Search

This study aimed to understand the role of regulatory focus for influencing self-directed learning activities during a job search. The authors surveyed 185 job-searching university students at two time points to explore the conditions under which regulatory focus (promotion and prevention foci) impacts self-directed learning activities and the number of employment interviews secured. Both promotion and prevention foci showed significant relationships with self-directed learning activities and number of interviews, and positive and negative affect partially mediated these relationships. The relationships between both regulatory focus strategies and self-directed learning were also contingent on self-efficacy. More specifically, prevention focus and self-directed learning showed a positive relationship for job seekers with high levels of self-efficacy but a negative one for job seekers with low levels of self-efficacy. This research extends the understanding of the role of regulatory focus in the context of self-directed learning during a job search. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Primarily using a variable-centered approach, job search research explores the connections between antecedents, processes, and outcomes. A person-centered approach, however, categorizes individuals based on personal and contextual elements. This study used CSM as a theoretical framework to identify job seeker profiles by exploring configurations of job search self-efficacy, conscientiousness, financial need, social pressure, and job search quality and intensity. We examined how these profiles correspond with sociodemographic variables and job search outcomes such as rumination, interviews, and job offers. In a sample of 300 job seekers, four profiles emerged: casual job search contemplator, financially burdened job seeker, financially secure job seeker, and multifaceted job search strategist. The contemplator profile correlated with the fewest interviews, while the financially burdened job seeker had the most. These findings suggest career counselors need to recognize distinctive job seeker patterns requiring tailored counseling approaches, underscoring the potential of the person-centered approach for further job search research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adaptive guidance is an instructional intervention that helps learners to make use of the control inherent in technology-based instruction. The present research investigated the interactive effects of guidance design (i.e., framing of guidance information) and individual differences (i.e., pretraining motivation and ability) on learning basic and strategic task skills over time. One hundred thirty participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 types of adaptive guidance (autonomy supportive, controlling) or a no-guidance condition while learning to perform a complex simulation task over 9 consecutive trials. Results indicated that participants receiving controlling guidance acquired strategic task skills at a faster rate than participants receiving autonomy-supportive guidance or no guidance. The design of adaptive guidance also moderated the effects of pretraining motivation and cognitive ability on learners' acquisition of basic and strategic task skills. Specifically, autonomy-supportive guidance enhanced the positive effects of pretraining motivation on the acquisition of basic task skills, and controlling guidance enhanced the positive effects of cognitive ability on the acquisition of strategic task skills. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01155.x Byline: TRACI SITZMANN (1), BRADFORD S. BELL (2), KURT KRAIGER (3), ADAM M. KANAR (4) Abstract: Two studies were conducted to examine the effect of prompting self-regulation, an intervention designed to improve learning from technology-delivered instruction. In Study 1, trainees who were prompted to self-regulate gradually improved their declarative and procedural knowledge over time, relative to the other conditions, whereas test scores declined over time for trainees who were not prompted to self-regulate. In Study 2, basic performance remained stable over time and strategic performance improved over time for trainees who were prompted to self-regulate, relative to the other conditions, whereas performance declined over time for trainees who were not prompted to self-regulate. Trainees' cognitive ability moderated the effect of the prompts on basic performance and task-specific self-efficacy moderated the effect of the prompts on strategic performance. Prompting self-regulation resulted in stronger performance gains over time for trainees with higher ability or higher self-efficacy. These results demonstrate prompting self-regulation improved performance over time, relative to the other conditions, in both online, work-related training and laboratory settings. The results are consistent with theory suggesting self-regulation is a dynamic process that has a gradual effect on performance and highlight the importance of using a within-subjects design in self-regulation research. Author Affiliation: (1)PDRI, in support of the Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative (2)Cornell University (3)Colorado State University (4)Cornell University Article note: Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Traci Sitzmann, Advanced Distributed Learning Co-Laboratory, 1901 N Beauregard St. Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22311; traci.sitzmann.ctr@adlnet.gov.

Searching for a job is a self‐directed activity that requires self‐regulation over significant periods of time; yet, in the scientific community, we know little about proximal support interventions that shape the self‐regulation processes during a job search. Using an experimental design, we tested a proximal support intervention in the form of metacognitive prompts and how this shaped metacognition and effort in 123 university job seekers over a period of 9 weeks. Job seekers who were exposed to the intervention reported higher levels of metacognition, effort, and a greater number of job interviews compared to job seekers in a control condition. Additionally, the present study revealed that the prompting intervention, compared to the active control condition, resulted in higher levels of metacognition for job seekers who were less committed to finding a job than for job seekers who were more committed to finding a job. In summary, the current study makes important contributions to the job search literature and practice by fine‐tuning our understanding of the interventions that may support metacognition during the job search process and the individuals for whom these interventions may be most effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]