Uncategorized

hello director Center on education and work now minus T is also being sponsored by the Department of counseling psychology as well as the discounted kuriboh association yes today is dr. Steven brown professor loyola university chicago at the school of education his topic today is toward a taxonomy on career decision making difficulties and little introduction mr. brown you graduated from the University of California Santa Barbara in 1977 he taught at the University of Minnesota before moving to loyola university chicago in 1994 in recognition for his important scientific contribution he received the John Holland ward from the Society of vocational or the Society of counseling psychology and also this year best science the his fourth edition of the handbook of counseling psychology that eco edits with Robert land continues to capture a wide range of topics and interests that kept that represent the diverse field of counseling psychology the handbook has served as a primer for generations of doctoral students preparing for the comprehensive doctor’ll exams and counseling psychology not sure what there’s a few of them in the room today so we’ll see what their feelings are about the text but for many of us is most seminal research contribution to the field of career development and vocational research and theory is his co-authorship of the social cognitive theory with doctors of Robert Lent and Gale Hackett but I also wonder if you would rank among his greatest professional accomplishments the mini doctoral students who have risen to great heights in our profession including Karen Moulton Karen O’Brien Paul gore and the rising Matt Miller he may or may not count as a contribution will find out perhaps that dr. Brown is also responsible for my start in the field of he gave my first academic position my best work was certainly due to his mentoring and patience during one of our many lunches where he had to explain over and over the difference between a mediator and a moderator he also made it clear that by being hired oil was conditional about becoming a loyal Cubs fan this of course is cause for ongoing pain and suffering for myself my children and that the Cubs perform this past century the pain and suffering is likely to extend to my children’s children so Steve well there’s plenty thanks guys now our topic today is toward a taxonomy of career decision making difficulties but before we launch into that just give us a sense how did you become interested in career development theory research how long is stories is purdue people one um actually I became interested in career development vocational psychology research kind of through the back door my first job in Minnesota I was hired this is what i’m told i was hired because i knew nothing about vocational psychology i have never taken a graduate course on in vocational psychology most of my research in graduate school and and after that in fact i did a postdoc here at Madison in the psychiatry department way back when but most of my research at the time was in coping skills training relaxation training and and i was told that they hired me at minnesota precisely because i was in a vocational psychologist I was the only non vocational psychologist on the faculty but to make a long story short bob lent arrived at the very same here at minnesota that i arrived and we as two newbies we started clackety Bob should I tell him Bob I think Bob’s had coursework and he had experience in career counseling but his interest was in in career counseling either and but we started to get together because we were the newbies and and we were both interested at when Albert bandura published first statement of social cognitive theory social cognitive theory in 1977 Doug that I began talking about how can we do research on this theory and it so happens that Nancy betzen Gill Hackett published their 1981 classic paper where they translated at least the self-efficacy part of social cognitive theory in social cognitive theory into the career area and Bob and I looked at that and said well bender essentially has four hypotheses about self-efficacy or we can translate for hypothesis interest development how choices are made

performance and persistence and we said Nancy and Gil focused on the interest in choice making part we should do persistence and performance and Bob happened to be teaching a career development class in the school of science and engineering so we had a captive group of subjects and so we decided well this career stuff might be somewhat interesting Willie that we least have a group of people we can start testing been juris theory and that was our 84 paper and before long we just got really interested in vocational psychology career development I moved to Loyola and they said well you just came from the University of Minnesota therefore you could prompt you could definitely teach the vocational psych class and I said sure I can do that but it took me with the end two or three years after that initial study I know I clearly identified myself as a vocational psychologist so I started out being interested in social cognitive porphyria but the social importance of career development and no its importance really got me interested in the topic and now I consider myself pretty exclusively a vocational psychologist so that’s what that’s what gotten easier I guess that I started out as a research interest that turned into a real really strong professional interest well and you talked about the 84 piece and probably those of the two 281 and the 84 piece that are the two seminal things that kicked off right the whole social cognitive is we have been we focused on performance and persistence Gil and Nancy and focused on interest enjoy same right all right now let’s let’s just keep talking then about the career stuff and the topic today is on this taxonomy of our decision making difficulties not so maybe you can just in a nutshell kind of described and what are the groups that you’re making difficult as you’re seeing it yeah can I touch a little bit about basically about methods fewer yeah it’s lot of my research ideas come out of my teaching and and this is this this interest came so Bob and I still do a lot of research and social cognitive theory but we also have our kind of our own special interest and in teaching my I teach a career development course for