- Email: [email protected]
Job search strategies, attitudes to school and attributions about unemployment
Journal of Adolescence 1996, 19, 355–369
Job search strategies, attitudes to school and attributions about unemployment ADRIAN FURNHAM AND RICHARD RAWLES Two-hundred and seventy British final-year school-leavers completed a questionnaire battery looking at attitudes to school, attributions for unemployment, job search strategies and the perceived characteristics of an ideal job. Six varimaxrotated factor analyses were performed on each part of the six part questionnaire. In accordance with similar studies in the area, each of the questionnaire sections yielded a predictable factor structure. Higher-order factor analysis showed five clear factors, which together accounted for nearly 45% of the variance. They were labelled: self-effort strategies, fatalistic, background, extrinsic and alienated. This showed that job search strategies, career advice, employment attributions and the perceived most and least desirable features of jobs are clearly interrelated. The complexity and interrelatedness of these cognitions about work suggest they may be difficult to change. 1996 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
Introduction Widespread recession with concomitant unemployment in the industrialized western world (Europe, North America, Australasia) has created considerable problems for the first-time, job-seeking, school-leaver. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that in an increasingly difficult and competitive job market, young people have to be more sophisticated in their job search strategies (Furnham and Stacey, 1991). Part of the research impetus into this area has been the considerable rise in youth unemployment and its psychological consequences on young people (Lewis et al., 1995). Since the early 1970s, when the problem became most acute, there have been several important studies of youth unemployment (Baxter, 1975; Mair and Raffe, 1983). Many of these have looked at the same factors (health, self-esteem, causal explanations) that have been investigated in the adult population, but some have been quite specific to young people. The late 1980s and 1990s have seen a flood of studies, many of them longitudinal, which have been published by active research groups (Jackson et al., 1983; Warr and Jackson, 1985; Warr et al., 1985; Feather and O’Brien, 1986; Winefield and Tiggemann, 1989, 1990; Winefield et al., 1991; Arnold, 1994). The underlying causes of increased youth unemployment are of course manifold. They include demographic factors (change in birth rate and an extension of the school career), micro- and macro-economic changes (change in technology, different productivity agreements) and educational and training factors (the relevance and appropriateness of
Reprint requests and correspondence should be addressed to Prof. A. Furnham, Department of Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1, U.K. 0140-1971/96/040355+15/$18.00/0
1996 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
356
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
education). Changes in youth unemployment are naturally associated with changes in adult unemployment but move with a greater amplitude. It has been calculated that if the unemployment rate for males rises by 1% the unemployment rate for males under 20 (excluding school-leavers) rises by 1.7. Early career unemployment is not a critical factor in retarding personal economic growth, relative to educational background and first job experience, but may have negative, job-attitudinal consequences. Young males who are early entrants in the labour force and who spend the bulk of their work in part-time employment do as well economically and better occupationally in their later work experience than full-time employed youths. Although there have been some studies of adult explanations of unemployment (Furnham, 1982, 1983), considerably less work has gone into establishing young people’s beliefs about, and actual attempt at, getting a job. Feather and Davenport (1981) tested their expectancy-valence theory on young people. They found, as predicted, that higher motivated, more depressed unemployed youths blamed stable external factors for unemployment and rated the attractiveness of work more highly than less depressed youths. Although incompatible with learned helplessness theory, which suggests internal characterological attributions for unemployment are associated with depression (Abramson et al., 1978), the results supported their theory, which assumes that positive motivation to seek employment is the multiplicative combination of expectancy of success in getting a job and the perceived net attractiveness of unemployment. Gurney (1981) examined the attributions for the causes of unemployment in both employed and unemployed groups of school-leavers. In a first study he attempted to discover, among a population of Australian school-leavers, whether the unemployed differed in their attributions of employment from those who succeeded in getting work; and secondly, whether any differences were antecedent to, or consequent upon, unemployment. He found that unemployed males attributed both getting and not getting work significantly more to external factors, as had been found previously, but there were no differences in the female groups. Gurney suggested that the lack of differences among the female groups may be due to their lesser defensiveness and need to blame external factors for being unemployed. In a second longitudinal study students were given a twelve-item attribution for getting jobs questionnaire prior to leaving school and then approximately 4 months later. The results showed that prior to leaving school the groups did differ, yet later it was not the unemployed who changed their attribution, but the employed who shifted significantly towards a more internal set of causal ascriptions. Overall Gurney (1981) seemed unable to account for his “counter-intuitive and unexpected” findings suggesting perhaps that subjects of this age have their self-esteem based on numerous other things such as parental evaluation and peer-group’s approval, rather than exclusively on work, which is more often the case with adults. In a rather different study, Dayton (1981) examined the way in which young people looked for a job. He set out to determine what job-seeking approaches were being used by young people and what factors they found positive and useful (aids) and what negative and worthless (barriers) in a job search. Using a population of 250 young Americans, Dayton found they regarded their own positive personal attributes (personality, flexibility, academic ability) as the most important aids in their job, and external factors (labour unions, welfare and unemployment insurance, government training programmes) as least important. Employment success and satisfaction were correlated with careful analysis of which job
Job search, school and unemployment
357
suited them best, the assemblance of a placement file, letters of recommendation, and a CV, combined with persistence in the job search. Research within the framework of attribution theory would, however, lead one to make a number of predictions about school childrens’ expectations and beliefs about getting a job (Furnham, 1982, 1983), for instance, people more prone to unemployment, and the unemployed in contrast to those in jobs and unlikely to become unemployed. Furthermore, studies have shown that external attributions are to some extent protective of self-esteem in the context of achievement. Hence Furnham (1984) predicted that females more than males, and working class subjects more than middle class subjects (for whom unemployment is statistically more probable) would be prone to make more external attributions about getting a job. Further it was suggested that these attributions will also be reflected in the number and type of job search strategies adopted by young people and the barriers and aids that they consider operate in job-hunting success. Furnham thus set out to examine sex and class differences in 240 British school-leavers’ attributions about unemployment, the most and least useful job search strategies and which school course they believed most and least useful in getting a job. The results of the four different parts of this study suggest that, overall, attributions about getting a job are frequently internal (that is, to personal attributes or abilities) rather than environmental or societal factors. Confidence, perseverance and qualifications were considered to be primary factors responsible for success in finding employment, yet this is moderated by the belief that jobs are not currently available (a fact which is attributed to the government). Yet failure to get a job was rarely attributed to the personal shortcoming of the job-seeker him/herself. Thus, these results tend to support the well established, attributional finding that success is attributed to internal factors and failure to external factors. Where there were significant sex differences it was found that females were more external in their attributions than males. This conflicted with Gurney (1981), who found that unemployed males were more external in their attributions about employment than employed males, but that there were no differences between employed and unemployed females. Similarly, class differences tended to show that working class subjects tend to place more emphasis on structural or external factors (Furnham, 1982). Again, this is to be expected and is in accordance with previous literature on the topic (Furnham and Gunter, 1984). The results on the aids and barriers confirmed the findings of Dayton (1981) who found that the subjects saw their own personal attributes as the greatest aids and external factors as the biggest hindrances. Middle class school children tended to rate all job-hunting strategies as more useful than the working class, and girls showed less faith in following up specific job choices than boys. The subjects stressed the importance of summer and afterschool work for experience, but tended to rely on personal contacts rather than direct approaches to employers. Heaven (1995) recently extended this research in Australia. Respondents differentiated between self-effort (e.g. studying job trends) and external (e.g. seeking help from friends) strategies in seeking employment. Girls were found to be significantly more supportive of both these strategies than were boys. For boys and girls, self-effort strategies were observed to correlate significantly with external attributions for employment (negative association), work ethic beliefs and job value, while the correlates of external strategies differed for the two sexes. Further analyses showed that when both job search measures were regressed on the independent predictors, marked differences were noted for males and females. He
358
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
concluded that different processes may underlie the job-search behaviours of young males and females. This study aimed to extend and replicate the findings reported by Furnham (1984), Heaven (1995), Furnham and Goddard (1986) and Poole (1983). It examined not only the relationship between attributions for employment and job search strategies (Furnham, 1984; Heaven, 1995) but how they related to school attitudes, career advice and the characteristics of preferred jobs. The study concentrated on the structure and relationship between these attitudes as well as on sex differences. First it was predicted that the factor analysis of the different questionnaires would show each to be multi-faceted and to replicate earlier analyses (Furnham, 1984; Heaven, 1995). Secondly, it was predicted that at least three factors would emerge from the overall factor analysis of all the second-order factors emerging from the separate questionnaire analyses: one concerning internal attributions and stressing self-help strategies; another stressing fatalistic beliefs and a third the role of powerful others in determining job success.
Method Subjects In total, 272 subjects took part in this study of whom 100 were male and 172 female. Their mean age was 16.02 years (S.D.=2.12). Eighty-three percent reported their father to be in full-time employment and 41% their mother to be fully employed. Overall, 81% reported having siblings. They were also requested to write down the number and grade (A=5; B=4 . . . E=1) of their school qualifications (O, A levels and equivalents). Most (about 60%) of the subjects were from lower-middle and middle class backgrounds based on the reported occupations of their parents.
