The relationship between attachment and career maturity: The mediating role of self-efficacy

Abstract

This article proposes to examine the relationship between parents, friends and teacher attachment and career maturity for adolescents and to review the mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between attachments and career maturity. The summary of the results is as follows. First, parent and friend attachments, self-efficacy and career maturity showed linear development over four years, but teacher attachment showed non-linear development. Second, the effect of parent attachment, teacher attachment and friend attachment on career maturity can clearly be seen through the mediation effect of self-efficacy rather than through any direct influence.

Keywords

career maturity friend attachment mediating effects parent attachment self-efficacy teacher attachment

The goal of this study is to examine the relationship between parents, friends and teacher attachments and career maturity for adolescents, and to examine the mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between attachment and career maturity.

The career problems of young people have been an increasingly important issue in Korea. Parents in Korea are especially interested in their children’s careers, perhaps more so than parents in most other countries. Korean parents have great enthusiasm for educating their children. Ultimately, Korean parents believe that a high level of education will lead to good careers and an increase in the socio-economic status of their children (Hyun et al., 2003).

Youth in Korea are likewise worried about their own careers, according to the Korea Youth Counseling Institute’s research. High school counselors find that ‘career issues’ make up approximately 50 percent of Korean high school students’ worries. Youth in Korea, as well as their parents, recognize that career preparation is an important part of life. Adolescence is an important period during which many decisions about one’s future are made. Adolescents must carve out a career for themselves. The ability to carve out one’s career is called career maturity.

The development of career maturity during adolescence is influenced by attachment levels and self-efficacy (Blustein and Prezioso, 1995; Cho et al., 2006; Choi, 2007; Jang, 2005; Jung, 2007; Kim et al., 2010; Lee and Lee, 2000). This study can divide attachment during adolescence into three categories: parent attachment, friend attachment, and teacher attachment. These are related to the development of career maturity during adolescence. Having stable attachments during adolescence increases self-efficacy (Lee, 2008; Masten and Coatsworth, 1998). Self-efficacy is related to career maturity during adolescence as well. Career maturity during adolescence has complex relationships with many variables; however, at present, there are no studies examining the relationships between parent attachment, friend attachment, teacher attachment, self-efficacy and career maturity.

This study will examine career maturity’s relationship with the three categories of attachment and attempt to shed some light on the potential mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between career maturity and attachment. Specifically, the research questions are as follows. First, what is the relationship between parent attachment, friend attachment, teacher attachment and career maturity during adolescence? And second, does self-efficacy play a mediating role in the relationship between career maturity and attachment?

1. Career maturity, attachment and self-efficacy among youth

‘Career maturity’ is a term which has been broadly used in career-focused research. This term is used to describe an individual’s level of career development. Super (1955) pointed out that vocational maturity is a key factor within career education and counseling. Measuring and understanding an individual’s level of career development is an essential part of career counseling. Career maturity can also been defined as the position, from search time to perishing time, that an individual has reached along the course of their career. Since the concept of ‘vocational maturity’ was introduced by Super, there have been many studies on career maturity. Crites (1971) refined the definition of vocational maturity, the concept originally proposed by Super, to be the comparative level of the vocational preparation shown amongst same-aged students. Crites labeled this factor ‘career maturity’. Similarly, Gribbons and Lohnes (1965) understood career maturity to be an individual’s level of preparation with respect to career planning and career choice. They found that there are discrepancies in career maturity depending on the internal and external situations of the individual. Hoyt (1977) defined career maturity as the degree to which an individual understands and unifies the self and the vocational world. In summary, career maturity refers to the level of preparation for dealing with problems related to careers, such as the career choice and career-related decision-making.

According to Ainsworth (1989) and Bowlby (1973), ‘attachment’ is defined as a close and intimate relationship that can give stabilized feelings and emotional comfort to human beings. Attachment, formed in infancy, growing and continuously developing, is seen as the base of an individual’s capacity to overcome new and unfamiliar worlds. Accordingly, the role of attachment objects, like parents, is critical in fostering psychological and emotional stability, as is the belief that around-the-clock support from parents is available, if needed.