master students and any doctoral student who comes in and didn’t take it for me they have to take it anyway as part of teaching that course I did I could teach theories there was a lot to say I found out I could teach about assessment I could teach the research we could talk that we could I could teach a lot but I could but the research outcome research on career interventions was abysmal I thought it was abysmal in a lot of work there was nothing I could teach about from the outcome research and career interventions well now let’s just be clear you’re you’re taking this as a scientist look what were empirically supported right to intervention right so but and I thought it was weak in a number of ways 1 i’m not going to get to it okay 11 I thought he looked at again I’m not just saying what counselors are doing as a practitioner I was doing a lot of things and wasn’t showing that that weren’t showing up in the outcome literature so the interventions tended to be very theoretically truncated they seem to all be based on hot John Holland’s theory and John Holland has wonderful theory but there are a lot more theories that have the empirical support feared work adjustment that could have been incorporated that I thought could have made the current er ventures more effective another piece was everybody and leave all the participants in the career intervention research seemed to be treated as if they all came in with the same problem they were all treated identically they had the same ball that is that get more options everybody that all the intervention seemed to be designed around the idea that clients come in wanting more options when in fact I think we all knows practitioners that that’s not the only reason clients come in with choice difficult some people coming in because they have too many options and they’re confused because of too many other people come in because they’re having a hard time deciding between a couple or they’re coming in because they’ve already decided and they need some confirmation but everybody in the outcome literature seemed to be treated as if they had no options and they wanted more and then I here and then the other piece was that everybody seemed to be coming treat as if they’re coming in as if the underlying reason for the recent underlying reason for their difficulty was the same despite the fact that there’d been a lot of writing over the

years suggesting that clients come in with different types of problems and there have been a lot of research over the years looking at different portlets of indecision and so what got me started Nancy Ryan so my interest became on in how can we improve the effect of career interventions and and study it empirically and so in 2009 see Ryan crane and I did a study looking at what goes on in career interventions and what needs to go on what seems to be critical so that was the first piece and we decided to turn to the question of trying to identify what some of the major sources of pro-choice difficulties are and that’s where this piece came from and so what we ended up doing and you read the paper another thing I’m interested in is tackling a question whether there’s a methodology there to tackle it or not to come up with some innovative way to do it but anyway what we did with was identified in the literature there have been a lot of correlational research on sources of indecision we identified about 28 correlation matrices in the literature we factored those now I couldn’t explain why we decided to do that and then kind of meta analytically combine the loadings and what we came up with was four major factors that seem that that seemed to be overarching factors without that its associated with Curtis Asian making difficulties they seem to come out from these 28 different matrices and here we are okay and the four we came out with were not somewhat not surprising because people had talked about him a lot but there had never been any real empirical verification one was one of the factors was what Paul Salmoni called chronic and decisiveness and that was characterized the variables attended the load on that or things like the primary characteristic is have as a long-term chronic overarching difficulty in making decisions of any type so it’s not just I’m having a problem with this career decision but I have problems making this visions in all contexts other things associated with that was a dependent decision-making style I tend to rely almost pathologically on others I can’t make a decision unless other people tell me what to do a high anxiety proneness external locus of control and what was interesting that chronic indecisiveness factor was almost the characteristics were almost identical to it all someone he had described years and years ago second factor is a lack of information self occupational information when what was interesting on that factor too was an approach approach conflict variable loaded on that factor which at which I find interesting which means approach approach conflict is you’re kind of stuck between two big things in your aunt I can’t make a decision because both are equally positive and one thing that says to me is a lot of people may be a lot of people who are coming in or were coming in saying I don’t have enough information or that seems to be the major problem that may suggest to me that they’re not looking for more options they don’t want that information in order to expand options the way at least the research literature thinks people behave but rather their need information to choose between a couple of good options anyway right right and then the third factor was a interpersonal conflicts external barriers so variables that loaded on that is think my family wants me to do is pressing me to do something I don’t want to do it I’m having conflict with significant others external barriers I don’t have the resources to do what I want that approach approach conflict variable loaded on that fact or two again suggesting to me people who are having interpersonal conflicts again may not be looking for more options but rather that conflicts around two good options or they whatever and then the final one we called to be consistent with you’re a lack of readiness what did you Scott gave me another term i like better disengage it was kind of a disengaged style lack of readiness things that load it on that were goal goal instability people tended not to have very clear goals for themselves career decision making self-efficacy didn’t feel very efficacious and decision-making choice