Questionnaire Subjects were requested to complete a five-part questionnaire. 1. Attitudes to Schools and Careers (Poole, 1983). Twenty-three items were taken from Poole’s study of expectations of life at school and transitions to the world at work. Items were selected on the basis of their applicability to the population group and research project as well as their psychometric properties. 2. Attribution for Employment (Gurney, 1981). This is a 20-item, two-part questionnaire that attempts to ascertain to what extent school-leavers believe that their ability to get work is a function of internal or external factors. It has proved a robust and sensitive measure in a number of studies (Furnham, 1984; Heaven, 1995). 3. Job Seeking Activities (Dayton, 1981). This was a two-part questionnaire developed to determine firstly, which of 30 or so activities were considered to be most useful in getting a job and secondly, which of 35 factors were considered barriers and which aids to getting a job. Although Dayton did not do much psychometric work on these scales (validity, reliability) he did administer them to two populations with comparable results and found they correlated meaningfully with employment status and satisfaction and a wide range of demographic and aptitude measures. 4. Career Advice (Poole, 1983). These were simply eight items that young people might believe they need to choose an appropriate job. The same selection criteria as noted above were used.
Job search, school and unemployment
359
5. Characteristics of a Good Job (Furnham and Goddard, 1986). This listed 19 characteristics associated with good jobs, which attempted to be comprehensive. Subjects note on a five-point (extremely important to not at all important) scale.
Procedure Subjects were obtained mainly from school open-days held by various university departments to explain the nature of their discipline. School children, mainly from the southeast of England, took part in the study. Of the 357 questionnaires distributed, 272 were returned complete making a response rate of 76%. Where possible subjects were debriefed afterwards.
Results Factor analysis Given that all the questionnaires used in this study were multi-dimensional it was decided to perform a factor-analysis of each (with varimax rotation) to ascertain their structure (Heaven, 1995).
Attitude to school questionnaire. This measure yielded a fairly clear four-factor structure that accounted for, in total, over a third of the variance. The first factor was clearly anti-school and accounted for most of the variance. Items loading on this factor suggested that school was unpleasant and of little consequence. The second factor stressed the school necessity and the importance of education. The third factor was similar to the second, generally positive about school and suggested the usefulness of schooling. The final, two-item factor, was labelled “interest” because it suggested teachers and class mates could be interesting. Attributions for unemployment. Six clear factors emerged from this analysis which accounted for nearly half of the variance. The factor structure was more complex than that found by Heaven (1995) but fairly typical of socio-economic attributions (Furnham and Stacey, 1991). The first factor suggested powerful others were the major cause of getting (or not getting) a job while the second factor stressed the importance of effort. The third factor, labelled “motivation”, was not unlike the second, concerned primarily with how hard young people pursued a job. The fourth factor was simply about luck and the final factor was labelled fatalism because of items loading on it which suggested that for societal reasons young people were essentially unlikely to get a job. Job seeking activity. Again, five clear factors emerged accounting for over 40% of the variance but with a more complex and subtle structure than that found by Heaven (1995). The first factor which accounted for about a fifth of the variance was labelled “register” because it concerned almost exclusively putting one’s name and CV on various files and registers. The second factor was labelled “research” because items loading on it were concerned with getting information on work experience. The third factor was labelled “self-analysis/training” because items loading on it concerned examining and improving personal skills. The fourth factor was labelled “government” because items concerned
360
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
contacting government agencies while the final factor was labelled “cold call” because it involved contacting a variety of potential employees. Table 1
Factor-analytic results for the attitude to school scale
A. Anti-school 10. It really doesn’t matter how well you do at school 9. Some people require education for their jobs but for most of us it is a waste of time 3. Jobs don’t depend on how well you do at school 5. People like me will find it difficult to get good jobs no matter how much education we have 13. You should not expect too much from school, for you would only be disappointed 12. I get bored and fed up with school and do not really enjoy anything connected with it 19. It should be possible to work and attend a normal school part-time (2 days a week) 1. It is not worth doing much about your career now because plans rarely work out 14. To get on in school it is best to behave like other students in class and not draw the attention of the teacher to yourself too much Eigenvalue 2.84 Variance 12.41%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.62
1.92
(0.95)
0.61 0.57
1.80 1.73
(0.87) (0.95)
0.52
2.30
(1.18)
0.52
2.32
(1.02)
0.51
1.99
(1.03)
0.47
2.89
(1.14)
0.38
1.94
(0.98)
0.33
2.42
(1.06)
0.64
2.22
(0.96)
0.56 0.54
3.91 3.41
(1.08) (1.01)
0.36
3.71
(0.93)
0.72
3.94
(0.88)
0.64
4.20
(0.86)
0.50
4.15
(0.96)
0.59 0.30
3.19 3.34
(0.97) (0.91)
B. School necessity 8. Failure in examinations ruins a person’s chances in life 4. An educated person stands a better chance in life than an uneducated person 7. A lot of schooling is necessary to avoid a dead-end job 6. Employers pay a lot of attention to school reports and examination results Eigenvalue 2.13 Variance 9.3% C. Usefulness of schooling 17. You should be able to undertake projects useful to the community as part of your school work 18. A lot of people would enjoy school more if the classes were more interesting 16. Technical and academic subjects should be offered in the same school Eigenvalue 1.07 Variance 7.3% D. Interest 23. Teachers are generally good at getting their ideas across 20. The most important thing about school is making friends Eigenvalue 1.42 Variance 6.2%
Job search, school and unemployment
Table 2
361
Factor-analytic results for the attributions for unemployment scale
A. Powerful others 42. To get a job, you need someone with influence to “put in a good word” for you 43. Going to the right school and having the right contacts is a big part of getting a job 33. Most school-leavers who have got a job had someone “pulling strings” for them 41. If you’re good looking and have lots of confidence you’ll get a job Eigenvalue 3.41 Variance 17.1%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.80
2.40
(0.99)
0.79
3.18
(1.07)
0.54 0.51
2.42 2.58
(1.04) (1.14)
0.73
2.63
(1.08)
0.70 0.65 0.49
3.82 3.29 3.30
(0.93) (1.10) (1.01)
0.71
1.99
(1.00)
0.66
2.55
(0.95)
0.57
2.01
(0.98)
0.50
2.86
(0.97)
0.75
2.41
(1.00)
0.71
2.55
(1.07)
0.63
3.14
(0.98)
0.66
3.88
(0.97)
0.59 0.55
2.36 3.39
(0.87) (0.95)
B. Effort 25. If they had better qualifications, most of the unemployed would soon get jobs 26. Most young people get jobs if they work hard, are confident and have a lot to offer 39. You can get a job if you are well qualified 34. Young people get work if they look hard and often enough Eigenvalue 2.58 Variance 12.9% C. Motivation 33. If you miss out on getting work it is because you are not good enough 31. Unemployed young people haven’t tried hard enough and don’t know how to sell themselves 40. People who haven’t got work don’t really want to work or haven’t looked hard enough 38. Young people don’t get jobs because they are not good at “putting themselves over” in applications and interviews Eigenvalue 1.43 Variance 7.2% D. Luck 36. Getting a job depends on sheer good luck 24. It is mainly a matter of luck whether a school-leaver gets a job or not 28. Getting a job is mainly a matter of being in the right place at the right time Eigenvalue 1.28 Variance 5.6% E. Fatalism 29. Unemployment is running so high because the jobs simply are not there 37. School-leavers are unemployed because older people have taken all the jobs 35. The government is to blame for young people being out of work Eigenvalue 1.12 Variance 5.6%
362
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
Barriers/aids to employment. The factor analysis revealed six factors concerned with factors that may be either, both or neither barriers or aids to employment. The first factor has items loading on it concerned mainly with demographic factors, while the second factor was mainly concerned with previous qualifications. The third factor has just two items on it which concerned chance, while the fourth factor referred to the applicant’s history. The fifth factor was clearly concerned with motivation and the final factor with the amount and type of support the person may be expected to get from various sources. Career planning. This short questionnaire yielded two factors that together accounted for two-thirds of the variance. The first factor was concerned with getting advice, the second with making contact with various sources. Table 3
Factor analysis of the job-seeking activity scale
A. Register 10. Register with a school/college placement service 8. Register with the state employment service 9. Register with a private employment service 11. Assemble a placement file of jobs going Eigenvalue 6.29 Variance 21.0%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.77 0.76 0.75 0.46
3.34 3.44 3.50 3.35
(0.81) (0.90) (0.82) (0.83)
0.75 0.64 0.61 0.53 0.43
4.08 3.78 3.87 4.07 3.37
(0.77) (0.78) (0.81) (0.78) (0.87)
0.73 0.72 0.46
3.65 3.74 3.63
(0.93) (0.89) (0.88)
0.85 0.74
2.51 2.71
(0.75) (0.82)
0.74 0.73 0.58
3.95 3.90 3.64
(0.79) (0.88) (0.87)
B. Research 25. Do summer or after-school work experience 28. Visit companies and employers to learn more 20. Do volunteer work related to chosen job 30. Find out what courses are more helpful for jobs 27. Talk to school/employment counsellor Eigenvalue 1.98 Variance 6.6% C. Self analysis/training 23. Analyse your own interests and abilities 24. Take job interview training in how to do a good job interview 25. Take vocational training Eigenvalue 1.82 Variance 6.1% D. Government 18. Take a civil service exam 19. Apply to some government agency Eigenvalue 1.62 Variance 5.4% E. Cold call 5. Write letters of enquiry 6. Telephone potential employers 7. Seek help from teachers/lecturers Eigenvalue 1.42 Variance 5.0%
Job search, school and unemployment
363
Job facet. The final questionnaire was concerned with the facets or characteristics of a desirable job. Five factors emerged that accounted for well over half the variance. Whilst the first factor had items loading on it which seemed to stress intrinsic factors, the second was clearly about extrinsic features of the job. The third factor had items loading on it which mainly concerned the independence that the job offered while the fourth factor’s Table 4
Factor analysis of barriers/aids to employment
A. Demography 11. Your sex 7. Your race 8. Employers’ attitudes towards young people 26. Your age 29. Any physical disability that you have 12. Your high job expectations Eigenvalue 4.30 Variance 13.2%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.76 0.73 0.65 0.62 0.43 0.35
2.33 2.14 2.95 2.82 2.89 3.01
(0.84) (0.90) (0.74) (0.71) (0.81) (0.71)
0.66 0.60 0.53 0.52
2.87 3.13 2.47 2.46
(0.72) (0.71) (0.72) (0.78)
0.75 0.56
3.19 2.59
(0.65) (0.86)
0.75 0.74
3.24 3.09
(0.81) (0.65)
0.77 0.66 0.43
3.34 2.95 3.48
(0.79) (0.95) (0.59)
0.74 0.56 0.52
2.17 2.46 2.83
(0.87) (0.75) (0.65)
B. Qualifications 23. Your secondary school record 13. Vocational training that you have received 28. Government sponsored employment programmes 22. Your experience in organizations (Scouts etc.) Eigenvalue 2.22 Variance 6.8% C. Chance 21. Your willingness to work part-time/odd hours 33. Chance and luck Eigenvalue 1.98 Variance 6.04% D. History 17. Your previous problems with the law 18. Your general health Eigenvalue 1.72 Variance 5.2% E. Motivation 25. Your lack of desire to find a job 6. Your not knowing what you want to do 16. Your ability to get along with bosses/co-workers Eigenvalue 1.47 Variance 4.5% F. Support 36. Attitudes of your friends about work 27. Your parents’ background and help 20. Help from friends and personal contacts Eigenvalue 1.36 Variance 4.1%
364
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
two items both referred to the extent to which the job allowed one to be of service. The final bi-polar factor referred to job involvement.
