An Empirical typology
of career thoughts of individuals with disabilities
Daniel Lustig, David Strauser
Rehabilitation
Counseling Bulletin
VOLUME 46 ,NUMBER 98,
Winter 2003
Copyright© PRO-ED, Inc.
Reprinted with permission
An empirical typology of career thoughts of individuals with
disabilities.
Dysfunctional career thoughts can have a negative impact on the career
decision-making
process and an individual's career and vocational development.
Individuals with
disabilities may be particularly vulnerable to dysfunctional career
thoughts because
limited access to the labor market provides limited opportunity to make
vocational
decisions and to understand the impact of functional limitations on
career decisions. The
purpose of this study was to identify groups of individuals with
disabilities based on
their measured levels of dysfunctional career thoughts. This
non experimental
descriptive study investigated the career thoughts of 132 individuals
with a diagnosis
based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders--Fourth Edition
(American Psychiatric Association, 1994) who received job placement
services from a
community-based job placement program. Cluster analysis of the Career
Thoughts
Inventory (Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, Reardon, & Saunders, 1996)
identified three
groups of participants: (a) those with dysfunctional thoughts, (b) those
with external
conflict, and (c) those with productive thoughts. The results suggest
differences between
the clustered groups and two comparison groups.
**********
Cognitions have been generally recognized as important factors that
affect an
individual's career decision-making process and overall vocational
development
(Keller, Briggs, & Gysbers, 1982; Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, Reardon, &
Saunders,
1996). Specifically, research has suggested that an individual's career
behaviors tend to
be influenced by the interaction of vocational cognitions, behaviors,
and environments
and that changes in an individual's career behaviors tend to be
cognitively mediated
(Keller et al., 1982). Practitioners and researchers have also noted
that some
individuals tend to verbalize negative or dysfunctional statements
regarding the career
decision-making process. These negative verbalizations make the career
problem-solving and decision-making process more difficult and often
cause the
individual to avoid it all together (Sampson et al., 1996). With the
potential negative
impact of dysfunctional career thoughts on the career decision-making
process,
researchers have focused efforts on gaining a better understanding of
dysfunctional
career thoughts and the potential impact on an individual's career and
vocational
development, specifically the career decision-making process. In
particular, individuals
with disabilities have significant problems with their career and
vocational
development and consequently are an important focus for the development
of
interventions. The purpose of this study was to identify groups of
individuals with
disabilities based on their measured levels of dysfunctional career
thoughts and suggest
interventions that could ameliorate dysfunctional career thoughts.
REVIEW OF CAREER THOUGHTS LITERATURE
Negative and dysfunctional career thoughts and belief have been
characterized by career
theorists as dysfunctional career beliefs (Krumboltz, 1990),
dysfunctional cognitions
(Corbishley & Yost, 1989), dysfunctional self-beliefs (Borders &
Archadel, 1987),
self-defeating assumptions (Dryden, 1999), and faulty self-efficacy
beliefs (Brown &
Lent, 1996). Dysfunctional career thoughts usually revolve around issues
of self-worth,
perfectionism, and overgeneralization and have a tendency to decrease
the likelihood of
overall life satisfaction (Sampson et al., 1996; Sampson, Peterson,
Lenz, Reardon, &
Saunders, 1998). Dysfunctional career thoughts have also been linked to
subjective
well-being or a person's self-perception of their current status, job
dissatisfaction, poor
job performance, unhappy significant others, job failure, job avoidance,
depression, and
anxiety (Judge & Locke, 1993; Newman, Fuqua, & Seaworth, 1989; Saunders,
Peterson,
Sampson, & Reardon, 2000; Serling & Betz, 1990). Research has suggested
that clients
tend to express their dysfunctional career thoughts through their
behavior (e.g.,
incomplete homework), emotions (e.g., depression and anger), and verbal
expression
(e.g., negative statements; Corbishley & Yost, 1989). Dysfunctional
career thoughts
have also been related to distorted, misinformed, and biased career
beliefs that
generally remain unnoticed and lead to self-defeating behaviors and
experiences
(Kinner & Krumboltz, 1986). Some research has also suggested that women
tend to
report higher levels of anxiety and lower self-esteem, which can lead to
dysfunctional
cognitions and perceptions that result in failure to realize individual
career potential
(Betz & Hackett, 1981; Herr & Cramer, 1996).
Research in the area of career decision making has suggested that
dysfunctional career
thoughts can affect career behavior in the following four ways:
1. An individual's career behaviors can be viewed as responses to the
individual's
cognitive conceptualization of specific career environments.
2. The individual's cognitive development and learning experiences can
modify the
individual's career representations.
3. The individual's contextual supports, behaviors, and cognitions
interact to influence
vocational behavior.
4. The individual's cognitions mediate and change his or her career
behavior (Keller et
al., 1982; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2000; G. W. Peterson, Sampson, &
Reardon, 1991;
Sampson et al., 1996).
Individual factors such as poor problem-solving skills (G. W. Petergon
et al., 1991);
lack of self-knowledge related to career interests, abilities, values
(Holland & Holland,
1977); maladaptive career beliefs and assumptions (Krumboltz, 1983; Nevo,
1987);
personality disorders, depression, anxiety, and schizophrenia (Fuqua,
Blum, & Hartman,
1988; Gibb, 1991); and poor self-esteem (Crozat & Kloss, 1979) have also
been
implicated in the development of dysfunctional career thoughts.
With cognitive processes and career thoughts playing such a significant
role in the
career and vocational development process, it is important for
individuals to have
healthy and appropriate career thoughts and to minimize their
dysfunctional thoughts
(Young & Chen, 1999). This may be especially true for individuals who
have been
traditionally underemployed and unemployed, such as persons of low
socioeconomic
status (SES), women, and individuals with disabilities.