work importance making a career choice now just ain’t that important to me sorry so and belief in career myths like there’s one perfect career out there for me and I can’t find it so essentially those were the disorders it I like Scott’s term disengage my interpersonal conflicts external factor external barriers lack of self and occupational information and then this chronic indecisiveness factor so what I want to do it shut up okay I just want to try to bring it down and to translate it down but you write more practice that right okay so we’ve got four kinds of students write the student who’s just anxious who about deciding about anything when you say about anything you’re saying that they can’t decide what to buy a new tuesdays they can’t decide but at least for high at least four hot decisions for elevators they should write so they have a hard time to go to date or whatever right okay and then you have another and I want to talk about that because you were you spoke to me earlier about that means having some significant issues that I got something to grow out of right and so we want to talk about that the the kinds of I’ve got a couple of good things I really need to know how to decide right then and how to and you also mentioned with me before this about the idea sometimes just needing confirmation right way that it quick and then we can get into the disengaged and active the ideas they’re out intervention about guide students just not seeing it as important why should I write be interested and then and then of course the interpersonal and just some of the challenge back to as well so I’m in at school said we’ve got a number of school counselors that are working with the middle and high school youth and are trying to get them focused on this what are what are some things we can tell let’s take that that what is it chronically undecided look like in a in a middle school type environment so i’m not i guess i am not sure what what the person will look look like in a middle school environment but i can tell you i think we have some preliminary data that that those potentially chronically indecisive kids exist in the middle school environment and or the high school environment as part of as part of the the study that this part you didn’t read about there had been a lot there’s been a lot of cluster analytic studies where a bunch of measures were given to people and they look to see whether they could cluster them into different types of clients and we went back and looked at those cluster analytic studies in using our four factors see if we could reanalyze them and what was interesting there had been to type cluster analytic studies done with 91 with 9th graders one with 10th and 12th graders and when we re analyze their data using our factors both studies had four identical percentages fourteen percent of the ninth graders tenth graders and eleventh graders in the other studies that were showing the least from our model the characteristics of chronic and decisiveness and i was surprised only two studies but fourteen percent exactly in both studies that could very well be some students right right and that and unless this is addressed right these have quarrels with other right right and there are some data after four it’s not from the chronic indecisiveness data but I’m a part of that is kind of a trait negative affectivity and there are data to suggest from the personality cycle edit literature that people who are chronically indecisive have a this trait negative affectivity complex over time have the their career development is probably going to be somewhat stymied that is people high on negative affectivity followed up in their 20s and some research tend to make less money than people who are lower they tend to get fewer promotions than people who are lower on that variable and tend to be less satisfied with their work so i think this chronic and decisiveness negative affectivity perhaps constellation identified in 9th 10th grade has some longer it long-range consequences for kids later employment for and that it’s important but i’m going to ask all of you how do we intervene it’s important to be able to identify an intervene and I’m not sure how to do that one characteristic one characteristic is a tendency to focus on what’s going to go wrong kind of a chronic tendency to focus on what’s going to go wrong rather than right with a decision so I’m trying to make a decision I can’t make it because all I

can see is all this all the bad stuff that’s going to happen with any option I choose so that says to me perhaps if we can help kids to to to learn to focus i’m not sure how easy it will be given this kind of trait characteristic that but but kids like that if we help them focus on the positive aspen and may take some work to focus on positive aspects of decisions it may take some anxiety management all of this is speculation i bet the practitioners have seen these kids maybe you can give me some tips because another aspect of the literature is that we know a lot in the literature now i think about working with a small subset of empirically I think we now know a lot about how to work with maybe twenty five percent of the students we see or maybe a bit more one thing we don’t know because there’s been absolutely no research done is how do we work with the chronically indecisive the people i’m calling chronically indecisive people tell me send them out for psychotherapy but no now we’re we’re doing career counseling with them and we just don’t know and that anybody any graduate student out here you want a career of research that’s going to have major impact I would suggest starting to do some research on how do we intervene early with these ninth and tenth graders who are beginning to show signs of chronic chronic and decisiveness how do we treat people when they’re out there after that for that problem so did that answer your question it’s getting our me that okay round yep two things on that one in k do have a significant right maybe fourteen percent and you add that in with other mental health issues there’s a series right but also it seems to me that the middle and high school it’s possible as you’re indicating maybe some its