Journal of Counseling Psychology Copyright 1996 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

1996, Vol. 43, No. 3, 338-346 0022-0167/96/$3.00

A Test of a Social Cognitive Model for Middle School Students:

Math and Science
Nadya A. Fouad and Philip L. Smith
University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee

This study tested Propositions 1, 3, and 4 of the R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and G. Hackett
(1994) social cognitive model with ethnically diverse middle school students (N = 380): that
an individual's vocational interests are reflective of his or her concurrent self-efficacy beliefs
and outcome expectations, that self-efficacy beliefs affect choice goals and actions, and that
outcome expectations affect choice goals and action. R. W. Lent et al. (1994) also proposed
that demographic and individual difference variables (such as gender or race-ethnicity)
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

mediate learning experiences that play a role in forming self-efficacy beliefs and outcome
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

expectations. The study investigated a model in which age and gender were represented as
antecedent conditions to learning experiences. Self-efficacy was modeled to have both a
direct influence on interests and an indirect influence on interests through outcome expect-
ancies. Finally, intentions were modeled to be influenced by self-efficacy, outcome expect-
ancies, and interests. Results support the R. W. Lent et al. Propositions 1, 3, and 4 for this
middle school population.

Recent reviews of literature in career theory and career
decision making have noted that self-efficacy (Bandura,
1977, 1986) has been a major area of investigation (Borgen,
1991; Gelso & Fassinger, 1990; Fitzgerald & Betz, 1994;
Fouad, 1994; Hackett & Lent, 1992). Self-efficacy has been
found to play a role in a variety of career-related behaviors,
such as indecision (Taylor & Betz, 1983), decision making
(Luzzo, 1993; Mathieu, Sowa, & Niles, 1993; Niles &
Sowa, 1992), math tasks and performance (Cooper & Rob-
inson, 1991; Hackett & Betz, 1989; Lent, Lopez, &
Bieschke, 1991,1993; Lopez & Lent, 1992), career salience
(Matzeder & Krieshok, 1995), specific occupational tasks
(Rooney & Osipow, 1992; Williams & Betz, 1994), and
academic achievement and persistence (Brown, Lent, &
Larkin, 1989; Hackett, Betz, Casas, & Rocha-Singh, 1992;
Lent, Brown, & Larkin, 1984, 1986).
Social-cognitive theory has been applied to the career
and vocational realm in relatively piecemeal fashion, with
investigators examining the relationship of self-efficacy to
other variables of interest in a variety of populations. Re-
cently, however, Lent, Brown, and Hackett (1994) have
taken an important step, building on social-cognitive theory
(Bandura, 1986) to explain and predict career outcomes.
Nadya A. Fouad and Philip L. Smith, School of Education,
Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wiscon-
sin—Milwaukee.
We are grateful for the assistance of Robert W. Lent, University
of Maryland, College Park, and Valerie Wiebeck, Kosciuszko
Middle School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in developing items for the
scales used in this study. We also thank V. Scott Solberg for his
helpful comments on a draft of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Nadya A. Fouad, School of Education, Department of Educational
Psychology, Enderis Hall, P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53201. Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to nfouad®
soe.uwm.edu.
338
Lent et al. argued that career interests and career intentions
develop in part as a result of self-efficacy and outcome
expectations. They also proposed that demographic and
individual difference variables (such as gender or race-
ethnicity) interact with background and contextual variables
to differentially mediate learning experiences that play a
role in forming self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expecta-
tions. For example, socialization may affect the learning
experiences of boys and girls differently, which may lead to
dissimilar self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancies.
Lent et al. (1994) formulated a number of propositions
that may be empirically tested. The purpose of this study
was to test portions of this model with ethnically diverse
middle school students. It is particularly critical to examine
these factors for middle school students, whose interests are
beginning to form and who are making choices that will
have strong influences on later decisions. These include
choice of courses in high school, choice of extracurricular
activities, and persistence in high school. By understanding
how self-efficacy operates in the development of career
interests and vocationally related intentions, counseling
psychologists will be in a better position to advocate for
specific interventions.
Lent et al. (1994) proposed that self-efficacy expectations
are related to expectations individuals have about the out-
comes of behavior. In their model, outcome expectancies
and self-efficacy beliefs both predict interests. Interests
(together with self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectan-
cies) predict intentions, which in turn lead to choice behav-
iors. Lent et al. presented intercorrelations among variables
in their model drawn from a meta-analysis of studies exam-
ining social cognitive theory applied to career-related vari-
ables. They discovered that, in general, studies supported
their propositions. For example, they found an average
weighted correlation of .49 between self-efficacy (measured
in a variety of ways) and outcome expectations, .53 between
 MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH-SCIENCE SELF-EFFICACY
self-efficacy and interests, and .52 between outcome expect-
ancies and interests. Thus, self-efficacy beliefs and outcome
expectancies each accounted for approximately 27% of the
variance in interests.
Hackett and Betz (1981) were the first to apply Bandura's
(1986) social-cognitive theory to career choice, particularly
focusing on self-efficacy to explain women's traditional
career choices. Bandura hypothesized that individuals'
judgments about their ability to successfully perform some
task increases the likelihood that they will attempt and
persist in that task. He also postulated that self-efficacy is