The recent economic and political trends pushing for programs to help
disadvantaged
individuals who are receiving benefits to find employment (Regenstein,
Meyer, &
Hicks, 1999) have coincided with a national shortage of workers ("A
Special News
Report," 2000). In addition to the shortage of qualified workers, the
economy has
undergone a shift from a manufacturing base to a service base, which has
increased the
importance of effective cognitive and interpersonal skills for all jobs,
including
low-paying and entry-level positions (Ryan, 1995; Wilson, 1997). Because
there are a
large number of individuals who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and
lack basic
work skills, many poorly educated and poorly trained individuals have
difficulty finding
employment, even when there is a strong labor market and an abundance of
jobs
(Twenty-Fifth Institute on Rehabilitation Issues, 1999; Wilson, 1997).
Research has
shown that individuals with disabilities (a) continue to have problems
finding
employment (Kosciulek, 1998, 1999; Louis Harris and Associates, 1998)
and (b) earn
significantly less compared to their nondisabled counterparts, with the
earnings gap
increasing for individuals with severe disabilities and individuals from
minority
backgrounds (Kruse, 1998; Stoddard, Jans, Ripple, & Kraus, 1998).
Individuals with
severe mental illness (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder) fare even
worse, with
unemployment rates between 70% and 90% (Ahrens, Frey, & Burke, 1999;
LaPlante &
Carlson, 1996; Trupin, Sebesta, Yellin, & LaPlante, 1997).
Limited employment experiences can also effect career development.
Individuals with
disabilities who have had few jobs may be less informed about
occupations and
consequently have limited opportunities to make vocational decisions and
to understand
the impact of functional limitations on career decisions (Farley,
Schriner, & Roessler,
1988). Lack of opportunity to develop choice-making and problem-solving
skills during
adolescence can also affect their ability to make effective and
productive career
decisions as adults (Czerlinsky & Ryan, 1986; N. Peterson & Gonzalez,
2000; Powers,
Sowers, & Stevens, 1995). Enright (1996) found that college students
with disabilities
experience career indecision due to limited opportunities for positive
reinforcement of
their abilities, which consequently affects their career decision-making
self-efficacy.
Luzzo, Hitchings, Retish, and Shoemaker (1999) found that college
students with
disabilities reported lower levels of career decision-making
self-efficacy and a more
pessimistic career decision-making attributional style than did college
students without
disabilities.
Cognitive information processing theory (CIP; Reardon, Lenz, Sampson, &
Peterson,
2000) has been applied to the career development process and provides a
basis for
career interventions that address the psychological variables associated
with making
effective career decisions. Cognitive information processing theory
suggests that
effective career problem solving and decision making is based on the
effective
processing of information related to self-knowledge, occupational
information,
decision-making skills, and executive processing. Self-knowledge is
conceptualized as
an individual's perceptions of his or her values, interests, and skills
(Reardon et al.,
2000; Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, & Reardon, 1992). Occupational
information consists
of an individual's knowledge of individual occupations and the
individual's cognitive
representation of how the work world is organized. Decision-making
skills consist of
general information-processing skills that the individual can apply to
problems and use
to make effective decisions. Executive processing includes
metacognitions that control
the selection and sequencing of cognitive strategies used to solve a
career problem
through cognitive interventions such as self-talk, self-awareness,
control, and
monitoring. According to CIP, when an individual experiences problems in
any one of
the four domain areas, he or she may experience career indecision and
develop
dysfunctional career thoughts.
Cognitive information processing theory provided the conceptual
framework for the
development of the Career Thoughts Inventory (CTI; Sampson, Peterson,
Lenz, Reardon,
& Saunders, 1996), which is an instrument designed to measure an
individual's level of
dysfunctional career thoughts using a total score and three subscale
scores. The CTI is
commonly used in career counseling interventions and research that
examines
dysfunctional career thoughts. In this study, the CTI was used to
identify and categorize
patterns of dysfunctional career thoughts in a group of individuals with
disabilities.
Specifically, the purpose of this study was to identify groups of
individuals with
disabilities based on their levels of dysfunctional career thoughts,
which were measured
by the CTI. The following two research questions were addressed:
1. Can individuals with disabilities be meaningfully categorized into
discrete groups
according to a pattern of dysfunctional career thoughts?
2. Do the discrete groups of individuals with disabilities identified
through the cluster
analysis differ in their type and level of dysfunctional career thoughts
when compared to
(a) a group of individuals of low SES who are not currently looking for
a job and (b) a
group of individuals from low SES backgrounds who are participating in a
General
Equivalency Diploma (GED) training program and currently looking for
employment?
METHOD
Participants
Participants in this study were a convenience sample of 132 individuals
who were
receiving job placement services from a community-based job placement
program
funded by a state division of rehabilitation and had a diagnosis from
the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders--Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; American
Psychiatric
Association, 1994). The DSM-IV diagnoses included Anxiety, Depression,
Schizophrenia, and Bipolar Disorder. In addition, two convenience
samples of
participants who were receiving services from a community-based job
placement
program were used for comparison purposes. These two comparison groups
were
chosen because they had also experienced high rates of unemployment and
concomitant
issues related to career decision making. Thus, the comparison groups
provided a frame
of reference for understanding the significance of the measured level of
dysfunctional
career thoughts of the DSM-IV diagnoses group. The first group was
composed of 28
individuals of low SES who had no plans to pursue employment in the
immediate future,
and the second group was composed of 49 individuals pursuing their GED
and involved
in a job readiness program. Members of the first group were in the
process of resolving
immediate issues, such as housing and childcare, and planned to become
involved in the
job search once these issues were stabilized. All participants were
provided with
informed consent information and were free to withdraw at any time. All
participants
resided in a major urban area in the southeastern United States.
