Loading…

Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis examined the structure of the four theoretical sources of self-efficacy (mastery experience, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and their relations to efficacy beliefs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Data were derived fr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of vocational behavior 2018-12, Vol.109, p.118-136
Main Authors: Sheu, Hung-Bin, Lent, Robert W., Miller, Matthew J., Penn, Lee T., Cusick, Megan E., Truong, Nancy N.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53
container_end_page 136
container_issue
container_start_page 118
container_title Journal of vocational behavior
container_volume 109
creator Sheu, Hung-Bin
Lent, Robert W.
Miller, Matthew J.
Penn, Lee T.
Cusick, Megan E.
Truong, Nancy N.
description This meta-analysis examined the structure of the four theoretical sources of self-efficacy (mastery experience, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and their relations to efficacy beliefs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Data were derived from 104 studies (including 141 independent samples) conducted across a 37-year period (1977–2013). Based on analysis of all samples, the omnibus test offered support for a two-source factor model of the efficacy sources: direct personal experiences (comprised of prior mastery experience, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and vicarious learning. Both sources were predictive of self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Moderator analyses supported the validity of the two-source model and accounted for substantial amounts of the variance in self-efficacy by gender, race/ethnicity, age group, and type of mastery experience (subjective vs. objective) measurement. Across all moderating conditions, the direct experiences factor was highly correlated with vicarious learning and produced large positive paths to self-efficacy. Vicarious learning yielded small yet negative paths to self-efficacy, which likely resulted from statistical suppression. A greater portion of the variance in self-efficacy was explained when mastery experience was assessed subjectively than objectively. We discuss practical implications of gender and racial/ethnic differences in the model tests along with the implications of the findings for theory and future research. •Findings of 104 studies are synthesized to test the sources of self-efficacy model.•The two-source model (direct experiences and vicarious learning) is retained.•Direct experiences positively predict self-efficacy and outcome expectations.•Vicarious learning is negatively and mildly predictive of self-efficacy.•Gender and racial/ethnic groups differ in the prediction of self-efficacy.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.003
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2151201839</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0001879118301131</els_id><sourcerecordid>2151201839</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOAzEMRSMEEuXxAewise0Ue15NYIUQLwmJBbCOMhlPyaiTlGSK6IpfJ6Ws2diyda91fRg7Q5ghYH3Rz_rPZpYDijTPAIo9NkGQVSZBlPtsAgCYibnEQ3YUY59GgWI-Yd8vfh0MRe47HmnZZdR11miz4dq13K9H4wfi9LUiM-rRehe5dTwaS87QlI9k3p1f-sVmysktrCMK1i2mv-5Bj--UijWRt37Q1sVLfs0HGnWmnV5uoo0n7KDTy0inf_2Yvd3dvt48ZE_P948310-ZKQHGrMFOCik6IWGutTRYVpAb2YpGVrnRjYCmzlEgkq7ysgCj67KgGqoCpKjbqjhm57u7q-A_1hRH1afHU4iocqxwC66QSYU7lQk-xkCdWgU76LBRCGrLWfUqcVZb-XaVOCfP1c5DKf6npaD-6LQ2JGiq9fYf9w9ieIY8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2151201839</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Sheu, Hung-Bin ; Lent, Robert W. ; Miller, Matthew J. ; Penn, Lee T. ; Cusick, Megan E. ; Truong, Nancy N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sheu, Hung-Bin ; Lent, Robert W. ; Miller, Matthew J. ; Penn, Lee T. ; Cusick, Megan E. ; Truong, Nancy N.</creatorcontrib><description>This meta-analysis examined the structure of the four theoretical sources of self-efficacy (mastery experience, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and their relations to efficacy beliefs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Data were derived from 104 studies (including 141 independent samples) conducted across a 37-year period (1977–2013). Based on analysis of all samples, the omnibus test offered support for a two-source factor model of the efficacy sources: direct personal experiences (comprised of prior mastery experience, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and vicarious learning. Both sources were predictive of self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Moderator analyses supported the validity of the two-source model and accounted for substantial amounts of the variance in self-efficacy by gender, race/ethnicity, age group, and type of mastery experience (subjective vs. objective) measurement. Across all moderating conditions, the direct experiences factor was highly correlated with vicarious learning and produced large positive paths to self-efficacy. Vicarious learning yielded small yet negative paths to self-efficacy, which likely resulted from statistical suppression. A greater portion of the variance in self-efficacy was explained when mastery experience was assessed subjectively than objectively. We discuss practical implications of gender and racial/ethnic differences in the model tests along with the implications of the findings for theory and future research. •Findings of 104 studies are synthesized to test the sources of self-efficacy model.