distinct from outcome expectancies, or the expectations
individuals have of the result of behavior. Bandura noted
that "efficacy and outcome expectancies judgments are dif-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ferentiated because individuals can believe that a particular
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
course of action will produce certain outcomes, but they do
not act on that outcome belief because they question
whether they can actually execute the necessary activities"
(Bandura, 1986, p. 392). Hackett and Betz hypothesized that
low self-efficacy may explain the restricted range of wom-
en's career options. Betz and Hackett (1981) empirically
tested this hypothesis with college students, finding signif-
icant gender differences in their confidence that they could
complete the educational requirements and job duties for
nontraditional occupations. Male students had higher self-
efficacy for traditionally male occupations, whereas female
students had higher self-efficacy for traditionally female
occupations.
Hackett (1995) traced the development of her and her
colleagues' work from early studies with Betz to the expli-
cation of the social-cognitive framework she developed
with Lent and Brown (Betz & Hackett, 1986; Hackett &
Betz, 1989; Hackett, Betz, Casas, & Rocha-Singh, 1992;
Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Lent, Lopez, & Bieschke,
1993). She noted that most early studies focused on the
content of choices, such as traditionality of choice for men
or women, but that attention has turned to focus on the
process of decision making and the variables that influence
that process. She advocated that future research focus on
efficacy-based interventions with at-risk youth, particularly
in the math and science areas, and noted that although
interests are too often seen as innate, self-efficacy studies
have demonstrated that interests may be developed by using
self-efficacy interventions.
Although it is important to examine process self-efficacy
in career decision making, it is also important to examine
causal links leading to content-specific self-efficacy, partic-
ularly in the math and science domain. By gaining a better
understanding of influences on math and science self-
efficacy, counseling psychologists will be able to effec-
tively intervene to promote math and science activities for
children. This study was designed to test three propositions
of Lent et al.'s (1994) model with a middle school popula-
tion on math and science content, examining the relation-
ships among self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, interests,
and intentions.
Specifically, the study tested Lent et al.'s (1994) Propo-
sition 1, which hypothesizes that interests are reflective of
self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancies; Proposition
339
3, which hypothesizes that self-efficacy beliefs are directly
associated with intentions; and Proposition 4, which hy-
pothesizes that outcome expectancies are directly associated
with intentions. Because this study investigated middle
school students, who are developmentally not ready for
choice goals or performance outcomes, intentions were sub-
stituted for choice goals. Thus, the study examined what
students intended to do, rather than the more ideal assess-
ment of their behavior, as hypothesized by Lent et al.
Although intention to act is a necessary precursor, it is
clearly not synonymous with action.
Lent et al. (1994) also proposed (Hypothesis 1G) that
gender and race differences "arise largely through differen-
tial access to opportunities, supports, and socialization pro-
cesses" (p. 108) and suggested that "group differences will
be reduced when [these] are controlled" (p. 108). Although
this proposition is beyond the scope of our study, gender
and age differences were included in the model as anteced-
ent variables to investigate the relationship between those
demographic variables and self-efficacy, outcome expect-
ancies, interests, and intentions. Gender was included be-
cause of the extensive literature that documents gender
differences in self-efficacy (reviewed in Hackett & Lent,
1992; Hackett, 1995). Age is not specifically included in the
Lent et al. model, although a developmental perspective is
implicit in their discussion. Self-efficacy beliefs have been
found to change and grow as children grow older (Flammer,
1995; Zimmerman, 1995), and we are postulating that age is
a distinct person variable. Bandura (1995), for example,
noted that children's "beliefs of cognitive efficacy can have
reverberating effects on developmental trajectories" (p. 19),
citing evidence that early low self-efficacy is related to later
antisocial behavior and aggression. It is important to note
that Lent et al. postulated that person variables affect the
learning experiences that influence self-efficacy beliefs and
outcome expectations rather than having a direct influence.
For example, girls are not inherently less self-efficacious in
math but are less self-efficacious in math because different
socialization and teaching practices have led to different
learning opportunities available to them. This perspective is
implicit in our study, as well.
The basis for the model tested in this study is shown in
Figure 1. In this figure the basic elements of the Lent et al.
(1994) model are shown, with the relationships posited by
Lent et al. depicted as dotted arrows. This model is very
complex and it would be a difficult task, in the context of a
single study, to collect information relative to each of the
variables indicated in Figure 1. Our study examined a some-
what truncated version of this general model, testing key
elements of the structure depicted in Figure 1.
Variables indicated in the shaded boxes of Figure 1 were
not measured in our study and therefore were not included
in the model that was tested. These omissions lead to a few
key differences between the model proposed by Lent et al.
(1994) and the one tested in this study. First, "person
inputs" as described by Lent et al. are represented by only
gender and age in this study. Obviously, there are a number
of person inputs that might be included in a study of this
sort. We limited ourselves to these two variables in this
 340 FOUAD AND SMITH
Contextual
Influences
Self Efficacy
-Learning
Experiences
Interests >•
Intentions
Outcome • Variable in current Model