Later in life, relationships with friends and teachers become more important since youth spend more time studying or in school. Accordingly, attachments of youth at this stage are influenced not only by parents but also by friends and teachers. Furthermore, upon entering into youth, young people desire to be free and independent from their parents and the frequency of adolescence activities between the two diminishes. Having mastered self-control and secured independence from parents or guardians, youth may try to meet the need for attachment alternatively from friends and teachers (Steinberg and Silverberg, 1986).

‘Self-efficacy’ is the concept delivered from the Society Education Theory of Bandura (1977). It indicates self-confidence in successfully organizing and executing tasks, and determines an individual’s capacity to control the motives, recognition, and direction of their actions (Martocchio, 1994). It also includes an individual’s capability to call upon the physical, intellectual and emotional resources needed for the successful accomplishment of tasks (Eden and Aviram, 1993). Self-efficacy has been described as a measure of an individual’s ability to determine three things: a course of action (what kind of action to take); an execution level (how much effort to exert); and an endurability level (how long to continue an action in order to overcome obstacles) (Multon et al., 1991).

In general, a high self-efficacy level indicates an affirmative sense of self and an ability to remain committed to goal achievement. Meanwhile, low self-efficacy indicates low levels of self-confidence, negative self-evaluation, and the inability to produce a planned outcome when tasks are given (Appelbaum and Hare, 1996; Wood and Bandura, 1989).

Consequently, a high level of self-efficacy is a hallmark of individuals who confidently execute actions, and successfully achieve their planned objectives. These kinds of individuals try and sustain numerous strategies and activities in order to successfully achieve their goals.

2. The relationships between attachment, self-efficacy and career maturity

According to Masten and Coatsworth (1998), self-efficacy is enhanced by stabilized attachment. Specifically in childhood and during youth, self-efficacy is greatly influenced by the level of parent attachment (Kim et al., 2003; Lee, 2008). Kim et al. (2003) classified the attachment levels of parents and friends and analyzed the relationship between these and self-efficacy, as well as their application in school life. The analysis showed that the more stabilized the parents and friends attachments, the more positive the effect on school life. Meanwhile, Lee (2008) testified to the relation between attachment to one’s parents and self-efficacy. Lee (2008) showed that attachment to parents is closely related with self-efficacy, and particularly with the individual’s relationship to his or her mother. Han and Moon’s survey (2010) of primary school students on self-efficacy showed that self-efficacy is directly influenced by the support level of teachers and also indirectly influenced by the individual’s level of self-respect. Shin and Seo (2006) analyzed a model formula of social support and self-efficacy, and the application of activities for primary, middle and high school students. This survey revealed that support from teachers and friends indirectly influenced their activities.

According to prior studies, the presence of feelings of attachment in youth has a substantial influence on an individual’s level of career maturity. This means that the attachment to parents and friends has a meaningful impact on a young person’s career maturity (Blustein and Prezioso, 1995; Cho et al., 2006; Jung, 2007; Kim et al., 2010). Bluestein and Prezioso (1995) argued that a healthy and stabilized attachment to parents stimulates the development of career maturity. Jung (2007) analyzed the impacts of the family variables (the family attachment level, the family communication level, the level of concern within a family, etc.) on career maturity among youth. This analysis revealed that the family concern level and attachment level had a remarkable statistical impact on career maturity. Cho et al. (2006) sorted youth by sex and researched the impact of attachment to parents, friends and teachers on career maturity. The survey revealed that parent attachment had a greater impact on career maturity with female students than with male students. Kim et al. (2010) divided the factors affecting career maturity into sex, the attachment level to parents and the attachment level to friends. The survey showed that in the case of girl students, a higher level of attachment to parents and a lower level of attachment to friends were directly related to a higher level of career maturity. Regarding the increasing rate of career maturity as time passed, parent attachment level showed a negative effect on this trend; however, a higher friend attachment level showed a positive, emotionally affirmative effect. Jung’s study (2005) on the variables of the individual, the family and the school related to career maturity, proved that students who held their teacher in high esteem, or teachers that demonstrated understanding and showed concern for their students’ careers and talents, had higher career maturity than the students not having such teachers. These results seem to indicate that teacher attachment plays an important role in the development of career maturity. Conversely, Cho et al. (2006) reported that teacher attachment does not have a meaningful influence on career maturity. Betz and Hackett (1983) reported that self-efficacy was related to career maturity due to the influences of vocational activities and the insights obtained by people participating in such activities. Such research revealed that self-efficacy is co-related with various aspects of career development and this correlation has been supported by Lent et al. (1984) and Taylor and Pompa (1990). Through empirical analysis, Choi (2007) and Lee and Lee (2000) pointed out that self-efficacy level during youth has a remarkable effect on career maturity. Choi’s research (2007) on the impacts of self-efficacy, socio-economic level, and the study achievement level related to career maturity. This study pointed out that the socio-economic level is emotionally related to career maturity. Lee and Lee’s analysis (2000) on the influence of the variables of self-efficacy, sex, school grade, and career major revealed that self-efficacy is the dominant factor affecting career maturity.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research model