interventions they may be trait like but trying to work on it at 35 is a lot different right you have a lot more it seems real enough now we’re blinking so so that’s one thing to kind of go to and you also mentioned that there’s there’s a percentage that are going to do well with the Korean from the right and things like that right and also some of the relational piece but let’s just stay on the personality for a minute you have a question that was brought in by Dave would he’s a Victoria British Columbia okay he’s very interested in this whole big five personality traits and I know it’s been hot in the literature right how does that connect to what we’re talking about it feels like it does from the right of the decisive would right right KITT I guess there may be and in doing that maybe explain a war with that negative affectivity is okay because I think a weird big five there’s been a lot of research in the personality literature to suggest that normal human personality could be pretty comprehensively understood in terms of five major traits okay one is called neuroticism lets you it’s not quite negative affectivity neuroticism another’s extraversion another is openness openness to experience another is agreeableness and conscientiousness okay where do you want me to go I just wanted to disconnect yeah what we found is that is what we found in our studies is that that neuroticism demand trait tended to load on the chronic indecisive characteristic of chronic and indecisiveness what was entry in that conscientiousness is a trait characterized kind of at the high end by somebody who’s persevering goal-directed organize those types of things and and on the disengagement factor chronic indecisiveness was negatively loaded on that no conscientiousness was negatively loaded on that but in terms of again what the implication some of the implications there is going back to what I had talked about about neuroticism negative affectivity although having long-range effects on people’s job success job satisfaction those types of things what you’ve talked about I could go on and on about the big five well the key is is that that the event in the answer is yes these these big fat do look differently across these dimensions which is which is an important part in Scott and I I think had the district of grey well the implications I don’t know the data stick the data suggests that by although they’re somewhat malleable by late mid adolescence these traits stabilized quite a bit and that people don’t change that so the most extroverted person at twenty among his or her peers tends to be the most extroverted at 50 or 60 so they’re pretty stable I often as we

talked about this in my career class I often ask my students if these things are so stable why do we talk about them why do we talk because I’m not sure any form of career counseling definitely is not going to make create major personality change see now now of course my channel that was that is the nan of one experience where I started as an extra work right that after my doctoral comprehensive exam so say that’s right but I guess when I write information ok ok i started yeah i think we get more introverted with age and there we go right ok but but what one thing i do we do talk to students about is even though these might not be changeable especially in career counseling they could give us some ideas for focus or so for instance in terms of neuroticism negative affectivity a major characteristic is this tendency to focus on what’s going to being stuck because this prepared my immediate reaction if i’m a high on that is to focus on what’s going to go wrong what’s going to go wrong with I just remember we know that we have cognitive restructuring technique I thought I’d write write write that and if I could just help people learn I’m not going to change their personality right but if I could help people know learn how how this personality characteristic affects my life right and I can become aware of it and catch myself for example when I’m starting to focus on the negative aspects then you can you can manage it better then you can manage me and you might not let it affect you as much okay well let me check out that answer home business is good oh that was that Dave would Dave I hope that would let me let me social cognitive queer theory great did you ever think when you were putting this together that it was going to be as big as it became I guess we didn’t we thought it was pretty good no no otherwise you wouldn’t have done right right right no um yeah we had hoped it would take off it was an explosion yeah it was and we’d hoped and we tried to make it as testable as possible for people who wanted to do testing do research on it and we hope I thought we had I think we both all three of us felt we had integrated things and we well pulled in things from outside of Bandar although Albert bandura is wonderful what we would send him drafts of it he’d send his three page single spaced letters back and she had a pretty good idea around the track we were on we were on the track and we agree when we and some of the things we decided not to agree with him but any kind of bottom line is I we did we didn’t expect it to take off as much as it did but we’re glad it did I guess yeah very glad it did and then there it there then enough research on individual pieces like self-efficacy it’s after Nancy and Gail’s 81 paper and maybe our 84 research on self-efficacy and career in the vocational psych dis exploded there had been a lot of research on goal mechanisms outside of our area so I we felt that most of the pieces had empirical support and what our goal in doing it was so the three of us sat down and said there has been so much research on various aspects of the theory we don’t need to do another study what somebody needs to do is try to pull it together and it turned out that Bob had a sabbatical and then after that I had a sabbatical so we had and Gail had a sabbatical and so we had a lot of time to just to try to do that type of integration that that we thought it needed and I’m happy it went where it went yeah and it’s in I mean how many countries are people working on testing and it’s coming out across across national two kinds of studies right I wonder if anyone’s done account on the number of dissertations hundreds parade on rebel no it’s been amazing now something that and something I find very interesting I don’t know if anyone knows you were at Minnesota and you said you didn’t go in as a vocational psychologist but came out as one right and the predominant theory theory of work adjustment and if it’s kind of quiet in the literature at least always has been well big and big in the Iowa industrial-organizational but not so much counseling site yet reading between the lines of your work and as I see the intervention of peace is going it has it’s a strong theoretical frame i just want if you want to comment on what you see is it bringing to even social cognitive theory or just your whole basis of of your approach to clear we should have used that earlier i personally i think next to social cognitive theory obviously that TWA is one of the most empirically powerful