Expecations • Variable not included
• Path in current model
• Lent et al posited path
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Hackett (1994) model.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
study because of the known (gender) and hypothesized
(age) relationships between these two variables and other
elements of the model.
Second, learning experiences were not measured in this
study and were not included in the model. As can be seen,
Lent et al. (1994) postulated that person inputs on both
self-efficacy and outcome expectations are mediated by
learning experiences, thus their effect on these variables is
indirect. Nonetheless, these effects can be modeled as direct
effects (solid lines in Figure 1) with the expectation of
obtaining an estimate of the effects of the person inputs on
both of these variables without denying the possibility that
any effects might be present only through their relationship
to learning experiences. The exclusion of this variable from
our study does not allow for the evaluation of the additional
influence that important learning experiences have on self-
efficacy and outcome expectations. Future research needs to
focus on these complex relationships.
Finally, our study did not include variables related to
context: neither individual background context variables nor
those contextual influences that occur at some point in time
as intentions are being formulated. It is clear that a test of
the complete model as proposed by Lent et al. would require
the inclusion of these important variables.
Method
Participants
Participants were located in an inner city (low socioeconomic
status) middle school in a large Midwestern urban city. Student
performances in the middle school on national tests indicated that
90% of the 750 students in the entire school were at the 10th-20th
percentile compared with national norms on the Iowa Tests of
Basic Skills in language, reading, and math. The average school
grade point average was 2.03, suspension rate was 45-50% over an
academic year, and the average daily attendance rate was 80%.
Socioeconomic status of students at the school in which this study
was conducted was homogeneous, with 85-95% of students of low
socioeconomic status (SES): 85% of students qualified for federal
funds for free lunch and 5% received reduced-fee lunch. Students
in the school represented a variety of ethnic groups: 58% were
Hispanic, 17% were African American, 17% were White, 3% were
Asian (primarily southeast Asian), 3% were American Indian, and
2% indicated other race or ethnicity.
Students participating in this study (N = 380) were seventh
(54%) and eighth (46%) graders, 58% of whom were girls, and
were all seventh- and eighth-grade English-speaking students in
the school present on the day of assessment. Twenty-six percent of
the students were 12-year-olds, 45% were 13-year-olds, 22% were
14-year-olds, and 6% were 15-year-olds. Students were in a Career
Linking program (Fouad, 1995) designed to promote math and
science performance and career information that was made avail-
able to the seventh and eighth graders. Although a substantial
number of the Spanish-speaking seventh and eighth graders were
also involved in Career Linking, the assessment tools were not
translated and thus were only given to English-speaking students.
Ethnic representation of students in the study was similar to
representation in the whole school: 55 (15%) were Caucasian, 225
(59%) were Hispanic American, 40 (11%) were African American,
13 (3%) were Asian American, 14 (3%) were American Indian,
and the remaining 33 students did not indicate their ethnicity or
marked other.
Procedure
Students were given the instrument during a class period. Intact
classrooms were chosen on the basis of teacher participation in a
math or science lab. Teacher participation was based on English
proficiency of students, with teachers of monolingual Hmong,
Laotian, and Spanish and one Spanish bilingual teacher not par-
ticipating in the lab. The latter thought the English proficiency of
her students was not sufficient for participation. Student partici-
pation was voluntary, and all students participated. Parental con-
sent was given for all Career Linking activities at the beginning of
the school year. Total test-taking was completed in 45 min.
Instruments
The self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, and intentions instru-
ments used in this study were developed by the first author and are
described in detail elsewhere (Fouad, Smith, & Enochs, 1995).
Instruments were developed to assess math-science self-efficacy,
math-science outcome expectancies, and math-science intentions.
In addition to the math-science-related instruments developed for
this study, students were administered additional scales intended to
assess career decision-making self-efficacy, outcome expectan-
cies, and intentions. Items for the self-efficacy scale were con-
structed by modifying items from the Career Decision-Making
Self-Efficacy Scale (CDMSE; Taylor & Betz, 1983) for middle
school students and by writing items for the outcome expectancy
and intentions scales with the cooperation of middle school teach-
ers. Internal consistency reliability coefficients were .79 for the
modified CDMSE, .70 for outcome expectancies, and .74 for
intentions (Fouad et al., 1995). These general scales are relevant to
our study in that they serve as discriminant validity criteria for the
more content-oriented math-science scales. Because the constructs
measured are domain specific (Bandura, 1986), the discriminant
validity coefficients can be expected to be attenuated relative to
those that might have arisen from parallel construct definitions.
Other than providing evidence of discriminant validity, the career
decision-making scales were not used in this study.
Math-science self-efficacy. Items in the Math-Science Self-
Efficacy subscale followed the format used in the Math Tasks
subscale of the Math Self-Efficacy Scale (Betz & Hackett, 1983;
Bieschke, 1993). The Math Tasks subscale assesses confidence
 MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH-SCIENCE SELF-EFFICACY
that college students have in completing various tasks. The internal
consistency reliability of the Math Tasks subscale was .90 with a
college sample, .93 with a high school sample, with moderate
test-retest reliability (Hackett & O'Halloran, 1985, in Bieschke,
