| Literature DB >> 24555701 |
Wei Xiao1, Liang Zhou1, Qing Wu2, Yan Zhang1, Danmin Miao1, Jiaxi Zhang1, Jiaxi Peng1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: How the career commitment of medical university students can be improved is an underinvestigated topic. AIM: This experimental study aims to explore the factors that influence career commitment of medical university students.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24555701 PMCID: PMC3996082 DOI: 10.1186/1752-4458-8-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst ISSN: 1752-4458
Vocational value-career fit ( = 167)
| Reputation and status | 3.179 ± 0.63 | 2.91 ± 0.79 | 4.659*** |
| Self development | 3.805 ± 0.60 | 3.10 ± 0.70 | 12.181*** |
| Basic security | 3.80 ± 0.71 | 3.41 ± 0.56 | 6.500*** |
Note: ***, p < 0.001.
Three dimensions of demands-supplies differences ( = 167)
| 0.27 ± 0.745 | 0.387 ± 0.76 | 0.72 ± 0.77 | 24.416*** |
Note: ***, p < 0.001.
Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis of variables ( = 167)
| 1. Reputation unfitness | | 0.227** | 0.175* | 0.179* | −0.015 | −0.07 | −0.155* | 0 | −0.143 |
| 2. Basic security unfitness | | | 0.575*** | 0.351*** | −0.357*** | −0.227** | −0.402*** | 0.005 | −0.408*** |
| 3. Development unfitness | | | | 0.385*** | −0.404*** | −0.181* | −0.527*** | −0.082 | −0.495*** |
| 4. State anxiety | | | | | −0.629*** | −0.518*** | −0.583*** | 0.148 | −0.465*** |
| 5. Career satisfaction | | | | | 0.424*** | 0.672** | −0.001 | 0.543** | |
| 6. Core self evaluations | | | | | | 0.381*** | −0.312*** | 0.337** | |
| 7. Affective commitment | | | | | | | | 0.037 | 0.740*** |
| 8. Cost commitment | | | | | | | | | 0.118 |
| 9. Normative commitment | | | | | | | | | |
| Mean | 0.27 | 0.38 | 0.72 | 2.50 | 3.54 | 3.11 | 3.65 | 2.91 | 3.80 |
| SD | 0.74 | 0.76 | 0.77 | 0.44 | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.80 | 0.67 | 0.67 |
Note: *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.
Stepwise regression of affective commitment
| Personal variables | | | | | | | | | |
| Development unfitness | | −0.424*** | | | | −0.307*** | −0.249*** | | |
| Core self evaluations | | | 0.277*** | | | | | 0.069 | 1.137 |
| Anxiety | | | | −0.503*** | | −0.408*** | | −0.469*** | |
| Career satisfaction | | | | | 0.591*** | | 0.509*** | | 8.958*** |
| 0.174*** | 0.37*** | 0.24*** | 0.379*** | 0.495*** | 0.452*** | 0.541*** | 0.378*** | 0.496*** | |
| 0.174*** | 0.151*** | 0.066*** | 0.197*** | 0.306*** | 0.269*** | 0.352*** | 0.200*** | 0.310*** |
Note: ***, p < 0.001.
Stepwise regression of normative commitment
| Personal variables | | | | | | | | | |
| Development unfitness | | −0.416*** | | | | −0.334*** | −0.28*** | | |
| Core self evaluations | | | 0.255** | | | | | 0.106 | 0.09 |
| Anxiety | | | | −0.388*** | | −0.285** | | −0.336*** | |
| Career satisfaction | | | | | 0.489*** | | 0.396*** | | 0.456*** |
| 0.114** | 0.263*** | 0.168** | 0.233*** | 0.331*** | 0.32*** | 0.389*** | 0.237*** | 0.333*** | |
| 0.114** | 0.145*** | 0.056** | 0.118*** | 0.209*** | 0.203*** | 0.268*** | 0.127*** | 0.215*** |
Note: **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.
Figure 1The whole model representation. Note: Factor loadings are standardized.
Direct and indirect effects and 95% confidence intervals for the final model
| | | | |
| CSE → Cost commitment | −0.312* | −0.449 | −0.160 |
| Development unfitness → Nominative commitment | −0.330* | −0.442 | −0.220 |
| Development unfitness → Affective commitment | −0.284* | −0.398 | --0.159 |
| | | | |
| Development unfitness → Satisfaction → Nominative commitment | −0.139* | −0.190 | −0.063 |
| Development unfitness → (Satisfaction, Anxiety) → Affective commitment | −0.203* | −0.301 | −0.134 |
| CSE → Satisfaction → Nominative commitment | 0.149* | 0.094 | 0.305 |
| CSE → (Satisfaction, Anxiety) → Affective commitment | 0.237* | 0.239 | 0.509 |
*Empirical 95% confidence interval does not overlap with zero.