The 132 participants with a DSM-IV diagnosis ranged in age from 18 to 61
(M = 35.9;
SD = 10.6), with 26% between 18 and 26, 50% between 27 and 43, and 24%
older than
43. Women composed 58% (n = 77) of the sample. Of the 132 participants,
most were
African American (n = 92; 70%), with 24% (n = 32) being Caucasian, 1% (n
= 1) being
Asian American, 1% (n = 1) being Hispanic, and 4% (n = 6) not reporting
their
ethnicity. Most had completed at least a high school diploma or GED
(45%; n = 59),
with 56 (42%) having completed less than 12th grade, and 13% not
reporting their
education (n = 17).
The 28 participants of low SES ranged in age from 18 to 45 (M = 28.9; SD
= 6.7), with
26% between 18 and 24, 50% between 25 and 33, and 24% older than 33. The
entire
sample was female. Of the 28 participants, most were African American (n
= 26; 93%),
and 7% (n = 2) were Caucasian. Most had completed at least a high school
diploma or
GED (54%; n = 15), 9 (32%) had completed less than 12th grade and 4
(14%) did not
report their level of education. The 49 individuals pursuing their GED
ranged in age
from 18 to 53 (M = 28.8; SD = 9.2), with 25% between 18 and 21, 50%
between 22 and
32, and 25% older than 32. The entire sample was female. Of the 49
participants, most
were African American (n = 45; 92%), with 4% (n = 2) being Caucasian, 2%
(n = 1)
being Hispanic, and 2% (n = 1) being Native American. Most had completed
less than a
high school diploma (80%; n = 39); 14% (n = 7) had completed at least a
GED or high
school diploma, and 6% (n = 3) individuals did not report their
educational level.
Because the criterion for admission to the program was the lack of a
GED/high school
diploma, it was determined that the 7 individuals reporting completion
in this area had
misunderstood the question.
Instruments
Cognitive information process theory provided the foundation for the
development of the
Career Thoughts Inventory, which is a self-administered instrument that
is designed to
measure dysfunctional career thoughts in career problem solving and
decision making in
high school students, college' students, and adults (Sampson et al.,
1998). In a review of
instruments designed to measure career decision making and decision
readiness, the CTI
is considered to be the most comprehensive instrument because it
measures both
capability and complexity, two constructs related to making an effective
career decision
(Sampson, Peterson, Reardon, & Lenz, 2000). The CTI is a relatively new
instrument
and has not been used before in research involving individuals with
disabilities. The
CTI is based on the assumption that although "dysfunctional thinking in
career problem
solving and decision making cannot be directly measured.... [such] ...
thinking can be
inferred from an individual's endorsement of statements (test items)
reflecting a variety
of dysfunctional career thoughts" (Sampson et al., 1996, p. 12). The
48-item scale is
scored on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree)
to 3 (strongly
agree; Sampson et al., 1996). The instrument consists of a total score
and three
subscales. The Decision Making Confusion subscale measures the extent to
which an
individual's emotions or lack of decision-making skill knowledge
interferes with his or
her ability to make a career decision and includes statements such as,
"Choosing an
occupation is so complicated, I just can't get started" (Sampson et al.,
1996, p. 28). The
Commitment Anxiety subscale examines the impact anxiety has on a
person's ability to
commit to a career decision and includes statements such as, "There are
several fields
of study or occupations that fit me, but I can't decide on the best one"
(Sampson et al.,
1996, p. 28). The External Conflict subscale examines how well the
person uses input
from others and self-perception in decision making and includes
statements such as,
"Whenever
I've become interested in something, important people in my life
disapprove" (Sampson
et al., 1996, p. 29). The three CTI subscales were used for analysis.
Internal consistency
coefficients for the CTI subscales are as follows: Decision Making
Confusion (.90-.94),
Commitment Anxiety (.79-.91), and External Conflict (.74-.81).
Test--retest reliability
(4 weeks) for the three subscales was .77 for Decision Making Confusion,
.75 for
Commitment Anxiety, and .63 for External Conflict (Sampson et al.,
1996). Sampson et
al. (1996) provided evidence of the validity of the CTI. Principal
components analyses
produced a three-factor solution conforming to the CTI scales. The CTI
scales
correlated in the expected direction with measures of similar
constructs, specifically,
My Vocational Situation (Holland, Daiger, & Power, 1980), the Career
Decision Scale
(Osipow, Carney, Winer, Yanico, & Koschier, 1987), the Career Decision
Profile
(Jones, 1988), and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McRae,
1992).
Finally, the CTI scales showed significant differences between a group
of college
students seeking career services and those not seeking career services.
Procedures
Packers containing the research materials were distributed to the
participants from the
GED and disability groups during their participation in the job
readiness program. The
participants from the low-SES group were contacted by staff members of
agencies
through which they received other types of support services.
Participants were informed
that their participation was voluntary, that no incentives were
associated with
participation, and that all data collected would be confidential. Upon
obtaining
informed consent, data were gathered from the three groups. All
participants were free
to withdraw without penalty at any time. All participants completed the
survey packet
and returned it to the researchers. Participants read the survey without
assistance.
Data Analysis
Correlations between the subscales of the CTI for the group with DSM-IV
diagnoses
were computed. In addition, means, standard deviations, and range on the
subscales for
the DSM-IV group and the comparison groups were calculated. An alpha
level of .05
was used for hypothesis testing.
Because random assignment and a priori matching of all groups was not
possible, the
groups were compared on demographic variables, specifically ethnicity,
education, and
age, to determine if there were significant differences. The groups were
not compared
on gender because two of the groups were 100% female and one group was
58%
female.
Because the purpose of the investigation was to empirically classify
individuals with
disabilities into a typology based on their levels on the three
subscales of the CTI,
cluster analysis was deemed an appropriate statistical technique.