1993). Bieschke reported that math self-efficacy beliefs contrib-
uted significantly to the prediction of interest in math-science
activities. The Math Self-Efficacy subscale was modified in our
study to assess tasks that middle school students might encounter
("Determine the amount of sales tax on clothes I want to buy;"
"Design and describe a science experiment I want to do") rather
than those encountered by college students (compute your income
tax; calculate recipe quantities for a dinner for 41 when the original
recipe is for 12 people). Items assessing science self-efficacy were
added to the math items. Items were developed iteratively, origi-
nally generated by the first author using the Math Tasks Scale and
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
modified by a self-efficacy expert and a team of middle school
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
teachers.
The final version of the subscale comprised 12 items. In each
item, students responded to the stem "Indicate your ability to do
each of the following statements by circling the appropriate num-
bers: 1 = very high, 2 = high ability, 3 = uncertain, 4 = low
ability, and 5 = very low ability. Scores could range from 12 to 60
with higher values indicating lower self-efficacy. Internal consis-
tency reliability for the Math-Science Self-Efficacy (MSSE) sub-
scale for this student population was .84. Aside from the content
validation described earlier, the MSSE scale was administered
along with the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Middle
School subscale (Fouad et al., 1995). The discriminant validity
coefficient of the MSSE scale with the CDMSE middle school
subscale was .54, corrected for attenuation.
Math-science outcome expectancies and math-science inten-
tions. The Math-Science Outcome Expectancies (MSOE) sub-
scale contained seven 5-point Likert items, such as "If I learn math
well, then I will be able to do lots of different types of careers;" "If
I get good grades in math, then my parents will be pleased;" "If I
do well in science, then I will be better prepared to go to college."
Scores on this scale could range from 7 to 35 with higher values
indicating lower outcome expectations. The MSOE scale scores
were correlated with the Career Decision-Making Outcome Ex-
pectancies subscale (Fouad et al., 1995), resulting in a discriminant
validity coefficient of .71, corrected for attenuation.
The Math-Science Intentions (MSI) subscale contained six
5-point Likert items, such as "I intend to take science classes in
high school;" "I intend to enter a career that will use math,"
assessing intent to choose math and science activities or goals.
This scale also measures individuals' intent to persist in pursuing
those activities. Students responded to the stem "Indicate the
degree to which you agree or disagree with each statement below."
Scores on this scale ranged from 6 to 30 with higher scores
indicating lower intentions with respect to math and science. The
MSI scale was correlated with the Career Decision-Making Inten-
tions and Goals subscale (Fouad et al., 1995), which was also
administered to the study group, resulting in a discriminant validity
coefficient of .66, corrected for attenuation.
Items assessing math-science outcome expectancies and inten-
tions were developed by using a format similar to Lent et al. (1991,
1993). Lent et al. (1991) found an internal consistency of .90 for
their 10-item scale with a college sample, and a 2-week test-retest
reliability of .91. Following the Lent et al. format, outcome ex-
pectancies were developed by the researchers, in cooperation with
self-efficacy experts and teachers, again in an iterative process. In
other words, items were developed that would be age appropriate,
then items were examined by self-efficacy experts and middle
school teachers. The final outcome expectancies and intentions
341
subscales had internal consistency reliabilities of .80 and .81,
respectively.
Math-science interests. The Math-Science Interest scale con-
sisted of twenty 3-point Likert-type scale items designed to assess
the individual's interest in mathematics- and science-related activ-
ities. Items on the Math-Science Interest scale were developed by
the first author and middle school teachers, based on Holland's
(1985) theory of vocational types. Specifically, items were drawn
from the investigative theme in areas relevant to middle school
students. Examples of items that followed the stem, "Indicate the
degree to which you dislike or like the activity," were: "working in
a science lab," "using a calculator," "participating in a science
fair," and "taking classes in math." The reliability of this scale was
.90. Scores on this scale could range from 20 to 60 with higher
scores indicating lower interests.
Data Analysis
Structural equation modeling procedures were used to explore
the theoretical relations that exist among the constructs and to test
the plausibility of the hypothesized causal system among certain
demographic variables and math-science self-efficacy, outcome
expectancies, interests, and intentions. Our study involved all
observed variables and involved techniques traditionally associ-
ated with path analysis along with model-fitting criteria associated
with structural equation modeling in general. This methodology
uses a confirmatory approach to investigating the hypothesized
causal system and therefore requires an a priori postulation of
model structure that emerges from theory or empirical research, or
both.
Analyses were based on the LISREL 8 (Joreskog & Sorbom,
1993a) program and involved the observed indicators associated
with demographics of age and gender, and math-science self-
efficacy, outcome expectancies, interests, and intentions. The raw
data matrix was prepared before LISREL, using Prelis 2 (Joreskog
& Sorbom, 1993b). This was done to ensure that the data met the
normality assumption associated with structural modeling tech-
niques (West, Finch, & Curran, 1995) and to compute the appro-
priate correlations and covariances for use in the modeling proce-
dure.
If one ignores the path coefficients for the time being, the initial
analysis tested the structural relations hypothesized in Figure 2. An
additional analysis based on a variation of this model was done to
improve model fit. Once it was evident that a better fit could be
achieved, we respecified the initial model to include new paths and
