ditchburn, on (08) 9360 2775. My supervisor and I are happy to discuss with you any

concerns you may have about this study.

Once we have analysed the information from this study a summary of the findings will

be put on the School of Psychology research results page. This will be done by

November, 2012:

http://www.psychology.murdoch.edu.au/researchresults/research_results.html

Thank you for your assistance with this research study.

Sincerely

Robyn Glaser

62

This study has been approved by the Murdoch University Human Research Ethics

Committee (Approval 2012/072). If you have any reservation or complaint about the

ethical conduct of this research, and wish to talk with an independent person, you may

contact Murdoch University’s Research Ethics Office (Tel. 08 9360 6677 or e-mail

[email protected]). Any issues you raise will be treated in confidence and

investigated fully, and you will be informed of the outcome.

http://www.psychology.murdoch.edu.au/researchresults/research_results.html

mailto:[email protected]

Appendix C

Copy of the 50-Item Set International Personality Item Pool Big-Five Factor Markers

Describe yourself as you generally are now, not as you wish to be in the future. Describe yourself as honestly as you see yourself, in

relation to other people you know of the same sex as you are, and roughly your same age. So that you describe yourself in an honest

manner, your responses will be kept in absolute confidence.

50-Item Set IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers

Very

Inaccurate

Moderately

Inaccurate

Neither

Accurate Nor

Inaccurate

Moderately

Accurate

Very

Accurate

1. Am the life of the party VI MI N MA VA

2. Feel little concern for others VI MI N MA VA

3. Am always prepared VI MI N MA VA

4. Get stressed out easily VI MI N MA VA

5. Have a rich vocabulary VI MI N MA VA

6. Don't talk a lot VI MI N MA VA

7. Am interested in people VI MI N MA VA

74

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

65

8. Leave my belongings around VI MI N MA VA

9. Am relaxed most of the time VI MI N MA VA

10. Have difficulty understanding abstract ideas VI MI N MA VA

11. Feel comfortable around people VI MI N MA VA

12. Insult people VI MI N MA VA

13. Pay attention to details VI MI N MA VA

14. Worry about things VI MI N MA VA

15. Have a vivid imagination VI MI N MA VA

16. Keep in the background VI MI N MA VA

17. Sympathise with other's feelings VI MI N MA VA

18. Make a mess of things VI MI N MA VA

19. Seldom feel blue VI MI N MA VA

20. Am not interested in abstract ideas VI MI N MA VA

21. Start conversations VI MI N MA VA

22. Am not interested in other people's problems VI MI N MA VA

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

66

23. Get chores done right away VI MI N MA VA

24. Am easily disturbed VI MI N MA VA

25. Have excellent ideas VI MI N MA VA

26. Have little to say VI MI N MA VA

27. Have a soft heart VI MI N MA VA

28. Often forget to put things back in their proper place VI MI N MA VA

29. Get upset easily VI MI N MA VA

30. Do not have a good imagination VI MI N MA VA

31. Talk to a lot of different people at parties VI MI N MA VA

32. Am not really interested in others VI MI N MA VA

33. Like order VI MI N MA VA

34. Change my mood a lot VI MI N MA VA

35. Am quick to understand things VI MI N MA VA

36. Don't like to draw attention to myself VI MI N MA VA

37. Take time out for others VI MI N MA VA

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

67

38. Shirk my duties VI MI N MA VA

39. Have frequent mood swings VI MI N MA VA

40. Use difficult words VI MI N MA VA

41. Don't mind being the center of attention VI MI N MA VA

42. Feel others' emotions VI MI N MA VA

43. Follow a schedule VI MI N MA VA

44. Get irritated easily VI MI N MA VA

45. Spend time reflecting on things VI MI N MA VA

46. Am quiet around strangers VI MI N MA VA

47. Make people feel at ease VI MI N MA VA

48. Am exacting in my work VI MI N MA VA

49. Often feel blue VI MI N MA VA

50. Am full of ideas VI MI N MA VA

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

68

Appendix D

Copy of the Cassidy and Lynn Achievement Motivation Scale

Achievement Motivation Scale

Strongly

Agree

Moderately

Agree

Moderately

Disagree

Strongly

Disagree

1. I can easily sit for a long time doing nothing SA MA MD SD

2. I must admit I often do as little work as I can get away with SA MA MD SD

3. I am basically a lazy person SA MA MD SD

4. I like to work hard SA MA MD SD

5. If there is an opportunity to earn money, I am usually there SA MA MD SD

6. I would be willing to work for a salary that was below average if the

job was pleasant

SA MA MD SD

7. I frequently think about what I might do to earn a great deal of money SA MA MD SD

8. It is important to me to make lots of money SA MA MD SD

9. I think I would enjoy having authority over other people SA MA MD SD

10. If given the chance I would make a good leader of people SA MA MD SD

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

69

11. I think I am usually a leader in my group SA MA MD SD

12. I enjoy planning things and deciding what other people should do SA MA MD SD

13. I hate to see bad workmanship SA MA MD SD

14. Part of the satisfaction in doing something comes from seeing how

good the finished product looks

SA MA MD SD

15. I get a sense of satisfaction out of being able to say I have done a