it’s the most elegantly simple i wish we could have been a simple most elegantly simple and powerful theory empirically that we have I think and that’s not because I was brainwashed in Minnesota but very sick and so very simple and it’s been it’s used and it’s used a lot it’s tested a lot in the IO industrial organizational psych literature not as much in counseling psych vocational site career development very elegantly simple a lot of support that the correspondence between the vocational needs or values people have and the types of needs and values that are reinforced in the occupation predicts how satisfied one will be kind of the overall correlation kind of a meta-analytic correlation there is about point 51 elegantly simple the core correspond coral the correspondence between abilities and ability requirements predicts work satisfactory pneus I will go to work there you’ll be very strongly so we didn’t we we didn’t use the terms but if you look at our social cognitive career theories performance model we’re talking about abilities plus self-efficacy essentially without drawing all the areas equals performance we don’t use the term correspondence but that’s really I think what we’re talking about ability ability core requirement correspondence T to Allah TWA then we add self-efficacy to it without drawing all the air arrows but the values part how has values getting values I a values are incorporated as part of outcome expectations so outcome expectations are the outcomes what’s going to happen if I choose this career versus self-efficacy can I do what’s necessary and so a piece of outcome expectation is are my values going to get reinforced in this occupation and I think we say that in the 94th one I don’t know that it’s measured yeah no no no is your disk right right right so it’s a piece of outcome at so outcome expectations so values kind of need vout value reinforcer correspondence perception of that is an outcome expectations ability ability requirement correspondence is kind of is in the performance model essentially I hope Bob agrees with that if he’s watching this well let’s let me just say that that that editing it would also say though that so you have your interest figured out but getting to that choice you know those intentions the values play a stronger yeah right right what I have a question from Aaron karlstrom now sit out of Kansas okay we’ll bring that and we’ll go down to Ganz us in this in this case Kansas State so I’m interested I’m also thinking this going back to the practitioner but also from the research piece you looked at all these measures right how do we get into measuring this stuff and I I don’t want to have to go through 40 measures you’re free or whatever I want to know what do I what’s a good way of looking at his taxonomy well if in a couple year we’re now developing a measure of the two factors so maybe a couple years you’ll have something will happen but in the meantime God if I can remember we we also talked about this study in the fourth edition of the handbook counseling psych chapter and we gave some suggestions on some measures there are several current measures of Judah charger and square factors inventory itamar Gotti’s career decision difficulties questionnaire and maybe one other that asked questions that are really faithful questions to the construct of indecisiveness simple questions I about the chronicity and generality of decision-making problems of the two or three questions so both of those instruments this and I think I would go the CF I had the career fair and square factors inventory has has a measure of career indecisiveness directly and then they also have measures of need for self and occupational information so that one inventory provides measures of 22 of the things and I think so you may have to piece together Gotti’s career decision difficulties questionnaire has a measure of interpersonal conflicts and external

beer so there’s nothing there but by pulling don’t tell publishers I’m telling you to do this pulling out scales from different existing measures will provide straight pretty straightforward ways of measuring does is that what you’re going to be sure not to tell them okay or buy them all and give right okay and we’re going to have some questions if it wants to come to the microphone in in just a moment so please do come up but I also want to ask one more question is sure that we in today it has to do with it you talked about just briefly but it’s it’s also a piece that I think from the interventionist perspective is probably as or more important than even social cognitive theory in you and Nancy Ryan crane put together a meta-analysis of what are the core intervention ingredients what do we need to have in queer curriculum to promote human development and I find it incredibly useful but I also find it easy to talk about that people get their arms wrapped around I just wonder if you could just briefly so we can get some other questions but talk about that and what they mean what you found really maybe you could if isset so no no it’s that I mentioned this tooth out today safety yeah two thousand other Medina it was all for it again it’s all both of these studies came out of my kind of dissatisfaction with what the courier intervention literature was looking like and trying to improve the effectiveness of career interventions at least those that were appearing in the literature and Nancy Ryan crane and I just wanted to look number one at Kratts kind of the current status of the literature get an overall idea of how effective career