to such theory-relevant outcomes as vocational interests, academic
major choices, and achievement indicators. Other studies have
examined gender differences in career-related self-efficacy, the ex-
periential sources of self-efficacy beliefs, experimental and causal
modeling tests of hypotheses concerning self-efficacy, self-efficacy
in relation to the dilemmas of women managing multiple career-
life roles, and development of novel approaches to assessing self-
efficacy. More recent studies have been exploring additional SCCT
variables, including outcome expectations, goals, and contextual
barriers and supports. Of special note, several theory-derived inter-
ventions have also been designed and tested.
A full-scale review of SCCT-relevant research is beyond the
scope of this chapter. However, we can highlight the findings of exist-
ing qualitative reviews and meta-analyses of this literature. Tradi-
tional qualitative reviews of research on career self-efficacy (Bandura,
1997; Betz & Hackett, 1986; Hackett, 1995; Hackett & Lent, 1992;
Lent & Hackett, 1987; Swanson & Gore, 2000) support the follow-
ing broad conclusions:
- Domain-specific measures of self-efficacy are predictive of
career-related interests, choice, achievement, persistence,
indecision, and career exploratory behavior. - Intervention, experimental, and path analyses support cer-
tain hypothesized causal relations between measures of self-
efficacy, performance, and interests. - Gender differences in academic and career self-efficacy help
to explain male-female differences in occupational considera-
tion. (We will examine the latter point in more depth in the
next section.)
Several meta-analytic investigations have also examined findings
relevant to SCCT’s major hypotheses (Lent et al., 1994; Multon,
Brown, & Lent, 1991; Sadri & Robertson, 1993; Stajkovic & Luthans,
1998). Meta-analysis is a quantitative review method that combines
280 CAREER CHOICE AND DEVELOPMENT