The goal of this research is to determine levels of career maturity. The study has a research model, as shown in Figure 1, which uses attachment levels as the antecedents, self-efficacy as the mediator variable and career maturity as the dependent variable. The study will propose a forecast model showing the career maturity of high school students by using their parent, teacher and friend attachment levels as antecedents, self-efficacy as the mediator variable and career maturity as the dependent variable.

Figure 1.

Research model.

3.2. Sample and measurement tool

The research was conducted on the middle school 2nd grade panel of the Korea Youth Panel Survey (KYPS). The panel includes 2nd year middle school students in Korea (excluding Jeju Island) in 2003 and the study was carried out annually. In all, six years of statistics were collected by 2008. The sample used in this research consisted of the 4th and 5th year surveys for high school students. In the 4th year, the sample number for second year high school students was 3449 persons; however, amongst the participants, 597 persons did not respond in the 5th year. Thus, this study used 2852 persons as samples.

This research uses the attachment levels as the independent variable, with self-efficacy as the mediator variable, and is based on middle school 4th year grade (2006), that is, high school 2nd grade. Career maturity is based on results from high school 3rd grade. The research has 10 items for parents’ attachment level, three items for teachers’ attachment level and four items for friends’ attachment level, along with seven items for self-efficacy and five items for career maturity. The items concerning career maturity are negative questions, which can be analyzed by the Likert five-point scale from 1 (absolutely not right) to 5 (absolutely right). The items concerning attachment are positive questions, also using the Likert five-point scale. A higher score indicates a higher attachment level.

3.3. Analysis method

The research was analyzed using SPSS 18.0 for Windows and AMOS 18.0. First, in order to test the reliability and validity of the instrument, the study analyzed the reliability of each item using Cronbach’s alpha analysis, and tested their validity by using factor analysis. Second, in order to find out that self-efficacy is creating a mediation effect between the attachment level and career maturity, the study analyzed the data using the Structural Equation Model (SEM). Third, in order to prove the hypothesis on the causal relations among the potential factors, our research analyzes the total effect as the direct and indirect effect and proves the mediator effect. Based on these results, this study can test our research problems. In our research we tested the mediator effect by using a bootstrapping method and picked up the intermediate model by comparing the partial intermediate model and the complete model, thus proving whether the effect is partial or complete.

3.4. Testing reliability and validity of scale

Cronbach’s alpha index was used to test the reliability of the major variables. The results were as follows: parent attachment: .890; teacher attachment: .781; friend attachment: .810; self-efficacy: .794; career maturity: .847. The reliability of these variables was shown to be satisfactory. In order to measure the construct validity, factor analysis was used. The measuring method was principal component analysis, and the result of the measurement is shown in Table 1. Factor loading and communality under .4 is not shown in the table. Multivariate normal distribution of the major variables is satisfactory, and there is no skewness as under |2| or kurtosis as under |4|. So, the reliability and validity of this research is shown to be satisfactory.

Table 1.

Factor and normality test of major variables.

Latent variables	Measurement variables	Mean	Standard deviation	Skewness	Kurtosis
Parent attachment	Parent attachment 1	3.546	2.242	-0.341	0.348
Parent attachment	Parent attachment 2	3.381	2.626	-0.228	-0.277
Teacher attachment	Teacher attachment 1	2.637	1.201	1.084	2.824
	Teacher attachment 2	2.932	1.129	0.761	3.072
	Teacher attachment 3	2.517	1.216	1.080	2.926
Friend attachment	Friend attachment 1	4.454	1.240	-1.104	2.262
Friend attachment	Friend attachment 2	4.023	1.550	-0.506	0.204
Self-efficacy	Self-efficacy 1	3.274	1.507	0.002	0.205
Self-efficacy	Self-efficacy 2	3.574	2.086	-0.226	0.336
Career maturity	Career maturity 1	3.568	3.434	-0.176	-0.355
Career maturity	Career maturity 2	4.036	2.528	-0.869	0.808