eliminate old paths, resulting in a better fitting model. Model
modification was based on the significance of the path coefficients
Figure 2. Initial structure and associated path coefficients (with
standard errors). Significant (p < .05) coefficients are shown in
bold typeface.
 342 FOUAD AND SMITH
derived from the original model (nonsignificant paths were elim-
inated from the subsequent model) and examination of the fitted
residuals from the original model (paths were added to a modified
model where large residuals existed). In the latter case, paths were
added to the modified model only in instances that were theoret-
ically justified. The final model was cross-validated by using a
bootstrap-type procedure in which the final model was tested using
five independently drawn random samples (n = 200 each) from
the full data set. The model was further validated separately for
each of the three most prevalent ethnic groups represented in the
study sample.
Assessment of model fit in each instance was based on multiple
considerations, including statistical and practical ones. In any
model-fitting exercise, it is important to use multiple criteria
because of the influence of sample size on various fit indexes.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Convergence of several criteria of fit increases confidence in the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
viability of the hypothesized model. In this study, model fit was
assessed by using the chi-squared likelihood ratio statistic, the
adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), the root-mean-square re-
sidual (RMR), and the j^ldf ratio. The chi-square statistic is a
measure of the overall fit of the specified model to the data
(Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993a). A small chi-square statistic corre-
sponds to a good fit and a large value to a poor fit. However, the
chi-square statistic is not always a good indication of a model fit,
especially with larger samples, because it tends to take on larger
values and therefore may result in a misleading interpretation of
the data. The goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and the AGFI were
introduced to eliminate this dependence on sample size (Joreskog
& Sorbom, 1989) and indicate the relative amount of variance and
covariance in the data explained by the hypothesized model
(Byrne, 1989). The AGFI theoretically takes on values between 0
and 1, with higher numbers indicating a better fit. In general,
AGFIs greater than .9 are considered good model fits (Byrne,
1989; Loehlin, 1987). RMR is an indication of the average dis-
crepancy between elements in the observed and hypothesized
covariance matrices and should be less than .05 if a good model fit
exists (Byrne, 1989). A frequently used procedure for determining
the adequacy of model fit is the ffldf ratio (Joreskog & Sorbom,
1979). This ratio, if large, suggests that the model can be im-
proved. Small values (less than 2 or 3) of this ratio indicate good
model fit. Marsh, Balla. and McDonald (1988) provided a reason-
ably comprehensive discussion of the various criteria that have
been suggested for determining model fit in structural equation
modeling.
Results
Analysis of the raw data by using Prelis 2 (Joreskog &
Sorbom, 1993b) indicated that the data met all of the nec-
Table 1
Correlations Between Variables Used in the Study
Variable 1 2
1. Age
2. Gender .1020
3. Self-efficacy -.0690 .0940
4. Outcome expectancies -.0620 -.1260
5. Interests -.1230 .1380
6. Intentions -.1370 -.0700
M 13.572 _ 42.850
SD 0.662 — 7.784
essary assumptions for structural equation modeling and
produced the correlation matrix among the variables shown
in Table 1. A point-biserial correlation was used to represent
the relationship between gender (dichotomous variable) and
age (polychotomous variable). All relationships between
age or gender and the other variables were computed by
using polyserial correlations; the rest of the relationships
were expressed by using the Pearson product-moment cor-
relation. A summary of the results of the model-fitting
procedures are in Table 2. (The initial model tested with
these data is shown in Figure 2 along with the associated
path coefficients and their significance.) Following our ad-
aptation of Lent et al. (1994) for the variables included in
this study, our model emphasized paths leading from the
demographic characteristics (in this case, age and gender) to
both self-efficacy and outcome expectancies. Self-efficacy
was modeled as a determinant of outcome expectancies,
interests, and intentions. Outcome expectancy was modeled
as a determinant of interest and intentions, and interests
were modeled as determinants of intentions. The first line in
Table 2 identifies the parameters and fit statistics associated
with this model and suggests that, although adequate, a
revised model may more adequately fit the data.
Model modification. On the basis of the initial fit statis-
tics, the correlations between the original variables, and the
path coefficients identified by the first model, the hypoth-
esized model was revised and refitted. In this revised model,
the paths leading from age to outcome expectancies and
those from gender to both self-efficacy and outcome expec-
tations were eliminated from the model because of nonsig-
nificant path coefficients. Paths from both age and gender to
interest were added to the model to assess the influence of
these demographic variables as antecedents. An analysis of
the fitted residuals provided by the LISREL output sug-
gested the addition of these paths to achieve a better model
fit. The fit statistics associated with this revised model are
shown in the second line of Table 2. These fit statistics
indicate that the data fit the model very well. The third line
of Table 2 shows the differences between the original model
and the revised model and indicates that the revised model
provides a significantly better fit than the original model.
Figure 3 illustrates this revised model, including the path
coefficients and associated standard errors.
Of particular interest in Figure 3 are the direct paths from
self-efficacy to intentions. Direct path coefficient estimates
3 4 5 6
—
.5330
.4020 .3190
.4490 .5470 .4530 —
24.473 44.663 22.898
4.089 8.146 4.313
 MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH-SCIENCE SELF-EFFICACY 343