interventions are for choice making difficulties and lo and behold we found that they were somewhat effective but in general disappointing and then we also wanted to say is there anything that is done are there any single things that might be done in an intervention that a counselor could do in an intervention that seems to be associated with increases in effect size increases an improvement and I won’t get into all the methodology but we essentially found what we called critical ingredients five critical ingredients that seemed to be important improve outcome over and above who the client was over and above whether it was done in the group it was done individually it was a career class over and above all these other things format who the client was who thier who the counselor was and these were asking clients to develop and write goals that the regardless of what else was going on in the intervention those interventions that had clients develop goals for what they wanted to accomplish when counseling was over and not only developed them but write them down we found Gulf setting by itself didn’t in contributing to an effectiveness but having the goals written dead so writing goals probably writing goals for what you’re going to do between sessions writing goals for especially what wow you’re going to use this stuff in the future the other was giving individual attention a lot of it to the written goals that people developed and difficult to interpret assessment result like inconsistent or flat profiles third was relying on or having people use models another was a fourth was well it was the use of that of career information so as counselors I don’t know I’m like this I love to give assessment instruments to help people find out their interest needs and values what we found that that didn’t add much that’s not that it we shouldn’t do it but if a counselor if it was done or was it done it didn’t matter what mattered was things we don’t find this interesting and that at least I don’t find this interesting and that is getting people to use the information sources that are out there and the more the more effective these the interventions were in the research literature at getting clients to use and process the career information the better they were not giving interest inventories but using the information and then finally the degree finally attending to the support the client has or their student has or could be developed for their choices not bits I so there’s been a lot of research looking at barriers barriers to choices and supports for joyce’s what we found is that focusing on barriers while important didn’t add attacked this is like giving interest inventories while important didn’t add anything to the effectiveness of the intervention but

attending to the types of supports a person might or might not have for the different choices he or she’s thinking about and then helping the client build in support when it was absent added to the effectiveness and what we found is it was that each one of these ingredients added to the effectiveness and collectively they massively in so if you looked at interventions did they use one of these none of these one of these two of these three of these unfortunately none of them use all five and it was amazing to see the almost linear increase in effect effectiveness as more of these critical ingredients up to three were added so I’m sorry I was pretty long-winded is awesome that I hoping you would say okay so it’s not just that you found the ingredients but you found in combination right right and it just seems to me that that also provides a way to analyze right what are we doing so if we’re bringing in a guest speaker could be a role model great but how can we improve on that right if emic and we can improve on it by having other activities right things going on so I guess when I was I would like when do I say to my students is that we know a lot about theories and they’re all important you got to incorporate these theories and there’s things that we know we need to do that we do and it’s not these critical ingredients that it doesn’t say these are only five things you need to do but given what we do if you add D if you’re in if one’s adds these in critical and great helps people set goals make sure they use occupational information attend to their supports you can you can increase the effectiveness drastically yeah I also want to say that when you were talking about interpretive feedback just giving an assessment and giving a drag doesn’t know translate it’s the meaning that they gain by that and sometimes it could be an interpersonal or just some activity right it makes that a meaningful event the other thing that you mentioned and I think it’s so important because it links to the other areas of psychology you talked about goals and it’s not getting in having talks about goals and aspirations it’s really identifying behavioral intentions right what you’re going to do with this information right when you’re down steps and then having it articulated writing it has some it’s amazing how that little shift right has such a powerful effect and I think it it tells us in a practice area we can be in analyzing exactly what we’re doing right and even though you found that in the crew literature it seems like what you’re focusing on this is key elements of development yeah we facilitate the moment pretty good but I just saw sometimes he’s supposed to be asking me quite a few I I know everybody from your system the lot of people do computer-guided interventions and from the meta-analysis there are a couple of clear findings that is completely self directed computer guidance work it’s not very effective on its own on its own some kind of it the data part two is that the literature suggests some type of counselor involvement in that process increases the effectiveness time I have no data on this but I my hypothesis is these five critical ingredients are what the counselor involvement in the computerized career interventions need to include right ok you get you go through this you help help the people develop goals anyway I said that so so in general we know in the literature having some kind of counselor involvement with self-directed interventions improves effectiveness anybody want to do a dissertation I’m saying I guess what I’m hypothesizing is that it’s these five critical