Clustering was
conducted using Ward's method of minimum-variance clustering and the
squared
Euclidean distance as the distance metric. According to Romesburg
(1990), Ward's
method of clustering is the most commonly used clustering method and
usually gives a
near optimal cluster solution. The Statistical Program for the Social
Sciences (Norusis,
1993) for Windows 6.1 produces fusion coefficients at each stage of the
cluster
procedure and a dendrogram, or tree diagram, that shows the mergers
occurring at each
stage. Examination of the pattern of changes in the fusion coefficients
and visual
inspection of the dendrogram aids in determining an optimal partition
within the sample
of respondents (Aldenderfer & Blashfield, 1984; Baker, 1972; Berven &
Hubert, 1977).
An optimal partitioning in the hierarchy is defined as one that (a)
creates homogeneous
groups so that respondents within a group are relatively similar to one
another and
relatively dissimilar to respondents in other groups and (b) creates
greater parsimony,
meaning fewer groups are more cognitively manageable (Berven & Hubert,
1977).
Romesburg (1990) suggested that evidence of the validity of the cluster
analysis can be
shown in a number of ways. Two methods used in this study were (a)
finding agreement
of the classifications produced from the same data processed by
different multivariate
methods and (b) finding agreement of the classifications based on split
samples of the
data. The first method involved the use of cluster analysis and
discriminant analysis.
Cluster analysis produced groups of participants based on scores on the
three subscales
of the CTI. Then, using the individual's scores on the three subscales
as independent
variables and group membership determined by the cluster analysis as the
dependent
variable, a discriminant function was fitted to the data. The fitted
discriminant function
was used to determine the accuracy of the discriminant function for
identifying group
membership based on the independent variables. The percentage of correct
predictions
was used as evidence of the validity of the cluster classification. The
second method
involved randomly splitting the data set and clustering both halves of
the data. Evidence
of the validity of the cluster solution is provided when the two cluster
solutions agree
with the cluster solution of the whole sample in terms of the number of
groups and the
groups' defining characteristics.
To address Research Question 2, the mean level of dysfunctional career
thoughts on the
three subscales of the CTI for each group was compared to the mean
levels of the three
subscales of the CTI for the comparison groups. A multivariate analysis
of variance
(MANOVA) was performed as an omnibus test of significance. Group
membership in
the three cluster groups and the comparison groups were entered as
independent
variables, with the scores on the three subscales of the CTI as
dependent variables.
Tests for the main effects of group membership were performed, and
effect sizes and
power estimates were reported. Effect size was measured by Cohen's d,
which is the
magnitude of the difference between the means of two groups in standard
deviation units
(Kirk, 1982). Effect size is a measure of the practical significance of
a difference
between means.
RESULTS
Correlations
Correlations, means, standard deviations, and ranges for the subscales
were computed.
For Decision Making Confusion, M = 11.5, SD = 7.3, and the range was 0
to 29. For
Commitment Anxiety Confusion, M = 12.0, SD = 5.5, and the range was 0 to
26, for
External Conflict, M = 4.8, SD = 3.2, and the range was 0 to 13. Pearson
product-moment correlation coefficients were computed between scores on
all possible
pairs of measures. The three subscales were significantly correlated.
Decision Making
Confusion correlated with Commitment Anxiety (r = .77), and External
Conflict (r =
.68). Also, Commitment Anxiety correlated with External Conflict (r =
.68). The authors
of the CTI found similar correlations among the three subscales (Sampson
et al., 1996).
For example, Decision Making Confusion correlated with Commitment
Anxiety (r = .74)
and External Conflict (r = .65), and Commitment Anxiety correlated with
External
Conflict (r = .58). These correlations suggest that the three subscales,
although related,
measure relatively distinct constructs.
Comparison of Groups
Chi-square analyses were conducted for differences among the three
groups on the basis
of ethnicity and education. In addition, t tests were conducted to test
for differences on
the variable of age. There were significant differences in ethnicity,
[X.sup.2](10, N =
209) = 19.22, p < .05, .with African Americans underrepresented in the
DSM-IV
diagnoses group (72%) compared to the GED group (92%) and low-SES group
(93% of
group). There were significant differences in educational level,
[X.sup.2](16, N = 209)
= 102.33, p < .05, with the DSM-IV group having a higher level of
educational
attainment than the GED group. The DSM-IV group and the low-SES group
were
relatively similar in educational attainment. There were significant
differences among
the groups on age, F(2, 197) = 12.40, p < .05. Pairwise comparisons
between groups
using Fisher LSD tests were used to examine whether the mean age of the
groups were
different. The DSM-IV group was significantly older (M = 35.98, SD =
10.59) than the
GED group (M = 28.80, SD = 9.16) or the low-SES group (M = 28.96, SD =
6.67). The
low-SES and GED groups were not significantly different on age. Overall,
the DSM-IV
group consisted of fewer African Americans than the GED and SES groups,
were older
than the GED and low-SES groups, and were better educated than the GED
group.
Although there were significant differences in the demographic
variables, these
differences were non-systematic and therefore had no effect on the
results.
Cluster Analysis
Based on the interpretability of the clusters, examination of the
dendrogram, and
inspection of the fusion coefficients for "significant" jumps, a
three-cluster solution was
chosen. Evidence for the validity of the clusters was provided by a
discriminant
analysis and clustering of random halves of the data. Using the
individual's scores on the
three subscales as independent variables and group membership determined
by the
cluster analysis as the dependent variable, discriminant analysis
yielded significant
functions for the data. Both functions were significant: Wilks's
[lambda.sub.1] .189;
[X.sup.2](6, N = 132) = 213.26, p < .001; Wilks's [lambda.sub.2] = .940;
[X.sup.2](2,
N = 132) = 7.94, p < .01. The discriminant function separates
individuals based on their
scores on the subscales of the CTI. Ninety-seven percent of individuals
were correctly
classified based on their scores on the subscales of the CTI. The second
technique for
providing evidence of the validity of the sample involved randomly
dividing the sample
and using Ward's method to apply cluster analysis to both data sets. The
cluster
solutions for the random samples were in close agreement with the whole
sample in
terms of the number of groups and the groups' defining characteristics,
thus suggesting a
stable cluster solution. Both the discriminant analysis and random
splitting of the
samples provided evidence of the validity of the three-cluster solution.