Table 2
Fit Statistics Associated With Study Models
Group/model x2 df P AGFI RMR Ratio
Full population
Initial 19.01 4 .001 .91 .041 4.75
Modified 5.91 3 .120 .96 .022 1.97
Difference 13.10 1 <.01
Ethnic group fit
White 1.78 3 .800 .97 .027 .59
Hispanic 3.60 3 .310 .96 .021 1.20
African American 2.12 3 .550 .88 .030 .71
Note. AGFI = adjusted goodness-of-fit index; RMR = root-mean-square residual.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

appear on the arrows directly joining the measures of inter- data and the final model was tested for fit with the covari-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

est, whereas estimates of the indirect effects are obtained by
multiplying the coefficient estimates associated with the
combination of arrows that form the indirect path. In the
case of the self-efficacy to intention paths, the direct path
coefficient estimate is .13, whereas the indirect paths
through outcome expectations and interests are estimated to
be .21 and .08, respectively. The magnitudes of these indi-
rect paths relative to the direct path are noteworthy.
Because the sample study comprised (primarily) three
distinct ethnic groups, it was important to assess the extent
to which the data for each of these three groups fit the final
model. The last three lines of Table 2 indicate the fit
statistics associated with this final model when applied to
each of the three primary ethnic groups represented. Group
1 refers to students who self-identified as White (N = 55),
Group 2 refers to Hispanic students (N = 225), and Group
3 refers to African American students (N = 40). In each
case, the data fit the model well. It is important to note that
these fit statistics do not necessarily imply that the model is
invariant across these three ethnic groups, rather, that the
data from each of these groups could plausibly have arisen
from the proposed model. A test of this former hypothesis
was not appropriate because of the relatively small sample
sizes associated with two of these three groups.
Finally, as with any model-fitting procedure, the question
of the sample dependence of model fit is likely to arise.
Aside from the tests associated with each of the most
prevalent ethnic groups represented, a modified bootstrap
approach was used to test the model. In this approach, five
independent samples of 200 were randomly drawn from the
Gender
Intentions
Age
Outcome
Expecations
Figure 3. Final structure and path coefficients (with standard
errors). All coefficients are significant (p < .05).
ance structure derived from these samples. In all five sam-
ples the data provided an acceptable fit to the model
(AGFI > .90 and RMR < .05), lending further credibility to
the robustness of the specified model for this sample.
Discussion
Most of the studies that have examined social-cognitive
theory in career-related behavior have focused on high
school and college students. These studies have, in general,
examined decision making as it occurs for students making
postsecondary education and career choices. Recently, how-
ever, attention has shifted to examining self-efficacy in
younger students in areas such as academic achievement
and motivation (Zimmerman, 1995) and math performance
(Meece, Wigfield, & Eccles, 1990) as well as interventions
to promote self-efficacy that might lead to better academic
and career choices and persistence in math and science
activities. The model proposed by Lent et al. (1994) results
in a fairly elaborate model of how basic career interests
develop and was tested to examine how it might be ex-
tended to middle school students. Math and science perfor-
mance is one area on which early interventions have fo-
cused to promote achievement as well as course selection in
high school (e.g., Fouad, 1995; Kahle & Danzl-Tauer, 1991;
Matyas, 1992; Waks, 1991).
The results of this analysis are revealing with respect to
several aspects of the model proposed by Lent et al. (1994)
as it applies to the middle school population of focus in this
study. First, the analysis suggests that there are small, but
significant, effects of person inputs (gender and age) on
outcome expectancies and interests in mathematics and sci-
ence but no such effects on self-efficacy. With respect to
age, our model depicted in Figure 3 posits a significant
negative relationship with interests in mathematics and sci-
ence. Because all of the students in the study were seventh
and eighth graders with an age distribution that might be
expected for this level, this relationship may signal a general
longitudinal decline in interest in mathematics and science
for this population. There are, of course, a number of
hypotheses that might account for this trend. These include
the increasing challenge and scope of the mathematics and
science content in the middle school curriculum, or a gen-
eral broadening of the scope of academic content presented
 344 FOUAD AND SMITH
to students during these years. Factors such as these could
contribute to a diffusion of interests in general, accounting
for a decline in interest in mathematics and science. Inter-
ventions may need to be directed to middle school students
to counteract a decrease in interests in science and math
courses. Research on the genetic influence of interests
(Betsworth et al., 1994) indicates that 55% of the variance
in interests were due to nonshared environmental effects, or
those that are unique to individuals rather than to environ-
ments (Gottfredson, 1995), and that heritability estimates
increase with age. These results suggest that the middle
school years are a prime time to influence the development
of interests of minority youth and girls in math and science
activities.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
With respect to gender, we observed there were signifi-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
cant paths to interests and outcome expectancies, the latter
relationship being negative. These paths indicate that male
students have lower interest in mathematics and sciences
than do female students, but that outcome expectancies are
higher for male students in these areas. Also noteworthy are
the lack of significant relationships between the age and
gender variables and self-efficacy. Although the path from
gender to self-efficacy was negative, which supports earlier
research (e.g., Betz & Hackett, 1981; Hackett, 1985; Post
Kammer & Smith, 1986), the path coefficient did not con-
tribute to a significantly better fitting model. This may have
been due to the SES of the students. Although not directly
tested in this study, the path from gender to self-efficacy is
through the learning experiences that are postulated as
sources of self-efficacy, and the relatively low SES of this
group of students may have provided them with fewer
learning experiences. In a similar vein, little is known about
the interaction between ethnicity, gender, and learning ex-
periences, and the results may have been specific to this
ethnically diverse sample of students.
Although in this study we used only two person input
variables (gender and age), it may be important to note that
the direct paths from these variables to interests are absent
in the Lent et al. (1994) model. It seems likely that direct
paths from input variables to interest emerge through both
formal and informal learning experiences in this critical
developmental stage as well as variation in these experi-
ences by gender. In short, school and out-of-school experi-
ences directly affect the interests of students in mathematics
and science, and these effects are not comparable for both
genders. Future research should include a broader array of
these personal variables to more completely address their
effects of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and inten-
tions.
The remaining paths in the model conform to the propo-
sitions and model set forth by Lent et al. (1994) but are of
interest because of the relative magnitudes of the path
coefficients. Especially noteworthy are the strong positive
paths between self-efficacy and outcome expectations (.55)
and between outcome expectations and intentions (.39).
These coefficients imply that the influence of self-efficacy
on intentions is due less to a direct path (.13) and more to
the indirect effect through outcome expectations. It is clear
that interventions that focus on outcome expectancies are
needed.
Self-efficacy also has a fairly large direct influence on
interests (.29), which in turn has a fairly large effect on
intentions (.28). The effect of this indirect path is nearly as
large as the direct path from self-efficacy to intentions. It is
clear that self-efficacy plays a significant role in the devel-
opment of intentions for these middle school students, but it
appears to do so primarily through its relationship to inter-
ests and outcome expectations rather than in a direct way.
The results indicate that the relationships among the per-
sonal indicators, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, inter-
ests, and intentions are complex, as suggested by the Lent et
al. (1994) model.
Finally, not only do these data support the model posited
by Lent et al. (1994) for middle school students, the model
appears to be robust for the three major ethnic groups
represented in the study. It is critical to test models with