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive statistics

Table 2 summarizes the descriptive statistics of the property variables of population sociology included in the analysis, and it was analyzed without the missing data. For the continuous variables the study shows the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD). For the categorical variables the study shows the number (N) and percentage (%). As to sex, the percentage of male students was about 50.5 percent and about 49.5 percent of the participants were female students. As to school record percentile, the highest 30 percent were about 20.8 percent, the middle 40 percent were about 53.3 percent and the bottom 30 percent were about 24.6 percent, and missing data were 35 (1.3%). As to the monthly average of household income, the highest 30 percent were 18.4 percent, the middle 40 percent were about 48.6 percent and the bottom 30 percent were about 28.6 percent, and missing data were 128 (4.5%).

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics (N = 2852).

Variables	Separation	N (%)	M	SD
Sex	Male	1440 (50.5%)	25.81	5.454
Sex	Female	1412 (49.5%)	26.96	5.120
School record	Highest 30%	594 (20.8%)	26.94	5.030
	Middle 40%	1522 (53.3%)	26.43	5.322
	Lowest 30%	701 (24.6%)	25.78	5.458
	Missing data	35 (1.3%)
Monthly average of household income	Highest 30%	524 (18.4%)	26.87	5.317
Monthly average of household income	Middle 40%	1385 (48.6%)	26.38	5.206
	Lowest 30%	815 (28.6%)	26.10	5.472
	Missing data	128 (4.5%)

4.2. Analysis of measurement model

Table 3 displays the analysis of the measurement model for review of whether the measurement variables represent the latent variables adequately. (Standardized) Estimate, SE (Standard Errors), and CR (Critical Ratio) are reported. In confirmatory factor analysis on the measurement variables of parent attachment, teacher attachment and friend attachment, the measurement model was well suited to the data with regards to adequate model fit, such that CFI = .983, GFI = .988, NFI = .980, TLI = .973 and RMSEA = .040. Also, all path coefficients between the measured variables and latent variables were significant (p < .001). This measurement model adequately reflected the latent variables.

Table 3.

Analysis of measurement model.

Latent variables	Measured variable	Estimate (standardized)	SE	CR
Parent attachment	Parent attachment 1	1.000 (.892)
Parent attachment	Parent attachment 2	1.053 (.801)	.050	21.205^***
Teacher attachment	Teacher attachment 1	1.000 (.752)
	Teacher attachment 2	1.093 (.874)	.027	40.667^***
	Teacher attachment 3	1.060 (.787)	.027	39.696^***
Friend attachment	Friend attachment 1	1.000 (.844)
Friend attachment	Friend attachment 2	1.066 (.719)	.101	10.582^***
Self-efficacy	Self-efficacy 1	1.000 (.606)
Self-efficacy	Self-efficacy 2	1.469 (.643)	.105	13.994^***
Career maturity	Career maturity 1	1.000 (.806)
Career maturity	Career maturity 2	.661 (.724)	.072	9.228^***

p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

This study used a correlation matrix for verification of the structural model. The result of the correlation matrix was that the maximum difference between the values of the latent variables was .278 (p < .001). So, multicollinearity did not appear between the latent variables.

4.3. Analysis of the structural model

First, in order to verify the structural equation model, path analysis of structural model using ML (Maximum Likelihood) estimation was employed. The fit of structural model is as follows.

4.3.1. Model fit of the structural model

Table 4 summarizes the analysis of the structural model. Because χ² is sensitive to sample size and multivariate normality, the study evaluates it using various fit indices. This article evaluates model fit indices such as GFI (Good-Fit Index), RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), Absolute fit index, TLI (Tucker-Lewis Index) and CFI (Comparative Fit Index), as well as incremental fit index.

Table 4.

Model fit.