Correlational analysis and higher-order factor analysis The factor analysis of the six scales used revealed 26 sub-factors (see Tables 1–6). Following this, a factor analysis and correlational analysis was performed between the 26 factors whose scores were derived arithmetically. Table 7 shows the correlations, few of which (25 in all) were over 0.30. Predictably, some of the highest correlations were between and within section c and b, both of which were derived from the two-part, 65-item Dayton scale. However, to examine in greater detail the relationship between these factors a “higher-order” factor analysis was performed on the factor scores. Table 8 shows the five factors that resulted, accounting for nearly 45% of the variance. Two of the factors (3 and 4) had factor loadings that were derived from the same questionnaire while the others were mixed, particularly the first factor which accounted for 16% of the variance. The first factor was labelled “self-effort strategies” because items loading on it suggested that young people needed a variety of self-initiated strategies (like doing research, getting advice and cold calling). The second factor, labelled “fatalistic”, clearly suggested that getting a job was a matter of chance. The third factor was labelled “background” because items loading on it suggested that it was primarily demographic and experiential factors associated with the young person that determined whether or not they got a job. The fourth factor had items loading on it concerned with the extrinsic nature of the job they preferred and the final factor was labelled “alienated” because items loading on it suggested that the young person was essentially anti-school and anti-work. Finally a series of hierarchical regressional analyses were performed which regressed five demographic variables on to each factor. They were the subject’s sex, age, social class, number of siblings and school results. The first factor had two significant predictors (F= Table 5
Factor analysis of the career planning scale
A. Advice 1. More detailed information from school about different jobs 2. More job advice from teachers 3. More access to sources of job advice outside of school 4. More information about the types of qualifications needed for different jobs Eigenvalue 4.14 Variance 51.8%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.74 0.72 0.84
4.08 3.81 3.87
(0.78) (0.84) (0.78)
0.72
4.14
(0.81)
0.63
3.76
(0.85)
0.70 0.80 0.85
3.90 3.73 3.70
(0.85) (0.82) (0.92)
B. Contact 5. More visiting speakers in school/college from companies to tell you about different jobs 6. More opportunities to talk to employers about jobs while still at school/college 7. More discussion with careers advisors 8. More information available in career rooms or library Eigenvalue 1.02 Variance 12.9%
Job search, school and unemployment
365
5.39, (2,173), p<0.001) which accounted for 6% of the variance. This showed females (beta=0.18) with better school results (beta=0.15) were more likely to believe in self-effort strategies. The second factor had only one significant predictor (F=4.89, (1,174), p<0.05) which accounted for 4% of the variance. This suggested that younger respondents (beta= 0.16) were more likely to be fatalistic about getting a job. The third factor, background, also had only one significant predictor (F=6.40, (1,175) p<0.01) which accounted for 4% of the variance and suggested the more siblings the respondents had (beta=0.19) the more they believed this factor was important. The fourth factor yield no significant predictors. The final factor showed sex was the only important predictor (F=7.06, (1,174) p<0.01) Table 6
Factor analysis of the job facets questionnaire
A. Intrinsic 15. A job which offers plenty of training 19. A job which teaches me useful skills 14. A job which offers plenty of variety 7. A job which I really enjoy doing Eigenvalue 3.71 Variance 19.6%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.70 0.69 0.60 0.45
3.31 4.01 4.16 4.76
(0.98) (0.83) (0.84) (0.49)
0.69 0.66 0.64 0.51
3.78 4.01 4.18 3.21
(0.94) (0.85) (0.79) (0.93)
0.73 0.67 0.67 0.48
2.92 2.95 2.34 2.22
(1.12) (1.08) (0.99) (1.06)
0.88 0.87
3.88 3.46
(1.02) (1.01)
0.81
3.00
(1.10)
0.77 −0.42
3.32 4.01
(1.14) (0.83)
B. Extrinsic 2. A job which pays good money 5. A job with good promotion prospects 8. A job that offers long-term security 9. A job in which I get plenty of holiday time Eigenvalue 2.66 Variance 14.0% C. Independence 11. A job in which I can work on my own 1. A job in which I can be my own boss 12. A job with plenty of overtime 13. A job in which I can use my hands Eigenvalue 1.48 Variance 7.8% D. Service 6. A job in which I can help other people 4. A job that helps the community Eigenvalue 1.48 Variance 7.8% E. Involvement 18. A job which is not too demanding or stressful 17. A job where I don’t need to worry about the work at the end of the day 10. A job which requires me to think Eigenvalue 1.11 Variance 5.8%
AA Anti-social AB School necessity AC Usefulness of school AD Interesting at school BA Powerful others BB Effort BC Motivation BD Luck CA Register CB Research CC Self-analysis CD Government CE Cold call DA Demography DB Qualifications DC Chance DD History DE Motivation DF Support EA Advice EB Contact FA Intrinsic FB Extrinsic FC Independent FD Service FE Uninvolvement
Table 7
−0.05 0.05 −1.5** 0.23*** −0.07 0.24*** 0.35*** 0.03 −0.15** −0.04 0.16** −0.03 0.03 −0.10* 0.08 0.00 −0.08 0.11* −0.05 −0.07 0.02 0.06 0.14* 0.00 0.21***
AA
AC
−0.03 0.02 0.08 0.18*** −0.01 0.14*** 0.00 0.05 0.23*** 0.04 0.08 −0.01 0.01 −0.01 0.08 −0.05 0.09 0.00 −0.02 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.12* 0.01 0.01 0.13** −0.04 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.11* 0.15** 0.06 0.00 0.23*** 0.16** 0.09 −0.05 −0.01 0.02 0.13** 0.06 −0.06
AB
BA
0.06 0.08 0.23*** 0.18*** 0.13** 0.14** 0.36*** −0.01 0.07 −0.01 −0.11 −0.05 0.00 −0.06 0.08 0.12* −0.04 −0.19*** 0.17** 0.06 0.09 0.06 0.19*** −0.09 0.03 −0.02 0.10* −0.01 0.19** 0.06 0.01 0.00 −0.01 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.14** 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.14**
AD
−0.10* −0.09 0.06 0.09* 0.10** 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.00 −0.08 −0.01 0.06 0.13* 0.21*** 0.07 −0.09 0.15**
BB
0.20*** −0.01 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.06 −0.04 −0.03 0.09 0.00 −0.06 −0.02 0.11* 0.05 0.19*** 0.05 −0.02 0.22*** 0.03
BC
CA
CB
CC
CD
CE
−0.07 −0.20*** 0.42*** −0.04 0.27*** 0.42*** −0.05 −0.19*** 0.18*** 0.15** −0.04 0.42*** 0.43*** 0.31*** 0.19** 003 −0.01 0.05 0.11* 0.05 0.04 −0.01 0.23*** 0.37*** 0.36*** 0.27*** 0.22*** 0.38*** 0.10 0.16*** 0.19*** 0.02 0.18*** 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.07 −0.07 0.00 −0.06 0.10* 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.10* 0.08 0.02 0.05 0.21*** 0.08 0.04 0.30*** 0.42*** 0.36** 0.07 0.28*** 0.00 0.35*** 0.37*** 0.28*** 0.13** 0.28*** 0.06 0.22*** 0.33*** 0.30*** 0.06 0.31*** 0.00 0.10* 0.10* 0.00 −0.07 0.12* 0.11* 0.10* 0.00 0.04 0.10* 0.24*** 0.20*** 0.18*** 0.14** 0.09 0.04 0.16** 0.08 0.01 −0.08 −0.04 0.01 −0.09
BD
0.09 0.26*** 0.24*** 0.18*** 0.33*** 0.18** 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.13* 0.00 0.00
DA
0.17** 0.09 0.18** 0.24*** 0.31*** 0.22*** 0.15* 0.02 0.15** 0.07 0.01
DB
DD
0.13* 0.10 0.20** 0.17*** 0.18** 0.27*** 0.05 0.16*** −0.04 0.13* 0.10 0.04 0.14* 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.02
DC
0.17*** 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.10 −0.14
DE
0.13* 0.13* 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.01
DF
0.60*** 0.40*** 0.11* 0.13* 0.28*** 0.01
EA
0.40*** 0.03 0.08 0.27*** 0.00
EB
0.23*** 0.23*** 0.40*** 0.00
FA
FC
0.31*** 0.05 0.07 0.24*** −0.04
FB
−0.12*
FD
366 A. Furnham and R. Rawles
Job search, school and unemployment
367
accounting for 4% of the variance and showing that males were more alienated than females (beta=−0.20).