•The two-source model (direct experiences and vicarious learning) is retained.•Direct experiences positively predict self-efficacy and outcome expectations.•Vicarious learning is negatively and mildly predictive of self-efficacy.•Gender and racial/ethnic groups differ in the prediction of self-efficacy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-8791</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-9084</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.003</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Correlation analysis ; Cultural differences ; Ethnicity ; Gender ; Learning ; Meta-analysis ; Race/ethnicity ; Self-efficacy ; Social cognitive career theory ; Sources of self-efficacy ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Journal of vocational behavior, 2018-12, Vol.109, p.118-136</ispartof><rights>2018 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Dec 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sheu, Hung-Bin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lent, Robert W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Matthew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Penn, Lee T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cusick, Megan E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Truong, Nancy N.</creatorcontrib><title>Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis</title><title>Journal of vocational behavior</title><description>This meta-analysis examined the structure of the four theoretical sources of self-efficacy (mastery experience, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and their relations to efficacy beliefs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Data were derived from 104 studies (including 141 independent samples) conducted across a 37-year period (1977–2013). Based on analysis of all samples, the omnibus test offered support for a two-source factor model of the efficacy sources: direct personal experiences (comprised of prior mastery experience, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and vicarious learning. Both sources were predictive of self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Moderator analyses supported the validity of the two-source model and accounted for substantial amounts of the variance in self-efficacy by gender, race/ethnicity, age group, and type of mastery experience (subjective vs. objective) measurement. Across all moderating conditions, the direct experiences factor was highly correlated with vicarious learning and produced large positive paths to self-efficacy. Vicarious learning yielded small yet negative paths to self-efficacy, which likely resulted from statistical suppression. A greater portion of the variance in self-efficacy was explained when mastery experience was assessed subjectively than objectively. We discuss practical implications of gender and racial/ethnic differences in the model tests along with the implications of the findings for theory and future research. •Findings of 104 studies are synthesized to test the sources of self-efficacy model.•The two-source model (direct experiences and vicarious learning) is retained.•Direct experiences positively predict self-efficacy and outcome expectations.•Vicarious learning is negatively and mildly predictive of self-efficacy.•Gender and racial/ethnic groups differ in the prediction of self-efficacy.</description><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Cultural differences</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Race/ethnicity</subject><subject>Self-efficacy</subject><subject>Social cognitive career theory</subject><subject>Sources of self-efficacy</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>0001-8791</issn><issn>1095-9084</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtOAzEMRSMEEuXxAewise0Ue15NYIUQLwmJBbCOMhlPyaiTlGSK6IpfJ6Ws2diyda91fRg7Q5ghYH3Rz_rPZpYDijTPAIo9NkGQVSZBlPtsAgCYibnEQ3YUY59GgWI-Yd8vfh0MRe47HmnZZdR11miz4dq13K9H4wfi9LUiM-rRehe5dTwaS87QlI9k3p1f-sVmysktrCMK1i2mv-5Bj--UijWRt37Q1sVLfs0HGnWmnV5uoo0n7KDTy0inf_2Yvd3dvt48ZE_P948310-ZKQHGrMFOCik6IWGutTRYVpAb2YpGVrnRjYCmzlEgkq7ysgCj67KgGqoCpKjbqjhm57u7q-A_1hRH1afHU4iocqxwC66QSYU7lQk-xkCdWgU76LBRCGrLWfUqcVZb-XaVOCfP1c5DKf6npaD-6LQ2JGiq9fYf9w9ieIY8</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>Sheu, Hung-Bin</creator><creator>Lent, Robert W.