	χ²	d.f.	CFI	GFI	NFI	TLI	RMSEA
Structural model	189.454^***	34	.983	.988	.980	.973	.040

p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

First, the CFI value is determined for the representation of the parameters and distribution of the population. The CFI value is about .983. Second, GFI is unaffected by sample size and violations of multivariate normal. The value of GFI is .988. Third, the use of NFI resulted in a better fit for structural equation modeling compared to the basic model. The value of NFI is .980, so the proposed model shows an improvement of about 98 percent. The value of TLI is .973. Lastly, RMSEA is the usual model fit used in cases of estimating from population, as opposed to samples. This value is commonly accepted when it is .08 or less. As the value of RMSEA is .040, this model shows that it is suited well to the data. So, this study is able to confirm that that this structural model has good model fit.

By using this structural model, the study will examine the results in order to identify the relationship between parent, teacher, and friend attachment levels and career maturity.

4.3.2. Relationship of attachment variables and career maturity

Figure 2 shows the result of structural model analysis. Through the path coefficient between latent variables, this study enables us to look at the relationships between parent, friend, teacher attachment and career maturity: our main research issue. First, the most significant attachment variable to career maturity was parent attachment with a value of .067 (p < .05), and friend and teacher attachment were not significantly related to career maturity with values of -.040 and .038, respectively. This result shows that higher attachment to parents indicates higher career maturity. Also, the study looked at the relationships between parent, friend, and teacher attachment and self-efficacy. All attachment variables with respect to self-efficacy were statistically significant with values of .353 (p < .001), .162 (p < .001), .172 (p < .001). This shows that higher attachment to parents, teachers and friends indicates higher self-efficacy.

Figure 2.

Standard regression weights between latent variables.

Analysis of structural equation modeling shows that there was not a statistically significant path from friend attachment to career maturity and from teacher attachment to career maturity. But other paths were significant statistically.

We tried to verify a causal relationship and find out whether self-efficacy had any mediators among attachment variables and career maturity: the second issue of our research.

4.3.3. Analysis of mediators of self-efficacy among attachment variables and career maturity

Looking at Table 5, there were significant indirect effects with each value: .102 (p < .01), .103 (p < .001), 095 (p < .001), mediator values of self-efficacy among attachment variables and career maturity. This means that parent attachment, teacher attachment and friend attachment had the indirect effects of a mediating variable, rather than direct effects on career maturity.

Table 5.

Total effects (direct effects + indirect effects) of structural model.

Latent variables		Direct effects	Indirect effects	Total effects
Parent attachment	→ Self-efficacy	.161^**		.161^**
Teacher attachment		.164^**		.164^**
Friend attachment		.151^***		.151^***
Self-efficacy	→ Career maturity	.631^**		.631^**
Parent attachment		.093^*		.195^**
Teacher attachment		-.123		-.019
Friend attachment		.100		.195^*
Parent attachment	→ Self-efficacy	→ Career maturity	.102^**
Teacher attachment			.103^***
Friend attachment			.095^***

p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

At the point of analysis of mediators, this study considers some check points as follows. First, there is no statistically significant path from independence variable to dependence variable required. Second, a statistically significant path is required between independence variable and parameter variable, parameter variable and dependence variable. Figure 2 shown this relationship in detail. The decision regarding full or partial mediators differs as a result of the difference of a value of χ². If a value of χ² is 3.84 or less, the mediators are full, otherwise they are partial mediators. Table 6 displays the result of the mediating effects of this article.

Table 6.

Analysis of the mediator of self-efficacy on the relationship of attachment and career maturity.

Path	Parameter model	χ2 (d.f.)	Δχ2 (Δd.f.)	Parameter effect
Parent attachment → Self-efficacy → Career maturity	Full	41.558^***(7)	5.348(1)	Partial mediation
Parent attachment → Self-efficacy → Career maturity	Partial	36.211^***(6)	5.348(1)	Partial mediation
Teacher attachment → Self-efficacy → Career maturity	Full	76.322^***(12)	1.728(1)	Fully mediated
Teacher attachment → Self-efficacy → Career maturity	Partial	74.594^***(11)	1.728(1)	Fully mediated
Friend attachment → Self-efficacy → Career maturity	FullPartial	43.094^***(7)	4.659(1)	Partial mediation
Friend attachment → Self-efficacy → Career maturity	FullPartial	38.435^***(6)	4.659(1)	Partial mediation

p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Looking at the Table 6, self-efficacy showed the influence of partial mediators among parent and friend attachment and career maturity, and the effects of full mediators among teacher attachment and career maturity. Thus, the study can conclude the second research issue of this article.

By modeling the indirect mediating effect of self-efficacy, this study gains a better description of the phenomena, more so than with the model of direct influence.