ingredients that’s what is what is what the counselor involvement should involve exactly thank you in it so it adds the human element in so again it gets to the creating a meaningful experience is what is what jump-starts the whole piece and so whether it’s a teacher that’s engaged in a counselor whoever it is there some dynamic right taking place with the intricate I’m saying those five things so irate court by the court I think reg phone yeah and that’s why I think it’s such a powerful piece i really map that out we have time for some questions I don’t see anyone at the microphone so we need to have someone come up and ask a question if they would like ask one this is a David Callum from center education work David yeah you were just asking or talking about the incremental effects of these different treatments and the question came to my mind was when you’re talking about didn’t and I’m not that good of a researcher to have an answer to this so when you’re talking about an incremental benefit so this is big this Plus this Plus this right chattering there is that because the can you tease out whether that’s because the treatment is more what I do for an

individual or more effective because it’s simply given to a bunch of different individuals needed those different treatments in other words and if you had had these five intervention right and could target them to the person that we need that needed them right would that not be a better effect than having these all of any treatments being given across all the people in order to get this quote-unquote incremental venom excellent question i can’t give you any an answer so I I guess I my int if you could target to what people need so somebody who needs more information if you targeted that way is that what your if a person really person didn’t need and I would guess but my I guess my answer is that’s that would that’s an interesting empirical question because all we did what we did where we came up with them we took existing research okay and first and meta analyze that those existing research and then after we had identified the five critical ingredients we went back to the studies and said did this one use any of the critical ingredients know so that got put in the zero category did this study use any Yulia that that one used one so then so then and we looked at the outcome the effect size averaged over those studies that use none those that would they use one those that used to and that’s where we got the linear relationship I tell you one thing we sure about is that it’s not just doing more things so you do just if I do more stuff I’m going to be more effective we’re in a 2003 paper we there were other ingredients that we looked at that didn’t come out critical and we randomly generated different combinations of those ingredients went back to the studies and said what studies use these three randomly generated agreements what used to and we didn’t get the linear relationship we only got it when these specific ingredients were adding together but I’m all for targeting interventions to people’s problems obviously from this second study we did and that’s a wonderful suggestion you know targeting targeting these ingredients to fort at the individual level for people who need it although i’m sorry i’m free associating I think goal setting is important is important across attending to at least paying attention to looking at analyzing helping the kids figure out do they have support for this option or this option if they don’t how can I build more support so at least analyzing for the support if the kid doesn’t need more support then it’s already there but but having that be part of the of the choice making process is is there support for this option and how do I deal with it if I don’t have support for so some of them I guess I’m thinking now as i’m free associating is it is it possible that what we’re talking about when we’re when we’re talking about a particular subgroup the content may shift hmmm so if we’re working with chronically undecided maybe a different content right but what you’ve identified our process elements yeah that will improve your effectiveness of that content right as it gets a exactly right so it really is you really are looking at it more from what are the processes yeah I guess I guess we are so it may not be worldatwork information but it’s information about luckily undecided the clear no I think with I think whether you’re chronically indecisive or just needing information that you’re going to work differently with these two groups of clients but including these five ingredients in the treatment or the counseling with either with whatever you’re doing with either group 11-1 prophetic and that that was right okay next question Bruce swamp oh good hi Steve hi Bruce so this goes back 30 years because I asked you the same question in a class I took from you on decision me he was he was a graduate student right yeah go ahead okay no not right on way back waiting 30 years I was hiding 30 here so the question then was in decision making because it was presented as a very cognitive activity I I developed the advantages and the disadvantages of various choices that I make that decision and the question was around where does emotion come into this and since that time we have a lot of research in a lot of different areas that really says the emotional content

already effect is what drives decision right and not the cognitive rationalizations so for an example in voting behavior drew westen at the emory university looks at how people make decisions about who to vote for they have an effective reaction or anime great but then if you ask them they come up with this elaborate rationalizations I have experiments in the in moral decision-making so forth and they can induce different kinds of decisions and people afterwards come up with rationalization that had nothing to do great with their actual decision so in this model and then in your talk I don’t see much reference to effect and one role does affect play in vocational decision-making and in the interventions that we give both kind of the the general programs as well as the individualized chemist probably not as much as it should but I’ll answer you I was a very strict behaviorist when when when Bruce was a graduate student and if he asks a prompt my answer was probably emotions but