very good job on a project

SA MA MD SD

16. There is satisfaction in a job well done SA MA MD SD

17. It annoys me when other people perform better than I do SA MA MD SD

18. If I get a good result, it doesn’t matter if others do better SA MA MD SD

19. To be a real success I feel I have to do better than everyone I come

up against

SA MA MD SD

20. It is important to me to perform better than others on a task SA MA MD SD

21. I would like an important job where people look up to me SA MA MD SD

22. I like to be admired for my achievements SA MA MD SD

23. I like to have people come to me for advice SA MA MD SD

24. I find satisfaction in having influence over others because of my

position in the community

SA MA MD SD

25. I would rather do something at which I feel confident and relaxed

than something which is challenging and difficult

SA MA MD SD

72

DE

TE

RM

INA

NT

S O

F C

AR

EE

R C

HO

ICE

70

26. I would rather learn easy fun games than difficult thought games SA MA MD SD

27. I prefer to work in situations that require a high level of skill SA MA MD SD

28. I more often attempt tasks that I am not sure I can do than tasks I know I can do

SA MA MD SD

71

D

ET

ER

MIN

AN

TS

OF

CA

RE

ER

CH

OIC

E


Appendix E

Bivariate Correlations Between Achievement Motivation and Personality

1 2 3 4 5 6

1.Extraversion - .15 -.03 .20* .21* .33**

2.Agreeableness - .17* .25** .01 -.03

3.Conscientiousness - .06 .15 .20*

4.Openness - .006 .28**

5.Emotional stability - -.11

6.Achievement motivation -

* p < .05. ** p < .01.


Appendix F

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Copy of Instructions to Authors

Prior to submission, please carefully read and follow the submission guidelines detailed

below. Manuscripts that do not conform to the submission guidelines may be returned

without review.

Submission

Submit manuscripts to the appropriate section editor.

Attitudes and Social Cognition:

Submit manuscripts electronically to the Attitudes and Social Cognition section

Eliot R. Smith

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences

Indiana University

1101 E. Tenth St.

Bloomington, IN 47405-7007

General correspondence may be directed to the Editor's Office.

Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes:

Submit manuscripts electronically to the Interpersonal Relations and Group

Processes section

Jeffry A. Simpson, PhD

Department of Psychology

http://www.jbo.com/jbo3/submissions/dsp_jbo.cfm?confirm=Y&journal_code=asc3


http://www.jbo.com/jbo3/submissions/dsp_jbo.cfm?journal_code=psp2


http://www.jbo.com/jbo3/submissions/dsp_jbo.cfm?confirm=Y&journal_code=asc3



University of Minnesota

75 East River Road N394

Elliott Hall

Minneapolis, MN 55455


Personality Processes and Individual Differences:

Submit manuscripts electronically to the Personality Processes and Individual

Differences section

Laura A. King, PhD

Department of Psychological Sciences

University of Missouri

McAlester Hall

Columbia, MO 65211


Section editors reserve the right to redirect papers as appropriate. When papers are

judged as better suited for another section, editors ordinarily will return papers to

authors and suggest resubmission to the more appropriate section. Rejection by one

section editor is considered rejection by all; therefore a manuscript rejected by one

section editor should not be submitted to another.


http://www.jbo.com/jbo3/submissions/dsp_jbo.cfm?journal_code=pid





In addition to addresses and phone numbers, please supply electronic mail addresses and

fax numbers, if available, for potential use by the editorial office and later by the

production office.

Keep a copy of the manuscript to guard against loss.

Masked Review Policy

The Attitudes and Social Cognition section and the Interpersonal Relations and Group

Processes section have adopted a policy of masked review for all submissions. The

cover letter should include all authors' names and institutional affiliations. The first page

of text should omit this information but should include the title of the manuscript and

the date it is submitted. Every effort should be made to see that the manuscript itself

contains no clues to the authors' identity.

Masked reviews will be done on all submissions to the Personality Processes and

Individual Differences section unless unmasked review is requested by the author. This

request should be included in the submission letter.

Manuscript Preparation

Prepare manuscripts according to the Publication Manual of the American

Psychological Association (6th

edition). Manuscripts may be copyedited for bias-free

language (see Chapter 3 of the Publication Manual).

Review APA's Checklist for Manuscript Submission before submitting your article.

If your manuscript was mask reviewed, please ensure that the final version for

production includes a byline and full author note for typesetting.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4200066.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4200066.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/manuscript-check.aspx


Double-space all copy. Other formatting instructions, as well as instructions on

preparing tables, figures, references, metrics, and abstracts, appear in the Manual.

Below are additional instructions regarding the preparation of display equations and

tables.