Discussion These results are fairly similar to those of Furnham (1984) whose comparable subjects were tested 10 years ago, and Heaven (1995) whose Australian subjects were tested more recently. The results show firstly that job-search strategies are related to other cognitions about school, the nature of work and unemployment. Both Furnham (1984) and Heaven (1995) showed strategies related to sex but Heaven (1995) also found them related to employment and unemployment attributions, work ethic beliefs and the extent to which young people value a job. This study found, in addition to attribution for unemployment, job-search strategies were related to attitudes to school, the perceived helpfulness of career advice and the perceived characteristics of good jobs. It is perhaps not surprising that job-search strategies are closely linked to school
Table 8
Higher-order varimax factor analysis of the 26 factors
Factor 1. Self-effort strategies
Alpha 0.79
Eigenvalue 4.12 Variance 15.9% EA Advice EB Contact CC Self-analysis CA Register FA Intrinsic CE Cold call DB Qualifications Factor 2. Fatalistic Alpha 0.81
0.78 0.74 0.61 0.59 0.58 0.56 0.47
Eigenvalue 2.36. Variance 9.1% BD Luck DC Chance BA Powerful others Factor 3. Background Alpha 0.88
0.81 0.63 0.61
Eigenvalue 1.82. Variance 7.1% DD History DF Support DE Motivation DA Demography Factor 4. Extrinsic
0.66 0.62 0.57 0.53
Eigenvalue 1.59. Variance 6.2% FC Independence FB Extrinsic Factor 5. Alienated
0.76 0.67
Eigenvalue 1.43. Variance 5.5% FE Involvement AA Anti-school
0.84 0.60
368
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
experiences and employment attributions. Indeed it is quite possible that employment attributions are a simple subset of general attributions which are strongly correlated with social behaviour (Furnham and Stacey, 1991). Those with internal attributions may be more likely to enjoy school, have more self-effort strategies for getting a job, be more open to career advice and value intrinsically satisfying jobs. The correlational analysis (Table 7) and the higher-order factor analysis (Table 8) show the more externally and fatalistically oriented young people are probably less likely to enjoy school, less likely to believe in the efficacy of self-effort strategies for getting a job, more cynical about career advice and also more interested in externally oriented jobs. Thus those who gave high luck attributions (BD) showed negative correlations with all the job search strategies, particularly research. It is also particularly interesting to note that self-effort strategies were associated with a preference for intrinsically satisfying jobs. Equally it was apparent from the higher-order factor analysis that anti-school attitudes were associated with jobs that required no involvement. In this sense, job-search strategies and their correlated attributions may be self-fulfilling. The motivated, qualified, young person interested in, and eager to help themselves get a job through a variety of methods including registering with a number of agencies is, no doubt, more likely to get an intrinsically satisfying job than the fatalistic and apathetic young person. These results show, secondly, that certain demographic factors are predictors of these beliefs. Both Furnham (1984) and Heaven (1995) showed strong sex effects. Heaven (1995) found females more self-effort oriented than males who, in turn were more externally oriented. Two of the regressional analyses showed sex differences. Females endorsed more strongly than males self-effort strategies and were less alienated than males. This may reflect their greater conscientiousness as well as the fact it may be more difficult for young women to find suitable jobs. It was interesting to note that school results (A level grades) were also significant predictors of self-effort strategies. Indeed it could be argued that the same underlying processes, namely the work ethic and adaptive attributions, are related to both success at school and at getting a job (Furnham, 1984). Younger subjects tended to be more fatalistic in their beliefs which may in part be due to the fact they have not mastered self-effort strategies or find the job search too difficult at their particular stage. Number of siblings was the only significant predictor of the third or background factor suggesting that the more siblings a young person has, the more they stress this factor. A variety of explanations could be put forward for this finding. First, it could be that because family size and social class are correlated it may well be that this is simply picking up a form of working class fatalism that has been reported before (Furnham, 1984). On the other hand, it may well be that young people attribute the job hunting success or failure of their siblings to external rather than internal factors, which is a manifestation of the fundamental attribution error. Few would doubt that job-search strategies, along with their academic record, job history and interview skills are major predictors of whether young people are successful or not in the increasingly difficult business of getting a job. This study showed job search strategies are closely linked to school-based attitudes, attributions about employment and the perceived social desirability of getting jobs. If these beliefs are inter-linked it may be difficult to change one aspect without changing another. It certainly suggests, however, that counselling and vocational guidance experts should pay attention to, and try to influence them. The full range of employment cognitions and behaviours held by young people need
Job search, school and unemployment
369
to be considered simultaneously. If the self-fulfilling nature of attributions occurs then it may well be that those who most need vocational and employment counselling are the least likely to seek it.
References Abramson, L., Seligman, M. and Teasdale, J. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 32–40. Arnold, J. (1994). Opportunity for skill use, job changing and unemployment as predictors of psychological well-being amongst graduates in early career. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 67, 355–370. Baxter, J. (1975). The chronic job changer: a study of youth unemployment. Social and Economic Administration, 19, 184–206. Dayton, C. (1981). The young person’s job search. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 28, 321–333. Feather, N. and Davenport, P. (1981). Unemployment and depressive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 422–436. Feather, N. and O’Brien, G. (1986). A longitudinal analysis of the effects of different patterns of employment and unemployment on school-leavers. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 459–479. Furnham, A. (1982). Explanations for unemployment in Britain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 335–352. Furnham, A (1983). Attitudes to the unemployed receiving social security. Human Relations, 36, 135–150. Furnham, A. (1984). Getting a job: school-leavers’ perception of employment prospects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 293–305. Furnham, A. and Goddard, L. (1986). Sex differences in job satisfaction. Psychologica, 29, 132–142. Furnham, A. and Gunter, B. (1984). Just world belief and attitudes towards the post. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 265–269. Furnham, A. and Stacey, B. (1991). Young Peoples’ Understanding of Society. London: Routledge. Gurney, R. (1981). Leaving school, facing unemployment and making attributions about the causes of unemployment. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 18, 79–91. Heaven, P. (1995). Job-search strategies among teenagers: attributions work beliefs and gender. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 217–278. Jackson, P., Stafford, E., Banks, M. and Warr, P. (1983). Unemployment and psychological distress in young people: the moderating of employment commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 525–535. Lewis, A., Webley, P. and Furnham, A. (1995). The New Economic Mind. Brighton: Wheatsheaf. Mair, B. and Raffe, D. (1983). The transition from school to work. British Education Research Journal, 9, 57–70. Poole, M. (1983). Youth: Expectations and Transitions. Melbourne: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Warr, P. and Jackson, P. (1985). Factors influencing the psychological impact of prolonged unemployment and of re-employment. Psychological Medicine, 15, 795–807. Warr, P., Banks, M. and Ullah, P. (1985). The experience of unemployment among black and white urban teenagers. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 75–88. Winefield, A. and Tiggemann, M. (1989). Job loss versus failure to find work as psychological stressors in the young unemployed. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 79–85. Winefield, A. and Tiggemann, M. (1990). Employment status and psychological well-being: a longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 455–459. Winefield, A., Tiggemann, M. and Winefield, H. (1991). The psychological impact of unemployment and unsatisfactory employment in young men and women: longitudinal and cross-sectional data. British Journal of Psychology, 82, 473–486.