5. Conclusion and discussion

In summary, the effect of parent attachment, teacher attachment and friend attachment on career maturity can clearly be seen through the mediation effect of self-efficacy, rather than through any direct influence. The better relationships students have with their teachers, the higher their career maturity. The teacher role has been demonstrated to be the most important, although better relationships with parents and friends also have a positive effect on career maturity. The purpose of this study was to explain career maturity levels among youth in Korea. By using parent attachment, teacher attachment and friend attachment as antecedents, and with self-efficacy as the mediator variable, the study was able to produce a good explanation of this phenomenon. This study concludes that among the majority of the high school students entering college in Korea, high self-efficacy produced by good relationships with teachers, parents and friends significantly enhanced students’ career maturity levels upon entering college.

The outcome of the research is as follows. First, the parent attachment results suggest that the more parents are emotionally attached to their children and the more communication they have with the children, the higher the career maturity their children have.

Second, in the study model it was possible to more clearly explain the relationship between attachment and career maturity through the mediating role of self-efficacy. In other words, while it turned out that higher teacher attachment could be correlated with higher career maturity, these increases in career maturity actually reflected the increased levels of self-efficacy among the youth, and were not the direct results of the teacher attachment level itself.

While teachers might not directly influence the career maturity of their students, teachers’ smooth relationships and attention to their students produce the confidence (self-efficacy) for their students to succeed. This research reinforces the idea that the teacher’s role is very important, particularly considering that high school students in Korea often have to spend over eight hours a day in school. Also, this research shows that parent attachment and friend attachment have partial influence through mediating effects. This supports the idea that when young people have a close relationship with their parents and friends, they will also have more self-confidence. Accordingly, they will make better judgments which ultimately enhance their career maturity.

Specifically, the results of the study suggest some practical interventions. First, programs are needed for parents in order to improve parent attachment rates among adolescents. For example, parents could attend seminars about adolescent development. Second, teachers need to be instructed on their role in the development of their students; they also need to be educated to encourage healthy relationships between themselves and their students. Teachers should receive support to develop counseling skills in order to promote healthy relationships with students. This will result in higher self-efficacy among the student body. Third, peer group activities are needed to increase self-efficacy. If these activities are related to the career development, it will improve career maturity. Various group programs directed at fostering career development awareness and skills should be created and offered to students: for example, peer group activities, small group activities, clubs, and activities providing work experience.

However, these practical efforts will be most effective only if adolescents, parents and teachers all get involved together. A coordinated approach to the various factors related to career maturity will obviously be most effective. Therefore, it is up to social workers to efficiently engage the different parties involved at the community, school and family levels.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author biographies

Soon-Gyu Kim, Soon-A Lee, Hae-Suk Lee and Haeng-Sook Song all work in the Department of Social Welfare, Chonbuk National University, South Korea.

References

Ainsworth

M.D.S.

(1989) ‘Attachments beyond Infancy’, American Psychologist 44(4): 709–19.

Appelbaum

S.H.

Hare

(1996) ‘Self-efficacy as a Mediator of Goal Setting and Performance: Some Human Resource Applications’, Journal of Managerial Psychology 11(3): 33–47.

Bandura

(1977) ‘Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory Behavioral Change’, Psychological Review 84(2): 191–215.

Betz

N.E.

Hackett

(1983) ‘The Relationship of Mathematics Self-efficacy Expectations to the Selection of Science-based College Majors’, Journal of Vocational Behavior 23: 329–45.

Blustein

D.L.

Prezioso

M.S.

(1995) ‘Attachment Theory and Career Development: Current Status and Future Directions’, The Counseling Psychologist 23: 416–32.

Bowlby

. (1973) Attachment and Loss, Vol. II: Separation. New York: Basic Books.

Cho

M.H.

Choi

S.M.

T.Y.

(2006) ‘A Study on the Effects of Attachment to Parents–Friends–Teachers on Career Maturity of Male and Female Adolescents: Focusing on the Mediating Effect of Adaptation to School Life’, Korean Journal of Social Welfare Research 15: 81–97.

Choi

S.J.

(2007) ‘Latent Growth Curve Model on Career Maturity and Self-Efficacy, SES, School Record of Adolescent’, Studies on Korean Youth 18(3): 31–57.

Crites

J.O.