Display Equations

We strongly encourage you to use MathType (third-party software) or Equation Editor

3.0 (built into pre-2007 versions of Word) to construct your equations, rather than the

equation support that is built into Word 2007 and Word 2010. Equations composed with

the built-in Word 2007/Word 2010 equation support are converted to low resolution

graphics when they enter the production process and must be rekeyed by the typesetter,

which may introduce errors.

To construct your equations with MathType or Equation Editor 3.0:

Go to the Text section of the Insert tab and select Object.

Select MathType or Equation Editor 3.0 in the drop-down menu.

If you have an equation that has already been produced using Microsoft Word 2007 or

2010 and you have access to the full version of MathType 6.5 or later, you can convert

this equation to MathType by clicking on MathType Insert Equation. Copy the equation

from Microsoft Word and paste it into the MathType box. Verify that your equation is

correct, click File, and then click Update. Your equation has now been inserted into your

Word file as a MathType Equation.

Use Equation Editor 3.0 or MathType only for equations or for formulas that cannot be

produced as Word text using the Times or Symbol font.


Tables

Use Word's Insert Table function when you create tables. Using spaces or tabs in your

table will create problems when the table is typeset and may result in errors.

Submitting Supplemental Materials

APA can now place supplementary materials online, available via the published article

in the PsycARTICLES® database. Please see Supplementing Your Article With Online

Material for more details.

Abstract and Keywords

All manuscripts must include an abstract containing a maximum of 250 words typed on

a separate page. After the abstract, please supply up to five keywords or brief phrases.

References

List references in alphabetical order. Each listed reference should be cited in text, and

each text citation should be listed in the References section.

Examples of basic reference formats:

Journal Article:

Herbst-Damm, K. L., & Kulik, J. A. (2005). Volunteer support, marital status, and the

survival times of terminally ill patients. Health Psychology, 24, 225–229. doi:

10.1037/0278-6133.24.2.225

Authored Book:

Mitchell, T. R., & Larson, J. R., Jr. (1987). People in organizations: An introduction to

organizational behavior (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/supp-material.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/supp-material.aspx


Chapter in an Edited Book:

Bjork, R. A. (1989). Retrieval inhibition as an adaptive mechanism in human memory.

In H. L. Roediger III & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of memory & consciousness (pp.

309–330). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Figures

Graphics files are welcome if supplied as Tiff, EPS, or PowerPoint files. The minimum

line weight for line art is 0.5 point for optimal printing.

When possible, please place symbol legends below the figure instead of to the side.

Original color figures can be printed in color at the editor's and publisher's discretion

provided the author agrees to pay

$255 for one figure

$425 for two figures

$575 for three figures

$675 for four figures

$55 for each additional figure

Permissions

Authors of accepted papers must obtain and provide to the editor on final acceptance all

necessary permissions to reproduce in print and electronic form any copyrighted work,

including, for example, test materials (or portions thereof) and photographs of people.

Download Permissions Alert Form (PDF, 47KB)

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/permissions-alert.pdf


Publication Policies

APA policy prohibits an author from submitting the same manuscript for concurrent

consideration by two or more publications.

See also APA Journals® Internet Posting Guidelines.

APA requires authors to reveal any possible conflict of interest in the conduct and

reporting of research (e.g., financial interests in a test or procedure, funding by

pharmaceutical companies for drug research).

Download Disclosure of Interests Form (PDF, 38KB)

Authors of accepted manuscripts are required to transfer the copyright to APA.

Download Publication Rights (Copyright Transfer) Form (PDF, 83KB)

Ethical Principles

It is a violation of APA Ethical Principles to publish "as original data, data that have

been previously published" (Standard 8.13).

In addition, APA Ethical Principles specify that "after research results are published,

psychologists do not withhold the data on which their conclusions are based from other

competent professionals who seek to verify the substantive claims through reanalysis

and who intend to use such data only for that purpose, provided that the confidentiality

of the participants can be protected and unless legal rights concerning proprietary data

preclude their release" (Standard 8.14).

APA expects authors to adhere to these standards. Specifically, APA expects authors to

have their data available throughout the editorial review process and for at least 5 years

after the date of publication.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/posting.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/disclosure_of_interests.pdf

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/publication-rights-form.pdf


Authors are required to state in writing that they have complied with APA ethical

standards in the treatment of their sample, human or animal, or to describe the details of

treatment.

Download Certification of Compliance With APA Ethical Principles Form (PDF, 26KB)

The APA Ethics Office provides the full Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of

Conduct electronically on their website in HTML, PDF, and Word format. You may

also request a copy by emailing or calling the APA Ethics Office (202-336-5930). You

may also read "Ethical Principles," December 1992, American Psychologist, Vol. 47,

pp. 1597–1611.

Other Information

Appeals Process for Manuscript Submissions

Preparing Auxiliary Files for Production

Document Deposit Procedures for APA Journals

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/ethics02.pdf

http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx


http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/appeals.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/preparing-efiles.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/pubmed-deposit.aspx