Job search strategies, attitudes to school and attributions about unemployment ADRIAN FURNHAM AND RICHARD RAWLES Two-hundred and seventy British final-year school-leavers completed a questionnaire battery looking at attitudes to school, attributions for unemployment, job search strategies and the perceived characteristics of an ideal job. Six varimaxrotated factor analyses were performed on each part of the six part questionnaire. In accordance with similar studies in the area, each of the questionnaire sections yielded a predictable factor structure. Higher-order factor analysis showed five clear factors, which together accounted for nearly 45% of the variance. They were labelled: self-effort strategies, fatalistic, background, extrinsic and alienated. This showed that job search strategies, career advice, employment attributions and the perceived most and least desirable features of jobs are clearly interrelated. The complexity and interrelatedness of these cognitions about work suggest they may be difficult to change. 1996 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
Introduction Widespread recession with concomitant unemployment in the industrialized western world (Europe, North America, Australasia) has created considerable problems for the first-time, job-seeking, school-leaver. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that in an increasingly difficult and competitive job market, young people have to be more sophisticated in their job search strategies (Furnham and Stacey, 1991). Part of the research impetus into this area has been the considerable rise in youth unemployment and its psychological consequences on young people (Lewis et al., 1995). Since the early 1970s, when the problem became most acute, there have been several important studies of youth unemployment (Baxter, 1975; Mair and Raffe, 1983). Many of these have looked at the same factors (health, self-esteem, causal explanations) that have been investigated in the adult population, but some have been quite specific to young people. The late 1980s and 1990s have seen a flood of studies, many of them longitudinal, which have been published by active research groups (Jackson et al., 1983; Warr and Jackson, 1985; Warr et al., 1985; Feather and O’Brien, 1986; Winefield and Tiggemann, 1989, 1990; Winefield et al., 1991; Arnold, 1994). The underlying causes of increased youth unemployment are of course manifold. They include demographic factors (change in birth rate and an extension of the school career), micro- and macro-economic changes (change in technology, different productivity agreements) and educational and training factors (the relevance and appropriateness of
Reprint requests and correspondence should be addressed to Prof. A. Furnham, Department of Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1, U.K. 0140-1971/96/040355+15/$18.00/0
1996 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
356
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
education). Changes in youth unemployment are naturally associated with changes in adult unemployment but move with a greater amplitude. It has been calculated that if the unemployment rate for males rises by 1% the unemployment rate for males under 20 (excluding school-leavers) rises by 1.7. Early career unemployment is not a critical factor in retarding personal economic growth, relative to educational background and first job experience, but may have negative, job-attitudinal consequences. Young males who are early entrants in the labour force and who spend the bulk of their work in part-time employment do as well economically and better occupationally in their later work experience than full-time employed youths. Although there have been some studies of adult explanations of unemployment (Furnham, 1982, 1983), considerably less work has gone into establishing young people’s beliefs about, and actual attempt at, getting a job. Feather and Davenport (1981) tested their expectancy-valence theory on young people. They found, as predicted, that higher motivated, more depressed unemployed youths blamed stable external factors for unemployment and rated the attractiveness of work more highly than less depressed youths. Although incompatible with learned helplessness theory, which suggests internal characterological attributions for unemployment are associated with depression (Abramson et al., 1978), the results supported their theory, which assumes that positive motivation to seek employment is the multiplicative combination of expectancy of success in getting a job and the perceived net attractiveness of unemployment. Gurney (1981) examined the attributions for the causes of unemployment in both employed and unemployed groups of school-leavers. In a first study he attempted to discover, among a population of Australian school-leavers, whether the unemployed differed in their attributions of employment from those who succeeded in getting work; and secondly, whether any differences were antecedent to, or consequent upon, unemployment. He found that unemployed males attributed both getting and not getting work significantly more to external factors, as had been found previously, but there were no differences in the female groups. Gurney suggested that the lack of differences among the female groups may be due to their lesser defensiveness and need to blame external factors for being unemployed. In a second longitudinal study students were given a twelve-item attribution for getting jobs questionnaire prior to leaving school and then approximately 4 months later. The results showed that prior to leaving school the groups did differ, yet later it was not the unemployed who changed their attribution, but the employed who shifted significantly towards a more internal set of causal ascriptions. Overall Gurney (1981) seemed unable to account for his “counter-intuitive and unexpected” findings suggesting perhaps that subjects of this age have their self-esteem based on numerous other things such as parental evaluation and peer-group’s approval, rather than exclusively on work, which is more often the case with adults. In a rather different study, Dayton (1981) examined the way in which young people looked for a job. He set out to determine what job-seeking approaches were being used by young people and what factors they found positive and useful (aids) and what negative and worthless (barriers) in a job search. Using a population of 250 young Americans, Dayton found they regarded their own positive personal attributes (personality, flexibility, academic ability) as the most important aids in their job, and external factors (labour unions, welfare and unemployment insurance, government training programmes) as least important. Employment success and satisfaction were correlated with careful analysis of which job
Job search, school and unemployment
357
suited them best, the assemblance of a placement file, letters of recommendation, and a CV, combined with persistence in the job search. Research within the framework of attribution theory would, however, lead one to make a number of predictions about school childrens’ expectations and beliefs about getting a job (Furnham, 1982, 1983), for instance, people more prone to unemployment, and the unemployed in contrast to those in jobs and unlikely to become unemployed. Furthermore, studies have shown that external attributions are to some extent protective of self-esteem in the context of achievement. Hence Furnham (1984) predicted that females more than males, and working class subjects more than middle class subjects (for whom unemployment is statistically more probable) would be prone to make more external attributions about getting a job. Further it was suggested that these attributions will also be reflected in the number and type of job search strategies adopted by young people and the barriers and aids that they consider operate in job-hunting success. Furnham thus set out to examine sex and class differences in 240 British school-leavers’ attributions about unemployment, the most and least useful job search strategies and which school course they believed most and least useful in getting a job. The results of the four different parts of this study suggest that, overall, attributions about getting a job are frequently internal (that is, to personal attributes or abilities) rather than environmental or societal factors. Confidence, perseverance and qualifications were considered to be primary factors responsible for success in finding employment, yet this is moderated by the belief that jobs are not currently available (a fact which is attributed to the government). Yet failure to get a job was rarely attributed to the personal shortcoming of the job-seeker him/herself. Thus, these results tend to support the well established, attributional finding that success is attributed to internal factors and failure to external factors. Where there were significant sex differences it was found that females were more external in their attributions than males. This conflicted with Gurney (1981), who found that unemployed males were more external in their attributions about employment than employed males, but that there were no differences between employed and unemployed females. Similarly, class differences tended to show that working class subjects tend to place more emphasis on structural or external factors (Furnham, 1982). Again, this is to be expected and is in accordance with previous literature on the topic (Furnham and Gunter, 1984). The results on the aids and barriers confirmed the findings of Dayton (1981) who found that the subjects saw their own personal attributes as the greatest aids and external factors as the biggest hindrances. Middle class school children tended to rate all job-hunting strategies as more useful than the working class, and girls showed less faith in following up specific job choices than boys. The subjects stressed the importance of summer and afterschool work for experience, but tended to rely on personal contacts rather than direct approaches to employers. Heaven (1995) recently extended this research in Australia. Respondents differentiated between self-effort (e.g. studying job trends) and external (e.g. seeking help from friends) strategies in seeking employment. Girls were found to be significantly more supportive of both these strategies than were boys. For boys and girls, self-effort strategies were observed to correlate significantly with external attributions for employment (negative association), work ethic beliefs and job value, while the correlates of external strategies differed for the two sexes. Further analyses showed that when both job search measures were regressed on the independent predictors, marked differences were noted for males and females. He
358
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
concluded that different processes may underlie the job-search behaviours of young males and females. This study aimed to extend and replicate the findings reported by Furnham (1984), Heaven (1995), Furnham and Goddard (1986) and Poole (1983). It examined not only the relationship between attributions for employment and job search strategies (Furnham, 1984; Heaven, 1995) but how they related to school attitudes, career advice and the characteristics of preferred jobs. The study concentrated on the structure and relationship between these attitudes as well as on sex differences. First it was predicted that the factor analysis of the different questionnaires would show each to be multi-faceted and to replicate earlier analyses (Furnham, 1984; Heaven, 1995). Secondly, it was predicted that at least three factors would emerge from the overall factor analysis of all the second-order factors emerging from the separate questionnaire analyses: one concerning internal attributions and stressing self-help strategies; another stressing fatalistic beliefs and a third the role of powerful others in determining job success.
Method Subjects In total, 272 subjects took part in this study of whom 100 were male and 172 female. Their mean age was 16.02 years (S.D.=2.12). Eighty-three percent reported their father to be in full-time employment and 41% their mother to be fully employed. Overall, 81% reported having siblings. They were also requested to write down the number and grade (A=5; B=4 . . . E=1) of their school qualifications (O, A levels and equivalents). Most (about 60%) of the subjects were from lower-middle and middle class backgrounds based on the reported occupations of their parents.