yeah I don’t play it’s all being Rick we can reinforce those things but now answering it all these years later emotion I’m sure plays a big part in career decisions but we don’t attend to it enough i agree exact a wondrous nth way now you mentioned values though yeah have an effort i guess it has an effective base to it yeah and that these you know like the basic dimensions I him I don’t know who’s watching this because I somewhat hesitated when i equated neuroticism with negative affectivity they’re not the same thing but human emotional experiences alchy telegin research has suggested can be described on two basic dimensions positive affectivity negative affectivity and I think the negative affectivity piece has been studied pretty wide nuh has been acknowledged in the career literature at in terms of how it as we’ve talked about who leads to difficulties in making decisions being stuck unable to make a decision its long-range effect on later employment outcomes so you have a a base to that yeah there’s a PA has it in our proofs I’m getting it in our in the in the effect analyses we we did for this study i was talking about today we could only in we could only include factors that we could get replicated across similar measures and there were some other factors out there one was a more positive emotion vector but every study that a debt were we identified that used a different measure so we we couldn’t and when I was howling so how we identify common factors we we identified a factor then we looked at the variables that loaded on that looked across to other factors and said to similar to the similar variables load on that yes and then what variables load along with that one does this make sense and then we moved across there we couldn’t find any common variables in this positive factor so we didn’t include it but there was closed so there was a negative it was a clear negative affectivity piece in what we called indecisiveness there we picked up from it from the research that there was probably what I would call a positive affectivity piece but we couldn’t verify it is that it’s more than I gave me when you’re a graduates doing like a career in decision right and somebody who can’t make a decision and you ask them well why not and they they don’t list all the things that can go wrong right which is the rationalization rate for their indecision right when in fact it just may be anxiety they’re afraid the anxiety is the effective right so there’s a avoidance of this through a great effective process right and that’s ignored when when we start to get a stout here’s the reasons why right that which are rationalization I so i don’t have to kind of admit this is really just great an effective reaction yeah in trait anxiety was the primary marker yeah in our factor analysis trait anxiety if you ranked by factor loading trait anxiety was the primary marker of indecisiveness yeah thanks jiggly huh

yeah okay i’m lee nelson and i’m coming not as a scholar in the career area although I’m sort of becoming one lately I’m coming as a former career counselor did it for about 13 years and at community college level and one of the practice there were two practices that seemed to be the most powerful in my work with clients and one was this old inventory that we don’t use anymore because it wasn’t armed in 1953 called the Edwards personal prayer scheduler and i found that extremely useful because it addressed Marie’s taxonomy of reads look and I got to talk to clients about needs that were absolutely conflicted and working around at that conflict I have a high need for nurturance but i also have a high need for saccharine right and uh I know how do i balance it out right that was one and then the other was we used a California occupational preference system I don’t know if you remember that but uh it was had an interest inventory of values inventory and an abilities inventory self-rated abilities or a label it was like a little teeny IQ test okay and um I’ll tell you that was the most powerful of all three of those instruments hmm it was people in community college who had not a lot of self-efficacy would take that and walk out starry-eyed because they hadn’t had it gets into that support thing oh my gosh I’m I’m smarter than I thought it was oh my gosh that’s all I have to say oh oh god no question I just you know if you wanted to comment on it yeah yeah I love nobody uses that is anybody used the Edwards personal preference schedule anymore but but but value value need conflict i think is right right right understanding values and understanding maybe the conflict among values or understanding how values play into the decision-making process i think is really important and i talked about the em IQ we use the Minnesota importance go for it to get it values never even thought I mean thank you i’m going to bring Edwards back in to my classes because we talked about the importance of value assessment but I don’t teach or ever mention the Edwards PRF guess yeah right i think but so but the kids got higher g scores than they anticipated and that was extremely motivating intelligent yeah I built you know sorry alright well this has been an afternoon tea with the center education at work at the University of wisconsin-madison visit our website at cew wisc.edu to find out about our annual careers conference our online career information system the whiskers in greer locker as well as our other professional development opportunities related to translating career and work force policy into practice information on how to view our afternoon tea conversations along with the readings for each session will be available on our website as we get closer to our next conversations I want to thank Jennifer lindwall for her invaluable help in helping us coordinate this an IV brown and anthony hernandez for their graphics support also thank you to the pile center for helping with the recording of the of this presentation our conversation and also our co-sponsors Department of counseling psychology and the Wisconsin Career Development Association so on behalf of the staff at the center and education work I want to express our thanks to dr. Stephen Brown for your insights and such an engaging conversation today so thank you you

You Want To Have Your Favorite Car?

We have a big list of modern & classic cars in both used and new categories.