diverse populations to determine whether career develop-
ment models developed with research using predominantly
college students apply to other groups. We believe this
study indicates that the Lent et al. social-cognitive model
may explain career behaviors of African Americans,
Whites, and Hispanics. More research is needed that di-
rectly tests the influence of race and ethnicity as an ante-
cedent variable affecting self-efficacy, outcome expectan-
cies, interests, and intentions-goals.
This study was conducted with middle school students
who were homogeneous with respect to SES. Although
holding SES relatively constant is a strength of the study, it
is also a limitation; more research is needed that examines
these factors across other SES groups, as well as other
geographic locations, and other racial and ethnic groups.
Research needs to focus on low-SES individuals to under-
stand how various vocational variables may be tied to
economic variables. However, examining one homogeneous
group restricts the range of relationships, and that is a
limitation of the study. Another limitation of this study is
that learning experiences were not included. This is an
important component of the Lent et al. (1994) model and is
theoretically critical to include. As noted earlier, the effect
of gender and age implicitly influences interests and out-
come expectancies through learning experiences. Addi-
tional person input variables could have been tested as well,
particularly race and ethnicity. Although teacher selection
in the program was based on language proficiency of stu-
dents, our study would have been strengthened by having
multiple school sites to draw from as well as validated
translations of the instruments to assess all students in the
building. Finally, although bootstrapping procedures al-
lowed some evaluation of sample independence, the best
way to assure this is to test the model on a completely
separate sample. This, too, is a limitation of the study and
should be an area for future research.
The need for further research has already been identified
in a number of areas, but one additional area should be
examined. This study did not investigate self-efficacy, out-
come expectancies, interests, and intentions as determinants
of behavioral indexes, such as actual choices made by
 MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH-SCIENCE SELF-EFFICACY
students. The focus of this study was on determinants of
intentions for middle school students, operating under the
assumption that intentions of choices and persistence in
early adolescence is an important variable to examine. How-
ever, future studies should examine the relationship of in-
tentions to actual choice, such as extracurricular activities or
course selection, and to overall persistence in math and
science (particularly postsecondary training and career
choice).
This study is an initial step in testing a model that may
lead directly to self-efficacy and outcome expectancy inter-
ventions for middle school students. It is very important that
counseling psychologists design, help implement, and eval-
uate these interventions. Counseling psychologists should
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
play an active role in the national School to Work Initiative
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
and in implementing the Education 2000 goals. To do so,
they must understand whether models and theory apply to
racially, socioeconomically, and developmentally diverse
populations.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of
behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A
social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in
changing societies. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self efficacy in chang-
ing societies (pp. 1-45). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Betsworth, D. G., Bouchard, T. J., Cooper, C. R., Grotevant,
H. D., Hansen, J. C , Scarr, S., & Weinberg, R. A. (1994). Ge-
netic and environmental influences on vocational interests as-
sessed using adoptive and biological families and twins reared
apart and together. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 263-
278.
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.
Betz, N., & Hackett, G. (1983). The relationship of mathematics
self-efficacy expectations to the selection of science-based col-
lege majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23, 329-345.
Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1986). Applications of self-efficacy
theory to understanding choice behavior. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 4, 279-289.
Bieschke, K. J. (1993). A causal model of math/science career
aspirations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University.
Borgen, F. H. (1991). Megatrends and milestones in vocational
behavior: A 20-year counseling psychology retrospective. Jour-
nal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 263-290.
Brown, S. D., Lent, R. W., & Larkin, K. C. (1989). Self-efficacy as
a moderator of scholastic aptitude-academic performance rela-
tionships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 35, 64-75.
Byrne, B. M. (1989). A primer ofUSREL: Basic applications and
programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. New
York: Springer-Verlag.
Cooper, S. E., & Robinson, D. A. (1991). The relation of mathe-
matics self-efficacy beliefs to mathematics anxiety and perfor-
mance. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Devel-
opment, 24, 4-11.
345
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Betz, N. E. (1994). Career development in
cultural context: The role of gender, race, class, and sexual
orientation. In M. L. Savickas & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Conver-
gence in career development theories (pp. 103-118). Palo Alto,
CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Flammer, A. (1995). Developmental analysis of control beliefs. In
A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 6 9 -
113). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fouad, N. A. (1994). Career assessment with Latinos/Hispanics.
Journal of Career Assessment, 2, 226-239.
Fouad, N. A. (1995). Career linking: An intervention to promote
math and science career awareness. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 73, 527-534.
Fouad, N. A., Smith, P., & Enochs, L. (1995). Reliability and
validity of the Middle School Self-Efficacy Scale. Manuscript
submitted for publication.
Gelso, C. J., & Fassinger, R. E. (1990). Counseling psychology:
Theory and research on interventions. In M. R. Rosenzweig &
L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review ofpsychology (pp. 355-386).
Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
Gottfredson, L. S. (1995, August). The nature of interests: A
discussion. Paper presented at the 103rd Annual Convention of
the American Psychological Association, New York.
Hackett, G. (1985). The role of mathematics self-efficacy in the
choice of math-related majors of college women and men: A
path model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 47-56.
Hackett, G. (1995). Self-efficacy in career choice and develop-
ment. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing society (pp.
232-258). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the
career development of women. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
18, 326-339.
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1989). An exploration of the mathe-
matics self-efficacy/mathematics performance correspondence.
Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 261-273.
Hackett, G., Betz, N. E., Casas, J. M., & Rocha-Singh, LA.
(1992). Gender, ethnicity, and social cognitive factors predicting
the academic achievement of students in engineering. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 39, 527-538.
Hackett, G., & Lent, R. W. (1992). Theoretical advances and
current inquiry in career psychology. In S. D. Brown & R. W.
Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (2nd ed., pp.
419-452). New York: Wiley Interscience.
Hackett, G., & O'Halloran, M. S. (1985). [Test-retest reliability of
career self-efficacy measures]. Unpublished raw data.
Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocational choices: A theory of
vocational personalities and work environments (2nd ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1979). Advances in factor analysis
and structural equation models. Cambridge, MA: Abt Books.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). USREL 7: A guide to the
program and applications. Chicago: SPSS.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993a). USREL 8: Structural
equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language.
Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993b). Prelis Z: A program for
multivariate data screening and data summarization: A prepro-
cessor for LISREL. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Kahle, J., & Danzl-Tauer, L. (1991). The underutilized majority:
The participation of women in science. In S. Majumdar, L. M.
Rosenfeld, P. A. Rubba, E. W. Miller, & R. F. Schmalz (Eds.),
Science education in the United States: Issues, crises and pri-
orities (pp. 483-502). Easton, PA: Pennsylvania Academy of
Science.
 346 FOUAD AND SMITH