Questionnaire Subjects were requested to complete a five-part questionnaire. 1. Attitudes to Schools and Careers (Poole, 1983). Twenty-three items were taken from Poole’s study of expectations of life at school and transitions to the world at work. Items were selected on the basis of their applicability to the population group and research project as well as their psychometric properties. 2. Attribution for Employment (Gurney, 1981). This is a 20-item, two-part questionnaire that attempts to ascertain to what extent school-leavers believe that their ability to get work is a function of internal or external factors. It has proved a robust and sensitive measure in a number of studies (Furnham, 1984; Heaven, 1995). 3. Job Seeking Activities (Dayton, 1981). This was a two-part questionnaire developed to determine firstly, which of 30 or so activities were considered to be most useful in getting a job and secondly, which of 35 factors were considered barriers and which aids to getting a job. Although Dayton did not do much psychometric work on these scales (validity, reliability) he did administer them to two populations with comparable results and found they correlated meaningfully with employment status and satisfaction and a wide range of demographic and aptitude measures. 4. Career Advice (Poole, 1983). These were simply eight items that young people might believe they need to choose an appropriate job. The same selection criteria as noted above were used.
Job search, school and unemployment
359
5. Characteristics of a Good Job (Furnham and Goddard, 1986). This listed 19 characteristics associated with good jobs, which attempted to be comprehensive. Subjects note on a five-point (extremely important to not at all important) scale.
Procedure Subjects were obtained mainly from school open-days held by various university departments to explain the nature of their discipline. School children, mainly from the southeast of England, took part in the study. Of the 357 questionnaires distributed, 272 were returned complete making a response rate of 76%. Where possible subjects were debriefed afterwards.
Results Factor analysis Given that all the questionnaires used in this study were multi-dimensional it was decided to perform a factor-analysis of each (with varimax rotation) to ascertain their structure (Heaven, 1995).
Attitude to school questionnaire. This measure yielded a fairly clear four-factor structure that accounted for, in total, over a third of the variance. The first factor was clearly anti-school and accounted for most of the variance. Items loading on this factor suggested that school was unpleasant and of little consequence. The second factor stressed the school necessity and the importance of education. The third factor was similar to the second, generally positive about school and suggested the usefulness of schooling. The final, two-item factor, was labelled “interest” because it suggested teachers and class mates could be interesting. Attributions for unemployment. Six clear factors emerged from this analysis which accounted for nearly half of the variance. The factor structure was more complex than that found by Heaven (1995) but fairly typical of socio-economic attributions (Furnham and Stacey, 1991). The first factor suggested powerful others were the major cause of getting (or not getting) a job while the second factor stressed the importance of effort. The third factor, labelled “motivation”, was not unlike the second, concerned primarily with how hard young people pursued a job. The fourth factor was simply about luck and the final factor was labelled fatalism because of items loading on it which suggested that for societal reasons young people were essentially unlikely to get a job. Job seeking activity. Again, five clear factors emerged accounting for over 40% of the variance but with a more complex and subtle structure than that found by Heaven (1995). The first factor which accounted for about a fifth of the variance was labelled “register” because it concerned almost exclusively putting one’s name and CV on various files and registers. The second factor was labelled “research” because items loading on it were concerned with getting information on work experience. The third factor was labelled “self-analysis/training” because items loading on it concerned examining and improving personal skills. The fourth factor was labelled “government” because items concerned
360
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
contacting government agencies while the final factor was labelled “cold call” because it involved contacting a variety of potential employees. Table 1
Factor-analytic results for the attitude to school scale
A. Anti-school 10. It really doesn’t matter how well you do at school 9. Some people require education for their jobs but for most of us it is a waste of time 3. Jobs don’t depend on how well you do at school 5. People like me will find it difficult to get good jobs no matter how much education we have 13. You should not expect too much from school, for you would only be disappointed 12. I get bored and fed up with school and do not really enjoy anything connected with it 19. It should be possible to work and attend a normal school part-time (2 days a week) 1. It is not worth doing much about your career now because plans rarely work out 14. To get on in school it is best to behave like other students in class and not draw the attention of the teacher to yourself too much Eigenvalue 2.84 Variance 12.41%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.62
1.92
(0.95)
0.61 0.57
1.80 1.73
(0.87) (0.95)
0.52
2.30
(1.18)
0.52
2.32
(1.02)
0.51
1.99
(1.03)
0.47
2.89
(1.14)
0.38
1.94
(0.98)
0.33
2.42
(1.06)
0.64
2.22
(0.96)
0.56 0.54
3.91 3.41
(1.08) (1.01)
0.36
3.71
(0.93)
0.72
3.94
(0.88)
0.64
4.20
(0.86)
0.50
4.15
(0.96)
0.59 0.30
3.19 3.34
(0.97) (0.91)
B. School necessity 8. Failure in examinations ruins a person’s chances in life 4. An educated person stands a better chance in life than an uneducated person 7. A lot of schooling is necessary to avoid a dead-end job 6. Employers pay a lot of attention to school reports and examination results Eigenvalue 2.13 Variance 9.3% C. Usefulness of schooling 17. You should be able to undertake projects useful to the community as part of your school work 18. A lot of people would enjoy school more if the classes were more interesting 16. Technical and academic subjects should be offered in the same school Eigenvalue 1.07 Variance 7.3% D. Interest 23. Teachers are generally good at getting their ideas across 20. The most important thing about school is making friends Eigenvalue 1.42 Variance 6.2%
Job search, school and unemployment
Table 2
361
Factor-analytic results for the attributions for unemployment scale
A. Powerful others 42. To get a job, you need someone with influence to “put in a good word” for you 43. Going to the right school and having the right contacts is a big part of getting a job 33. Most school-leavers who have got a job had someone “pulling strings” for them 41. If you’re good looking and have lots of confidence you’ll get a job Eigenvalue 3.41 Variance 17.1%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.80
2.40
(0.99)
0.79
3.18
(1.07)
0.54 0.51
2.42 2.58
(1.04) (1.14)
0.73
2.63
(1.08)
0.70 0.65 0.49
3.82 3.29 3.30
(0.93) (1.10) (1.01)
0.71
1.99
(1.00)
0.66
2.55
(0.95)
0.57
2.01
(0.98)
0.50
2.86
(0.97)
0.75
2.41
(1.00)
0.71
2.55
(1.07)
0.63
3.14
(0.98)
0.66
3.88
(0.97)
0.59 0.55
2.36 3.39
(0.87) (0.95)
B. Effort 25. If they had better qualifications, most of the unemployed would soon get jobs 26. Most young people get jobs if they work hard, are confident and have a lot to offer 39. You can get a job if you are well qualified 34. Young people get work if they look hard and often enough Eigenvalue 2.58 Variance 12.9% C. Motivation 33. If you miss out on getting work it is because you are not good enough 31. Unemployed young people haven’t tried hard enough and don’t know how to sell themselves 40. People who haven’t got work don’t really want to work or haven’t looked hard enough 38. Young people don’t get jobs because they are not good at “putting themselves over” in applications and interviews Eigenvalue 1.43 Variance 7.2% D. Luck 36. Getting a job depends on sheer good luck 24. It is mainly a matter of luck whether a school-leaver gets a job or not 28. Getting a job is mainly a matter of being in the right place at the right time Eigenvalue 1.28 Variance 5.6% E. Fatalism 29. Unemployment is running so high because the jobs simply are not there 37. School-leavers are unemployed because older people have taken all the jobs 35. The government is to blame for young people being out of work Eigenvalue 1.12 Variance 5.6%
362
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
Barriers/aids to employment. The factor analysis revealed six factors concerned with factors that may be either, both or neither barriers or aids to employment. The first factor has items loading on it concerned mainly with demographic factors, while the second factor was mainly concerned with previous qualifications. The third factor has just two items on it which concerned chance, while the fourth factor referred to the applicant’s history. The fifth factor was clearly concerned with motivation and the final factor with the amount and type of support the person may be expected to get from various sources. Career planning. This short questionnaire yielded two factors that together accounted for two-thirds of the variance. The first factor was concerned with getting advice, the second with making contact with various sources. Table 3
Factor analysis of the job-seeking activity scale
A. Register 10. Register with a school/college placement service 8. Register with the state employment service 9. Register with a private employment service 11. Assemble a placement file of jobs going Eigenvalue 6.29 Variance 21.0%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.77 0.76 0.75 0.46
3.34 3.44 3.50 3.35
(0.81) (0.90) (0.82) (0.83)
0.75 0.64 0.61 0.53 0.43
4.08 3.78 3.87 4.07 3.37
(0.77) (0.78) (0.81) (0.78) (0.87)
0.73 0.72 0.46
3.65 3.74 3.63
(0.93) (0.89) (0.88)
0.85 0.74
2.51 2.71
(0.75) (0.82)
0.74 0.73 0.58
3.95 3.90 3.64
(0.79) (0.88) (0.87)
B. Research 25. Do summer or after-school work experience 28. Visit companies and employers to learn more 20. Do volunteer work related to chosen job 30. Find out what courses are more helpful for jobs 27. Talk to school/employment counsellor Eigenvalue 1.98 Variance 6.6% C. Self analysis/training 23. Analyse your own interests and abilities 24. Take job interview training in how to do a good job interview 25. Take vocational training Eigenvalue 1.82 Variance 6.1% D. Government 18. Take a civil service exam 19. Apply to some government agency Eigenvalue 1.62 Variance 5.4% E. Cold call 5. Write letters of enquiry 6. Telephone potential employers 7. Seek help from teachers/lecturers Eigenvalue 1.42 Variance 5.0%
Job search, school and unemployment
363
Job facet. The final questionnaire was concerned with the facets or characteristics of a desirable job. Five factors emerged that accounted for well over half the variance. Whilst the first factor had items loading on it which seemed to stress intrinsic factors, the second was clearly about extrinsic features of the job. The third factor had items loading on it which mainly concerned the independence that the job offered while the fourth factor’s Table 4
Factor analysis of barriers/aids to employment
A. Demography 11. Your sex 7. Your race 8. Employers’ attitudes towards young people 26. Your age 29. Any physical disability that you have 12. Your high job expectations Eigenvalue 4.30 Variance 13.2%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.76 0.73 0.65 0.62 0.43 0.35
2.33 2.14 2.95 2.82 2.89 3.01
(0.84) (0.90) (0.74) (0.71) (0.81) (0.71)
0.66 0.60 0.53 0.52
2.87 3.13 2.47 2.46
(0.72) (0.71) (0.72) (0.78)
0.75 0.56
3.19 2.59
(0.65) (0.86)
0.75 0.74
3.24 3.09
(0.81) (0.65)
0.77 0.66 0.43
3.34 2.95 3.48
(0.79) (0.95) (0.59)
0.74 0.56 0.52
2.17 2.46 2.83
(0.87) (0.75) (0.65)
B. Qualifications 23. Your secondary school record 13. Vocational training that you have received 28. Government sponsored employment programmes 22. Your experience in organizations (Scouts etc.) Eigenvalue 2.22 Variance 6.8% C. Chance 21. Your willingness to work part-time/odd hours 33. Chance and luck Eigenvalue 1.98 Variance 6.04% D. History 17. Your previous problems with the law 18. Your general health Eigenvalue 1.72 Variance 5.2% E. Motivation 25. Your lack of desire to find a job 6. Your not knowing what you want to do 16. Your ability to get along with bosses/co-workers Eigenvalue 1.47 Variance 4.5% F. Support 36. Attitudes of your friends about work 27. Your parents’ background and help 20. Help from friends and personal contacts Eigenvalue 1.36 Variance 4.1%
364
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
two items both referred to the extent to which the job allowed one to be of service. The final bi-polar factor referred to job involvement.