</creator><creator>Miller, Matthew J.</creator><creator>Penn, Lee T.</creator><creator>Cusick, Megan E.</creator><creator>Truong, Nancy N.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis</title><author>Sheu, Hung-Bin ; Lent, Robert W. ; Miller, Matthew J. ; Penn, Lee T. ; Cusick, Megan E. ; Truong, Nancy N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Cultural differences</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Race/ethnicity</topic><topic>Self-efficacy</topic><topic>Social cognitive career theory</topic><topic>Sources of self-efficacy</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sheu, Hung-Bin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lent, Robert W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Matthew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Penn, Lee T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cusick, Megan E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Truong, Nancy N.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of vocational behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sheu, Hung-Bin</au><au>Lent, Robert W.</au><au>Miller, Matthew J.</au><au>Penn, Lee T.</au><au>Cusick, Megan E.</au><au>Truong, Nancy N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of vocational behavior</jtitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>109</volume><spage>118</spage><epage>136</epage><pages>118-136</pages><issn>0001-8791</issn><eissn>1095-9084</eissn><abstract>This meta-analysis examined the structure of the four theoretical sources of self-efficacy (mastery experience, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and their relations to efficacy beliefs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Data were derived from 104 studies (including 141 independent samples) conducted across a 37-year period (1977–2013). Based on analysis of all samples, the omnibus test offered support for a two-source factor model of the efficacy sources: direct personal experiences (comprised of prior mastery experience, verbal persuasion, and affective state) and vicarious learning. Both sources were predictive of self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Moderator analyses supported the validity of the two-source model and accounted for substantial amounts of the variance in self-efficacy by gender, race/ethnicity, age group, and type of mastery experience (subjective vs. objective) measurement. Across all moderating conditions, the direct experiences factor was highly correlated with vicarious learning and produced large positive paths to self-efficacy. Vicarious learning yielded small yet negative paths to self-efficacy, which likely resulted from statistical suppression. A greater portion of the variance in self-efficacy was explained when mastery experience was assessed subjectively than objectively. We discuss practical implications of gender and racial/ethnic differences in the model tests along with the implications of the findings for theory and future research. •Findings of 104 studies are synthesized to test the sources of self-efficacy model.•The two-source model (direct experiences and vicarious learning) is retained.•Direct experiences positively predict self-efficacy and outcome expectations.•Vicarious learning is negatively and mildly predictive of self-efficacy.•Gender and racial/ethnic groups differ in the prediction of self-efficacy.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.003</doi><tpages>19</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-8791
ispartof Journal of vocational behavior, 2018-12, Vol.109, p.118-136
issn 0001-8791
1095-9084
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2151201839
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection
subjects Correlation analysis
Cultural differences
Ethnicity
Gender
Learning
Meta-analysis
Race/ethnicity
Self-efficacy
Social cognitive career theory
Sources of self-efficacy
Systematic review
title Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T17%3A52%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sources%20of%20self-efficacy%20and%20outcome%20expectations%20in%20science,%20technology,%20engineering,%20and%20mathematics%20domains:%20A%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20vocational%20behavior&rft.au=Sheu,%20Hung-Bin&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=109&rft.spage=118&rft.epage=136&rft.pages=118-136&rft.issn=0001-8791&rft.eissn=1095-9084&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2151201839%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-b1f9898f8907aa9c14502c9d8b952cab80b621811ea52430ca643e60530986d53%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2151201839&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true