(1971) The Maturity of Vocational Attitudes in Adolescence. Inquiry Series, Monograph No. 2. Washington, DC: APGA.

10.

Eden

Aviram

(1993) ‘Self-efficacy Training to Speed Reemployment: Helping People to Help Themselves’, Journal of Applied Psychology 76: 352–60.

11.

Gribbons

W.D.

Lohnes

P.R.

(1965) ‘Shifts in Adolescents, Vocational Values’, Personnel and Guidance Journal 44(3): 238–44.

12.

Han

S.A.

Moon

S.B.

(2010) ‘A Structural Analysis on School-aged Children’s Self-efficacy and its Related Variables’, Korea Open Association for Early Childhood Education Conference 5: 441–5.

13.

Hoyt

K.B.

(1977) The School Counsellor and Career Education. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

14.

Hyun

Lee

J.B.

Lee

H.Y.

(2003) A Study on the Educational Fever of Korean Parents. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.

15.

Jang

S.C.

(2005) ‘An Analysis of Type of University Students’ Career Decision’, The Korean Journal of Counseling and Psychotherapy 16(3): 533–51.

16.

Jung

J.M.

(2007) ‘The Relationship between Career Maturity and Social Capital of Youth’, Journal of Future Oriented Youth Society 4(2): 91–103.

17.

Jung

Y.K.

(2005) ‘Related Variables to Career Maturity of Korea Adolescents’, Korean Education & Employment Panel 6: 259–302.

18.

Kim

A.R.

Lee

J.H.

Choi

B.Y.

(2010) ‘A Five-year Longitudinal Study on Development of Career Maturity in Middle and High School Students: Focused on Gender, Parental Attachment, and Peer Attachment’, The Korean Journal of Counseling and Psychotherapy 22(3): 843–62.

19.

Kim

G.S.

Jung

Y.O.

Lee

N.H.

(2003) ‘A Study of Relationship between Adolescents’ Attachment, Self-efficacy and Adaptation to School Life’, The Korean Journal of East West Science 6(2): 259–79.

20.

Lee

K.H.

Lee

H.J.

(2000) ‘The Effects of Career Self-efficacy in Predicting the Level of Career Attitude Maturity of College Students’, The Korean Journal of Counseling and Psychotherapy 12(1): 127–36.

21.

Lee

S.S.

(2008) ‘The Effect of Adolescents’ Sex-role Trait, Attachment with Parent on the Self-efficacy of the Middle School Students’, Korean Journal of Human Ecology 17(6): 1037–49.

22.

Lent

R.W.

Brown

S.D.

Larkin

K.C.

(1984) ‘Relation of Self-efficacy Expectations to Academic Achievement and Persistence’, Journal of Counseling Psychology 31: 1356–65.

23.

Martocchio

J.J.

(1994) ‘Effects of Conception of Ability on Anxiety, Self-efficacy, and Learning in Training’, Journal of Applied Psychology 79: 819–25.

24.

Masten

A.S.

Coatsworth

J.D.

(1998) ‘The Development of Competence in Favorable and Unfavorable Environments’, American Psychologist 53(2): 205–20.

25.

Multon

K.D.

Brown

S.D.

Lent

R.W.

(1991) ‘Relation of Self-efficacy Beliefs to Academic Outcomes: A Meta-analytic Investigation’, Journal of Counseling Psychology 38(1): 30–8.

26.

Shin

H.J.

Seo

Y.S.

(2006) ‘Analyses of Structural Equation Model on the Relationships among Social Support, Self-efficacy, and Adjustment by School Class’, The Korea Journal of Counseling 7(1): 117–30.

27.

Steinberg

Silverberg (1986) ‘The Vicissitudes of Autonomy in Early Adolescence’, Child Development 57: 841–51.

28.

Super

D.E.

(1955) ‘Dimensions and Measurement of Vocational Maturity’, Teachers College Record 57(3): 151–63.

29.

Taylor

K.M.

Pompa

(1990) ‘An Examination of the Relationships among Career Decision-making Self-efficacy, Career Salience, Locus of Control and Vocational Indecision’, Journal of Vocational Behavior 37(1): 17–31.

30.

Wood

R.E.

Bandura

(1989) ‘Impact of Conceptions of Ability on Self-regulatory Mechanisms and Complex Decision-making’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56: 407–15.