The clusters
were labeled as follows: (a) Cluster 1: Dysfunctional Thoughts (n = 45),
(b) Cluster 2:
External Conflict (n = 69), and (c) Cluster 3: Productive Thoughts (n =
18).
Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics for each cluster. No
significant differences were found among the three clusters on age, F(2,
121) = 1.78, p > .05; gender, [X.sup.2](2, N = 132) = 1.42, p > .05;
ethnicity, [X.sup.2](8, N = 128) = 10.19,p > .05, or education,
[X.sup.2](12, N = 1,162) = 12.98, p > .05. Table 2 shows the
mean scores, standard deviations, and standard scores for each of the
three clusters on the three CTI subscales.
Comparison of Means
The MANOVA produced a significant result, F(3,202) = 449.58, p < .001.
Post hoc Bonferroni t tests, effect sizes, and power estimates between
pairs of means are presented in Table 3. All comparisons between Cluster
1 (Dysfunctional Thoughts) and the GED and SES groups on the three
subscales of the CTI revealed significant differences, except for the
comparison between Cluster 1 and the GED group on the External Conflict
subscale. In addition, all six comparisons exhibited at least a small
effect size, with four comparisons demonstrating a large effect size. A
significant difference was found between Cluster 2 (External Conflict)
and the GED group on the Decision Making Confusion subscale: Five
out of the six comparisons demonstrating a small effect size. Finally,
all comparisons between Cluster 3 (Productive Thoughts) and the GED and
low-SES groups on the three subscales of the CTI revealed significant
differences, except the comparison between Cluster 3 and the low-SES
group on the
External Conflict subscale. In addition, four out of the six comparisons
exhibited a large
effect size. Cohen (1969) refers to a d value of 0.2 as a small effect
size, a d value of
0.5 as a medium effect size, and a d value of 0.8 as a large effect
size.

DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to identify groups of
individuals with disabilities based on their
measured levels of dysfunctional career thoughts.
Individuals with a DSM-IV diagnosis who were
participating in a job readiness program completed the Career Thoughts
Inventory.
Based on their responses, participants were classified into three
identifiable groups,
which were named Dysfunctional Thoughts, External Conflict, and
Productive Thoughts.
Evidence of the validity of the cluster solution was provided by a
discriminant analysis
and a cluster analysis performed on both halves of a randomly split
sample. In addition,
Cluster 1 (Dysfunctional Thoughts) was significantly higher in
dysfunctional career
thoughts than the GED and low-SES groups, and Cluster 3 (Productive
Thoughts) was
significantly lower in dysfunctional career thoughts than the GED and
low-SES groups.
Before discussing the results, several limitations should be noted.
First, the sampling
procedure was non-probability and cross-sectional in character;
consequently, the
interpretation of the results should be limited to the sample examined
at the time of the
study. Specifically, men and Caucasians were underrepresented in the
sample. In
addition, the sample was limited to individuals with a DSM-IV diagnosis,
specifically
individuals with Anxiety, Depression, Schizophrenia, and Bipolar
Disorder, and did not
include persons with physical disabilities. For example, it is possible
that individuals
with physical disabilities would be different in terms of their level
and pattern of
dysfunctional career thoughts. In addition, the sample consisted of
individuals currently
involved in a community-based job placement program. It is possible that
they were
particularly cognizant of their thoughts and feelings about career
decisions and may have
had different thoughts about careers when not involved in the program.
Second, in order
to increase the likelihood that the cluster solution represents a stable
property of this
population, additional samples should be studied and analyzed.
Data Analysis
Cluster 1: Dysfunctional Thoughts. Participants in this group (n = 45)
were more than
one standard deviation above the mean in decision-making confusion (93rd
percentile),
commitment anxiety (97th percentile), and external conflict (92nd
percentile) when
compared to a normative group of adults (Sampson et al., 1996). This
group was
considered to have dysfunctional thoughts in all three areas and was
thus labeled
Dysfunctional Thoughts. When compared to a group of individuals pursuing
their GED
also involved in a job readiness program (GED group) arid a group of
individuals of
low SES with no plans to pursue employment in the immediate future
(low-SES group),
this group was higher (more dysfunctional) in the three subscales of the CTI (see Table
3). Individuals with similar scores may exhibit a very high level of
dysfunctional
thinking in decision-making confusion, commitment anxiety, and external
conflict.
Individuals in this group may have great difficulty understanding how to
make a career
decision and at times may be incapable of coming to a decision related
to career
matters. Individuals in this group may be worried and anxious about the
consequences of
making a career decision, resulting in the person being "stuck" in the
career
decision-making process. Important in the career decision-making process
is the ability
to balance one's own thoughts about appropriate careers with the
opinions of valued
others. These individuals may have great difficulty forging an effective
integration of
their own thoughts about careers with those of others, sometimes relying
solely on
themselves and at other times giving great importance to others'
opinions.

Cluster 2: External Conflict. Participants in this group (n = 69)
were within one standard deviation above the mean in decision-making
confusion(54th percentile), commitment anxiety (62nd percentile), and
external conflict (79th percentile) when compared to a normative group
of adults (Sampson et al., 1996). Although this group was within one
standard deviation above the mean on all three subscales, the measured
level of external conflict was particularly high, approaching two
standard deviations above the mean. Therefore, this group was labeled
External Conflict. When compared to the GED and low-SES groups, these
individuals were higher (more dysfunctional) than the low-SES group and
lower (less dysfunctional) than the GED group on the three subscales of
the CTI (see Table 3). Individuals with similar scores may exhibit
moderately dysfunctional thinking in (a) the ability to understand how
to make a career decision and (b) the ability to commit to a specific
career decision. The
distinguishing characteristic of these individuals is that they
experience problems balancing the input of others with their own beliefs
when making a career decision. Sampson et al. (1996) suggested that
these individuals may experience difficulty making career decisions when
considering the appropriate balance between their own opinions and that
of significant others. Although a person is likely to receive
information and suggestions about career decisions, it is important to
be able to distinguish between meaningful and insignificant information
when making a decision. These individuals may have a difficult time
making that distinction.