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a uni-
fying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest,
choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45,
79-122.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of
self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persis-
tence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 356-362.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1986). Self-efficacy in
the prediction of academic performance and perceived career
options. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 265-269.
Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1991). Mathematics
self-efficacy: Sources and relations to choice. Journal of Coun-
seling Psychology, 38, 424-430.
Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1993). Predicting
mathematics-related choice and success behaviors: Test of an
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
and the prediction of work and home role salience. Journal of
Career Assessment, 3, 331-340.
Meece, J. L., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1990). Predictors of
math anxiety and its influence on young adolescents' course
enrollment intentions and performance in mathematics. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 82, 60-70.
Niles, S. G., & Sowa, C. J. (1992). Mapping the nomological
network of career self-efficacy. Career Development Quarterly,
41, 12-21.
Post Kammer, P., & Smith, P. L. (1986). Sex differences in math
and science career self-efficacy among disadvantaged students.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29, 89-101.
Rooney, R. A., & Osipow, S. H. (1992). Task-specific occupa-
tional self-efficacy scale: The development and validation of a
prototype. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 40, 14-32.

expanded social cognitive mode. Journal of Vocational Behav- Taylor, K. M., & Betz, N. E. (1983). Applications of self-efficacy
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

ior, 42, 223-236.
Loehlin, J. C. (1987). Latent variable models: An introduction to
factor, path and structural analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lopez, F. G., & Lent, R. W. (1992). Sources of mathematics
self-efficacy in high school students. Career Development Quar-
terly, 41, 3-12.
Luzzo, D. A. (1993). Value of career decision-making self-
efficacy in predicting career decision-making attitudes and
skills. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 194-199.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-
of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of
sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410.
Mathieu, P. S., Sowa, C. J., & Niles, S. G. (1993). Differences in
career self-efficacy among women. Journal of Career Develop-
ment, 19, 187-196.
Matyas, M. (1992). Promoting undergraduate studies in science
and engineering. In M. Matyas & L. Dix (Eds.), Science and
engineering programs: On target for women? (pp. 43-66).
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Matzeder, M. E., & Krieshok, T. S. (1995). Career self-efficacy
theory to the understanding and treatment of career indecision.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 63- 81.
Waks, L. (1991). Technological literacy for the new majority. In S.
Majumdar, et al. (Eds.), Science education in the United States:
Issues, crises and priorities (pp. 483-502). Easton, PA: Penn-
sylvania Academy of Science.
West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equa-
tion models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies.
In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts,
issues and applications (pp. 56-73). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Williams, T. W., & Betz, N. E. (1994). The relationships among
occupational and task-specific measures of career self-efficacy.
Journal of Career Assessment, 2, 341-351.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational develop-
ment. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies
(pp. 202-231). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Received October 23, 1995
Revision received February 26, 1996
Accepted February 26, 1996 •

Mentoring Program Available for International Scholars

APA's Committee on International Relations in Psychology is encouraging publication of inter-

national scholars' manuscripts in U.S. journals. To accomplish this initiative, the Committee is
looking for authors whose native language is not English to work with U.S. mentors. U.S. men-
tors will help authors bring manuscripts into conformity with English-language and U.S. publi-
cation standards.

The Committee also continues to update its mentor list and is looking for U.S. mentors, espe-
cially those with translating and APA journal experience. Interested individuals should contact
Marian Wood in the APA International Affairs Office, 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC
20002-4242. Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to mzw.apa@email.apa.org; Telephone:
(202) 336-6025; Fax: (202) 336-5919.