Correlational analysis and higher-order factor analysis The factor analysis of the six scales used revealed 26 sub-factors (see Tables 1–6). Following this, a factor analysis and correlational analysis was performed between the 26 factors whose scores were derived arithmetically. Table 7 shows the correlations, few of which (25 in all) were over 0.30. Predictably, some of the highest correlations were between and within section c and b, both of which were derived from the two-part, 65-item Dayton scale. However, to examine in greater detail the relationship between these factors a “higher-order” factor analysis was performed on the factor scores. Table 8 shows the five factors that resulted, accounting for nearly 45% of the variance. Two of the factors (3 and 4) had factor loadings that were derived from the same questionnaire while the others were mixed, particularly the first factor which accounted for 16% of the variance. The first factor was labelled “self-effort strategies” because items loading on it suggested that young people needed a variety of self-initiated strategies (like doing research, getting advice and cold calling). The second factor, labelled “fatalistic”, clearly suggested that getting a job was a matter of chance. The third factor was labelled “background” because items loading on it suggested that it was primarily demographic and experiential factors associated with the young person that determined whether or not they got a job. The fourth factor had items loading on it concerned with the extrinsic nature of the job they preferred and the final factor was labelled “alienated” because items loading on it suggested that the young person was essentially anti-school and anti-work. Finally a series of hierarchical regressional analyses were performed which regressed five demographic variables on to each factor. They were the subject’s sex, age, social class, number of siblings and school results. The first factor had two significant predictors (F= Table 5
Factor analysis of the career planning scale
A. Advice 1. More detailed information from school about different jobs 2. More job advice from teachers 3. More access to sources of job advice outside of school 4. More information about the types of qualifications needed for different jobs Eigenvalue 4.14 Variance 51.8%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.74 0.72 0.84
4.08 3.81 3.87
(0.78) (0.84) (0.78)
0.72
4.14
(0.81)
0.63
3.76
(0.85)
0.70 0.80 0.85
3.90 3.73 3.70
(0.85) (0.82) (0.92)
B. Contact 5. More visiting speakers in school/college from companies to tell you about different jobs 6. More opportunities to talk to employers about jobs while still at school/college 7. More discussion with careers advisors 8. More information available in career rooms or library Eigenvalue 1.02 Variance 12.9%
Job search, school and unemployment
365
5.39, (2,173), p<0.001) which accounted for 6% of the variance. This showed females (beta=0.18) with better school results (beta=0.15) were more likely to believe in self-effort strategies. The second factor had only one significant predictor (F=4.89, (1,174), p<0.05) which accounted for 4% of the variance. This suggested that younger respondents (beta= 0.16) were more likely to be fatalistic about getting a job. The third factor, background, also had only one significant predictor (F=6.40, (1,175) p<0.01) which accounted for 4% of the variance and suggested the more siblings the respondents had (beta=0.19) the more they believed this factor was important. The fourth factor yield no significant predictors. The final factor showed sex was the only important predictor (F=7.06, (1,174) p<0.01) Table 6
Factor analysis of the job facets questionnaire
A. Intrinsic 15. A job which offers plenty of training 19. A job which teaches me useful skills 14. A job which offers plenty of variety 7. A job which I really enjoy doing Eigenvalue 3.71 Variance 19.6%
Loading
Mean
S.D.
0.70 0.69 0.60 0.45
3.31 4.01 4.16 4.76
(0.98) (0.83) (0.84) (0.49)
0.69 0.66 0.64 0.51
3.78 4.01 4.18 3.21
(0.94) (0.85) (0.79) (0.93)
0.73 0.67 0.67 0.48
2.92 2.95 2.34 2.22
(1.12) (1.08) (0.99) (1.06)
0.88 0.87
3.88 3.46
(1.02) (1.01)
0.81
3.00
(1.10)
0.77 −0.42
3.32 4.01
(1.14) (0.83)
B. Extrinsic 2. A job which pays good money 5. A job with good promotion prospects 8. A job that offers long-term security 9. A job in which I get plenty of holiday time Eigenvalue 2.66 Variance 14.0% C. Independence 11. A job in which I can work on my own 1. A job in which I can be my own boss 12. A job with plenty of overtime 13. A job in which I can use my hands Eigenvalue 1.48 Variance 7.8% D. Service 6. A job in which I can help other people 4. A job that helps the community Eigenvalue 1.48 Variance 7.8% E. Involvement 18. A job which is not too demanding or stressful 17. A job where I don’t need to worry about the work at the end of the day 10. A job which requires me to think Eigenvalue 1.11 Variance 5.8%
AA Anti-social AB School necessity AC Usefulness of school AD Interesting at school BA Powerful others BB Effort BC Motivation BD Luck CA Register CB Research CC Self-analysis CD Government CE Cold call DA Demography DB Qualifications DC Chance DD History DE Motivation DF Support EA Advice EB Contact FA Intrinsic FB Extrinsic FC Independent FD Service FE Uninvolvement
Table 7
−0.05 0.05 −1.5** 0.23*** −0.07 0.24*** 0.35*** 0.03 −0.15** −0.04 0.16** −0.03 0.03 −0.10* 0.08 0.00 −0.08 0.11* −0.05 −0.07 0.02 0.06 0.14* 0.00 0.21***
AA
AC
−0.03 0.02 0.08 0.18*** −0.01 0.14*** 0.00 0.05 0.23*** 0.04 0.08 −0.01 0.01 −0.01 0.08 −0.05 0.09 0.00 −0.02 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.12* 0.01 0.01 0.13** −0.04 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.11* 0.15** 0.06 0.00 0.23*** 0.16** 0.09 −0.05 −0.01 0.02 0.13** 0.06 −0.06
AB
BA
0.06 0.08 0.23*** 0.18*** 0.13** 0.14** 0.36*** −0.01 0.07 −0.01 −0.11 −0.05 0.00 −0.06 0.08 0.12* −0.04 −0.19*** 0.17** 0.06 0.09 0.06 0.19*** −0.09 0.03 −0.02 0.10* −0.01 0.19** 0.06 0.01 0.00 −0.01 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.14** 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.14**
AD
−0.10* −0.09 0.06 0.09* 0.10** 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.00 −0.08 −0.01 0.06 0.13* 0.21*** 0.07 −0.09 0.15**
BB
0.20*** −0.01 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.06 −0.04 −0.03 0.09 0.00 −0.06 −0.02 0.11* 0.05 0.19*** 0.05 −0.02 0.22*** 0.03
BC
CA
CB
CC
CD
CE
−0.07 −0.20*** 0.42*** −0.04 0.27*** 0.42*** −0.05 −0.19*** 0.18*** 0.15** −0.04 0.42*** 0.43*** 0.31*** 0.19** 003 −0.01 0.05 0.11* 0.05 0.04 −0.01 0.23*** 0.37*** 0.36*** 0.27*** 0.22*** 0.38*** 0.10 0.16*** 0.19*** 0.02 0.18*** 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.07 −0.07 0.00 −0.06 0.10* 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.10* 0.08 0.02 0.05 0.21*** 0.08 0.04 0.30*** 0.42*** 0.36** 0.07 0.28*** 0.00 0.35*** 0.37*** 0.28*** 0.13** 0.28*** 0.06 0.22*** 0.33*** 0.30*** 0.06 0.31*** 0.00 0.10* 0.10* 0.00 −0.07 0.12* 0.11* 0.10* 0.00 0.04 0.10* 0.24*** 0.20*** 0.18*** 0.14** 0.09 0.04 0.16** 0.08 0.01 −0.08 −0.04 0.01 −0.09
BD
0.09 0.26*** 0.24*** 0.18*** 0.33*** 0.18** 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.13* 0.00 0.00
DA
0.17** 0.09 0.18** 0.24*** 0.31*** 0.22*** 0.15* 0.02 0.15** 0.07 0.01
DB
DD
0.13* 0.10 0.20** 0.17*** 0.18** 0.27*** 0.05 0.16*** −0.04 0.13* 0.10 0.04 0.14* 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.02
DC
0.17*** 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.10 −0.14
DE
0.13* 0.13* 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.01
DF
0.60*** 0.40*** 0.11* 0.13* 0.28*** 0.01
EA
0.40*** 0.03 0.08 0.27*** 0.00
EB
0.23*** 0.23*** 0.40*** 0.00
FA
FC
0.31*** 0.05 0.07 0.24*** −0.04
FB
−0.12*
FD
366 A. Furnham and R. Rawles
Job search, school and unemployment
367
accounting for 4% of the variance and showing that males were more alienated than females (beta=−0.20).