Cluster 3: Productive Thoughts. Participants in this group (n = 18)
were more than one standard deviation below the mean in decision-making
confusion (14th percentile), commitment anxiety(14th percentile), and
external conflict (8thpercentile) when compared to a normative group of
adults (Sampson et al., 1996). Because these individuals reported very
low scores on all three subscales, this group was labeled Productive
Thoughts. When compared to the GED and low-SES groups, these individuals
were lower (less dysfunctional) than the low-SES and GED groups on the
three subscales of the CTI (see Table 3). Individuals with similar
scores may exhibit generally productive approaches to making career
decisions. These individuals appear to understand how to make a career
decision and typically find the process of making a career decision
manageable. A key characteristic is their ability to be flexible when
necessary. They can stick with a decision once it has been made but can
also adapt and modify their choices when warranted. Finally, these
individuals are able to integrate others' opinions about their career
choices with their own needs.
Implications for Practice and Research
Because effective career problem solving and decision making is based on
a client's
ability to develop and use effective information processing skills, it
is important for practitioners and researchers to have a conceptual framework for the
development and
implementation of effective interventions that reduce negative and
dysfunctional career
thoughts. Interventions need to be comprehensive in nature and address
both complexity
and capability. The level of dysfunctional thoughts dictates the level
of intervention
need. Individuals with a significant level of dysfunctional career
thoughts need in-depth
intervention such as individual counseling, whereas individuals with low
levels of
dysfunctional career thoughts need only minimal interventions, such as
making available
career resources for the individual to use independently. (For a more
in-depth
discussion of specific intervention strategies, refer to the CTI manual
[Sampson et al.,
1996] and Sampson et al., 2000.)
The results of this study also provide the basis for future research
regarding the career
thoughts of individuals with disabilities. First, data should be
collected to determine if
the groups identified in this study can be replicated. Second, research
is also needed to
determine what type of interventions are effective in reducing the level
of dysfunctional
career thoughts for individuals with disabilities. More specifically,
researchers need to
determine whether the intervention strategies typically used with
individuals with career
decision-making problems are effective for individuals with anxiety,
depression,
schizophrenia, add bipolar disorder. Third, it needs to be determined
whether there are
differences in career decision making between individuals with anxiety,
depression,
schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. Fourth, contextual factors should
be examined to
determine how these factors influence the development of dysfunctional
thoughts.
Finally, the results of this study provide evidence that individuals
With anxiety,
depression, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder are able to complete
this survey
without assistance. This provides researchers with an instrument that be
can used in
career development research with this population. However, more research
is needed to
examine if the instrument produces reliable and valid data on career
thoughts for
individuals with these conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 1. Characteristics of the Clusters |
|
|
|
|
|
Characteristic Cluster 1 |
Cluster 2 |
Cluster 3
39.0
(8.2) |
|
|
Age: M
(SD) 33.8 (10.3) 36.6 |
(11.2) |
|
|
|
Women 62% 54% |
67% |
|
|
|
Ethnicity
African
American 60% 73% |
83% |
|
|
|
Caucasian 31% 23 % |
11% |
|
|
|
Hispanic 2% 0% |
0% |
|
|
|
Asian
American 2% 0% |
0% |
|
|
|
Education
< 12th
grade 45% 42% |
39% |
|
|
|
GED/HSD
or higher 38% 46% |
56% |
|
|
|
Note. GED
= General Equivalency Diploma; HSD = high school
diploma.
Cluster 1: Dysfunctional Thoughts, n = 45; Cluster 2:
External
Conflict, n = 69; Cluster 3: Productive Thoughts, n = 18.
Percentages may not equal 100 because of participants' not
reporting
information. |
|
|
TABLE 2.
Raw Score Means, Standard Deviations, and Adult Sample
Percentiles on the Three CTI Subscales for Clusters and Comparison
Groups |
|
|
Cluster
1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3
CTI
subscale M (SD) %ile M (SD) vile M
(SD) file
DMC 19.2 (3.9) 93 9.3 (4.1) 54 0.9
(1.6) 14 |
|
|
|
CA 17.4 (3.2) 92 10.7 (3.2) 62 3.6
(2.7) 14 |
|
|
|
EC 7.1 (3.1) 97 4.6 (1.9) 79 0.2
(0.5) 8 |
|
|
|
GED
group SES group
CTI
subscale M (SD) %ile M (SD) vile
DMC 12.9 (6.3) 76 7.9 (6.4) 50 |
|
|
|
CA 12.9 (4.6) 76 8.6 (5.5) 46 |
|
|
|
EC 5.4 (3.0) 88 3.7 (3.1) 66 |
|
|
|
Note. CTI
= Career Thoughts Inventory (Sampson et al., 1996);
GED =
General Equivalency Diploma; SES = socioeconomic status;
DMC =
Decision Making Confusion subscale; CA = Commitment Anxiety
subscale;
EC = External Conflict subscale. Cluster 1: Dysfunctional
Thoughts,
n = 45; Cluster 2: External Conflict, n = 69; Cluster 3:
Productive Thoughts, n = 18. Higher number indicates greater
dysfunction. Percentile reported is based on a normative group |
|
|
of
adults. |
and t
Tests Between |
|
|
TABLE 3.
Effect Sizes (d), Power Estimates,
Pairs of
Means on the Three CTI Subscales |
|
|
CTI
subscale |
CA |
|
|
|
DMC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cluster |
Effect
size |
Power Effect size
estimate |
Power
estimate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Dysfunctional |
|
-1.3 (c)
* |
(.99) |
-0.9 (c)
* |
(.97) |
|
1. |
Thoughts-GED
Dysfunctional |
group |
-2.3 (c)
* |
(.99) |
-.8 (c) * |
(.99) |
|
|
Thoughts-SES |
group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.
External Conflict- |
0.8 (c) * |
(.92) |
0.4 (a) |
(.42) |
|
|
|
GED group |
|
-0.3 (a) |
(.09) |
-0.4 (a) |
(.22) |
|
2.
External Conflict- |
|
|
|
SES group |
|
2.4 (c) * |
(.99) |
1.8 (c) * |
(.99) |
|
3.
Productive Thoughts- |
|
|
|
GED group |
|
1.4 (c) * |
(.97) |
1.0 (c) * |
(.75) |
|
3.
Productive Thoughts- |
|
|
SES group |
|
CTI
subscale |
|
|
|
Cluster |
EC
Effect
size Power estimate |
|
|
1. |
Dysfunctional |
|
-0.3 (a) |
(.17) |
|
|
|
|
1. |
Thoughts-GED
Dysfunctional |
group |
-0.7 (b)
* |
(.62) |
|
|
|
|
|
Thoughts-SES |
group |
0.2 (a) |
(.05) |
|
|
|
2.
External Conflict- |
|
|
GED group |
|
-0.2 (a) |
(.04) |
|
|
|
2.
External Conflict- |
|
|
|
SES group |
|
1.1 (c) * |
(.87) |
|
|
|
3.
Productive Thoughts- |
|
|
GED group |
0.7 (b) |
(.39) |
|
|
|
3.
Productive Thoughts- |
|
|
SES group
Note. CTI
= Career Thoughts Inventory (Sampson et al., 1996); |
|
|
DMC =
Decision Making Confusion subscale; CA = Commitment Anxiety
subscale;
EC = External Conflict subscale; GED = General Equivalency
Diploma;
SES = socioeconomic status. |
|
(a) small
effect size. (b) medium effect size. |
(c) large
effect size. |
|
* p <
.05. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REFERENCES
A special news report about life on the job and trends taking shape
there. (2000, March
14). The Wall Street Journal, p. Al.
Ahrens, C., Frey, J., & Burke, S. (1999). An individualized job
engagement approach
for persons with severe mental illness. Journal of Rehabilitation,
65(4), 17-24.
Aldenderfer, M., & Blashfield, R. (1984). Cluster analysis. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental
disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Baker, E (1972). Numerical taxonomy for education researchers. Review of
Educational Research, 42, 345-358.
Berven, N., & Hubert, L. (1977). Complete-link clustering as a
complement to factor
analysis: A comparison to factor analysis used alone. Journal of
Vocational Behavior,
10, 69-81.
Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related
self-efficacy
expectations to perceived career options in college women and men.
Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 28, 399-410.
Borders, D., & Archadel, K. A. (1987). Self-beliefs and career
counseling. Journal of
Career Development, 14, 69-79.
Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1996). A social cognitive framework for
career choice
counseling. The Career Development Quarterly, 44, 354-366.
Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral
sciences. New York:
Academic Press.
Corbishley, M. A., & Yost, E. B. (1989). Assessment and treatment of
dysfunctional
cognitions in career counseling. Career Planning and Adult Development
Journal, 5(3),
20-26.
Costa, P., & McRae, R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO
PI-R) and
NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Crozat, P., & Kloss, J. D. (1979). Intensive community treatment: An
approach to
facilitating the employment of offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior,
6, 133-145.
Czerlinsky, T., & Ryan, D. (1986). The utility of the Vocational
Decision-Making
Interview for vocational evaluations within school settings. Vocational
Evaluation and
Work Adjustment Bulletin, 19, 77-82.
Dryden, W. (1999). Rational emotive behavior therapy: A training manual.
New York:
Springer.
Enright, M. (1996). The relationship between disability status, career
beliefs, and
career indecision. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 40, 134-152.
Farley, R., Schriner, K., & Roessler, R. (1988). The impact of the
Occupational Choice
Strategy on the career development of rehabilitation clients.
Rehabilitation Psychology,
33, 121-125.
Fuqua, D. R., Blum, C. R., & Hartman, B. W. (1988). Empirical support
for the
differential diagnosis of career indecision. Career Development
Quarterly, 36, 364-373.
Gibb, D. S. (1991). An investigation of the relationship between
psychological type and
career indecision. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 62, 27-29.
Herr, E. L., & Cramer, S. H. (1996). Career guidance and counseling
through the
lifespan: Systematic approaches (5th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
Holland, J., Daiger, D., & Power, G. (1980). My vocational situation.
Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Holland, J. L., & Holland, J. E. (1977). Vocational indecision: More
evidence and
speculation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24, 404-415.
Jones, J. (1988). The career decision scale. (Available from Lawrence K.
Jones, North
Carolina State University, College of Education and Psychology,
Department of
Counselor Education, Box 7801, Raleigh, NC 27695)
Judge, T. A., & Locke, E. A. (1993). Effect of dysfunctional thought
processes on
subjective well-being and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 78, 475-490.
Keller, K. E., Biggs, D. A., & Gysbers, N. C. (1982). Career counseling
from a
cognitive perspective. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60, 367-371.
Kinner R. T., & Krumboltz, J. D. (1986). Procedures for successful
career counseling.
In N. C. Gysbers (Ed.), Designing careers (pp. 307335). San Francisco:
Jossy-Bass.
Kirk, R. (1982). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral
sciences (2nd ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Kosclulek, J. E (1998). Empowering the life choices of people with
disabilities though
career counseling. In N. C. Gysbers, M. J. Heppner, & J. A. Johnson
(Eds.), Career
counseling: Process, issues, and techniques (pp. 109-122). Boston: Allyn
& Bacon.