Discussion These results are fairly similar to those of Furnham (1984) whose comparable subjects were tested 10 years ago, and Heaven (1995) whose Australian subjects were tested more recently. The results show firstly that job-search strategies are related to other cognitions about school, the nature of work and unemployment. Both Furnham (1984) and Heaven (1995) showed strategies related to sex but Heaven (1995) also found them related to employment and unemployment attributions, work ethic beliefs and the extent to which young people value a job. This study found, in addition to attribution for unemployment, job-search strategies were related to attitudes to school, the perceived helpfulness of career advice and the perceived characteristics of good jobs. It is perhaps not surprising that job-search strategies are closely linked to school
Table 8
Higher-order varimax factor analysis of the 26 factors
Factor 1. Self-effort strategies
Alpha 0.79
Eigenvalue 4.12 Variance 15.9% EA Advice EB Contact CC Self-analysis CA Register FA Intrinsic CE Cold call DB Qualifications Factor 2. Fatalistic Alpha 0.81
0.78 0.74 0.61 0.59 0.58 0.56 0.47
Eigenvalue 2.36. Variance 9.1% BD Luck DC Chance BA Powerful others Factor 3. Background Alpha 0.88
0.81 0.63 0.61
Eigenvalue 1.82. Variance 7.1% DD History DF Support DE Motivation DA Demography Factor 4. Extrinsic
0.66 0.62 0.57 0.53
Eigenvalue 1.59. Variance 6.2% FC Independence FB Extrinsic Factor 5. Alienated
0.76 0.67
Eigenvalue 1.43. Variance 5.5% FE Involvement AA Anti-school
0.84 0.60
368
A. Furnham and R. Rawles
experiences and employment attributions. Indeed it is quite possible that employment attributions are a simple subset of general attributions which are strongly correlated with social behaviour (Furnham and Stacey, 1991). Those with internal attributions may be more likely to enjoy school, have more self-effort strategies for getting a job, be more open to career advice and value intrinsically satisfying jobs. The correlational analysis (Table 7) and the higher-order factor analysis (Table 8) show the more externally and fatalistically oriented young people are probably less likely to enjoy school, less likely to believe in the efficacy of self-effort strategies for getting a job, more cynical about career advice and also more interested in externally oriented jobs. Thus those who gave high luck attributions (BD) showed negative correlations with all the job search strategies, particularly research. It is also particularly interesting to note that self-effort strategies were associated with a preference for intrinsically satisfying jobs. Equally it was apparent from the higher-order factor analysis that anti-school attitudes were associated with jobs that required no involvement. In this sense, job-search strategies and their correlated attributions may be self-fulfilling. The motivated, qualified, young person interested in, and eager to help themselves get a job through a variety of methods including registering with a number of agencies is, no doubt, more likely to get an intrinsically satisfying job than the fatalistic and apathetic young person. These results show, secondly, that certain demographic factors are predictors of these beliefs. Both Furnham (1984) and Heaven (1995) showed strong sex effects. Heaven (1995) found females more self-effort oriented than males who, in turn were more externally oriented. Two of the regressional analyses showed sex differences. Females endorsed more strongly than males self-effort strategies and were less alienated than males. This may reflect their greater conscientiousness as well as the fact it may be more difficult for young women to find suitable jobs. It was interesting to note that school results (A level grades) were also significant predictors of self-effort strategies. Indeed it could be argued that the same underlying processes, namely the work ethic and adaptive attributions, are related to both success at school and at getting a job (Furnham, 1984). Younger subjects tended to be more fatalistic in their beliefs which may in part be due to the fact they have not mastered self-effort strategies or find the job search too difficult at their particular stage. Number of siblings was the only significant predictor of the third or background factor suggesting that the more siblings a young person has, the more they stress this factor. A variety of explanations could be put forward for this finding. First, it could be that because family size and social class are correlated it may well be that this is simply picking up a form of working class fatalism that has been reported before (Furnham, 1984). On the other hand, it may well be that young people attribute the job hunting success or failure of their siblings to external rather than internal factors, which is a manifestation of the fundamental attribution error. Few would doubt that job-search strategies, along with their academic record, job history and interview skills are major predictors of whether young people are successful or not in the increasingly difficult business of getting a job. This study showed job search strategies are closely linked to school-based attitudes, attributions about employment and the perceived social desirability of getting jobs. If these beliefs are inter-linked it may be difficult to change one aspect without changing another. It certainly suggests, however, that counselling and vocational guidance experts should pay attention to, and try to influence them. The full range of employment cognitions and behaviours held by young people need
Job search, school and unemployment
369
to be considered simultaneously. If the self-fulfilling nature of attributions occurs then it may well be that those who most need vocational and employment counselling are the least likely to seek it.
References Abramson, L., Seligman, M. and Teasdale, J. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 32–40. Arnold, J. (1994). Opportunity for skill use, job changing and unemployment as predictors of psychological well-being amongst graduates in early career. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 67, 355–370. Baxter, J. (1975). The chronic job changer: a study of youth unemployment. Social and Economic Administration, 19, 184–206. Dayton, C. (1981). The young person’s job search. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 28, 321–333. Feather, N. and Davenport, P. (1981). Unemployment and depressive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 422–436. Feather, N. and O’Brien, G. (1986). A longitudinal analysis of the effects of different patterns of employment and unemployment on school-leavers. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 459–479. Furnham, A. (1982). Explanations for unemployment in Britain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 335–352. Furnham, A (1983). Attitudes to the unemployed receiving social security. Human Relations, 36, 135–150. Furnham, A. (1984). Getting a job: school-leavers’ perception of employment prospects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 293–305. Furnham, A. and Goddard, L. (1986). Sex differences in job satisfaction. Psychologica, 29, 132–142. Furnham, A. and Gunter, B. (1984). Just world belief and attitudes towards the post. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 265–269. Furnham, A. and Stacey, B. (1991). Young Peoples’ Understanding of Society. London: Routledge. Gurney, R. (1981). Leaving school, facing unemployment and making attributions about the causes of unemployment. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 18, 79–91. Heaven, P. (1995). Job-search strategies among teenagers: attributions work beliefs and gender. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 217–278. Jackson, P., Stafford, E., Banks, M. and Warr, P. (1983). Unemployment and psychological distress in young people: the moderating of employment commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 525–535. Lewis, A., Webley, P. and Furnham, A. (1995). The New Economic Mind. Brighton: Wheatsheaf. Mair, B. and Raffe, D. (1983). The transition from school to work. British Education Research Journal, 9, 57–70. Poole, M. (1983). Youth: Expectations and Transitions. Melbourne: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Warr, P. and Jackson, P. (1985). Factors influencing the psychological impact of prolonged unemployment and of re-employment. Psychological Medicine, 15, 795–807. Warr, P., Banks, M. and Ullah, P. (1985). The experience of unemployment among black and white urban teenagers. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 75–88. Winefield, A. and Tiggemann, M. (1989). Job loss versus failure to find work as psychological stressors in the young unemployed. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 79–85. Winefield, A. and Tiggemann, M. (1990). Employment status and psychological well-being: a longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 455–459. Winefield, A., Tiggemann, M. and Winefield, H. (1991). The psychological impact of unemployment and unsatisfactory employment in young men and women: longitudinal and cross-sectional data. British Journal of Psychology, 82, 473–486.