Kosciulek, J. E (1999). The consumer-directed theory of empowerment.
Rehabilitation
Counseling Bulletin, 42, 196-213.
Krumboltz, J. D. (1983). Private rules in career decision making.
Columbus, OH: Ohio
State University, Advanced Study Center, National Center for Research in
Vocational
Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED229608)
Krumboltz, J. D. (1990, March). Helping clients change dysfunctional
career beliefs.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of
Counseling and
Development, Cincinnati, OH.
Kruse, D. (1998, September). Persons with disabilities: Demographic,
income, and
health care characteristics. Monthly Labor Review, 121(9), 13-22.
LaPlante, M., & Carlson, D. (1996). Disability in the United States:
Prevalence and
causes, 1992. Disability Statistics Report, 7. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of
Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and
barriers to
career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 47,
36-49.
Louis Harris and Associates. (1998). 1998 N.O.D./ Harris survey of
Americans with
disabilities. New York: Author.
Luzzo, D., Hitchings, W., Retish, P., & Shoemaker, A. (1999). Evaluating
differences in
college students' career decision making on the basis of disability
status. Career
Development Quarterly, 48, 142-156.
Nevo, O. (1987). Irrational expectations in career counseling and their
confronting
arguments. The Career Development Quarterly, 35,239250.
Newman, J. L., Fuqua, D. R., & Seaworth, T. B. (1989). The role of
anxiety in career
indecision: Implications for diagnosis and treatment. Career Development
Quarterly,
37, 221-230.
Norusis, M. (1993). SPSS professional statistics 6.1. Chicago: SPSS.
Osipow, S., Carney, C., Winer, J., Yanico, B., & Koschier, M. (1987).
Career decision scale. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Peterson, G. W., Sampson, J. P., & Reardon, R. C. (1991). Career
development and
services: A cognitive approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Peterson, N., & Gonzalez, R. G. (2000). The role of work in people's
lives: Applied
career counseling and vocational psychology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Powers, L., Sowers, J., & Stevens, T. (1995). An exploratory, randomized
study of the
impact of mentoring on the self-efficacy and community-based knowledge
of
adolescents with severe physical challenges. Journal of Rehabilitation,
61 (1), 33-41.
Reardon, R. C., Lenz, J. G., Sampson, J. P., & Peterson, G. W. (2000).
Career
development and planning: A comprehensive approach. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Regenstein, M., Meyer, J. A., & Hicks, J. D. (1999). Job prospects for
welfare
recipients: Employers speak out. Number A-25, New Federalism: Issues and
Options
for States. The Urban Institute. Retrieved January 17, 2000, from
http://newfederalism.urban.org/htlm/anf25.html
Romesburg, H. (1990). Cluster analysis for researchers. Malabar, FL:
Krieger
Publishing.
Ryan, C. (1995). Work isn't what it used to be: Implications,
recommendations, and
strategies for vocational rehabilitation, Journal of Rehabilitation, 61
(4), 8-15.
Sampson, J. P., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., & Reardon, R. C. (1992). A
cognitive
approach to career services: Translating concepts into practice. Career
Development
Quarterly, 41, 67-74.
Sampson, J. P., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., Reardon, R. C., &
Saunders, D. E. (1996).
Career Thoughts Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Sampson, J. P., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., Reardon, R. C., &
Saunders, D. E. (1998).
The design and use of a measure of dysfunctional career thoughts among
adults, college
students, and high school students: The Career Thoughts Inventory.
Journal of Career
Assessment, 6, 115-134.
Sampson, J. P., Peterson, G. W., Reardon, R. C., & Lenz, J. G. (2000).
Using readiness
assessment to improve career services: A cognitive information
processing approach.
Career Development Quarterly, 49, 146-174.
Saunders, D. E., Peterson, G. W., Sampson, J. E, & Reardon, R. C.
(2000). Relation of
depression and dysfunctional career thinking to career indecision.
Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 56, 288-298.
Serling, D. A., & Betz, N. E. (1990). Development and evaluation of a
measure of fear
of commitment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 91-97.
Stoddard, S., Jans, L., Ripple, J., & Kraus, L. (1998, June). Chartwork
on work and
disability in the United States. An Inhouse Report. Retrieved January
17, 2000, from
http:www.inhouse.com/disabilitydata/
Trupin, L., Sebesta, D., Yelin, E., & LaPlante, M. (1997).Trends in
labor force
participation among persons with disabilities, 1983-1994. Disability
Statistics Report,
10. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on
Disability and
Rehabilitation Research.
Twenty-Fifth Institute on Rehabilitation Issues. (1999). Meeting future
workforce needs.
Menomonie: University of Wisconsin--Stout, Rehabilitation Research and
Training
Center.
Wilson, J. W. (1997). Connecting to regional job prosperity: That state
of work in the
inner cities. Paper presented at a symposium on Community 2020: A New
Future for the
American City, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington,
DC.
Young, R. A., & Chen, C. P. (1999). Annual review: Practice and research
in career
counseling and development-1998. Career Development Quarterly, 48,
98-141.
Daniel C. Lustig, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of
Counseling,
Educational Psychology, and Research at the University of Memphis. His
current
research interests include the working alliance and adjustment of
individuals with
disabilities. David R. Strauser, PhD, is the director of the Center for
Rehabilitation and
Employment Research and an associate professor in the Department of
Counseling,
Educational Psychology, and Research at the University of Memphis. His
research
interests include the working alliance and career thoughts of
individuals with
disabilities. Address: Daniel C. Lustig, Department of Counseling,
Educational
Psychology, and Research, University of Memphis, 113 Patterson Hall,
Memphis, TN
38111-9890; e-mail: dlustig@memphis.edu
|