Family Influence on Careers Among Asian Parent

Abstract

Previous research in vocational psychology has investigated various contextual factors that have influenced the career development process of Asian Americans. Such factors include family influence, acculturation, cultural values, and conflict within the family. However, there has been limited research on the role of family influence on careers in the context of Asian parent–child dyads. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the congruence of family influence on careers, specifically investigating whether aspects of family influence are predicted by congruence of values, acculturation, and intergenerational conflict, among Asian parent–child dyads. There were a total of 30 Asian parent and college-age student dyads. Multiple regression analyses were performed to answer the research question, with findings suggesting that congruence of values, acculturation, and intergenerational conflict predicted congruence of the family expectations aspect of family influence on careers. Implications for theory, practice, and research are discussed.

Keywords

Asian American career development family influence

According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2010), Asian Americans comprise 17.3 million or 5.6% of the total U.S. population. This population is projected to increase to 40.6 million residents in the United States by 2050 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). Previous research has suggested that Asian Americans are often overrepresented in certain fields (e.g., science, engineering, and mathematics) and underrepresented in others (e.g., social sciences; U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). Therefore, it is important to understand what specific factors influence Asian Americans’ career-related choices.

Previous research has focused on Asian Americans’ career interests, career choices, and occupational values (Leong & Gupta, 2007). Research has suggested that Asian Americans do not necessarily make career-related choices based on their interests, but rather on contextual factors such as family (e.g., Tang, Fouad, & Smith, 1999). For example, Tang (2002) investigated the relationship between career choices and parental influence among Asian American, Chinese, and Caucasian American college students. In this study, the college students were instructed to answer questions about their actual and ideal career choices in addition to their parents’ preferences for their career choices utilizing Holland’s theoretical framework (Tang, 2002). Findings suggested that Asian American and Chinese college students were more likely to choose investigative occupations whereas Caucasian American students were more likely to choose social occupations (Tang, 2002). Additionally, findings suggested that actual and ideal career choices for Asian American and Chinese college students were significantly related to their parents’ expectations regarding career choices (Tang, 2002).

Contextual factors that have shown to influence this population’s career choices such as acculturation, family influence, cultural values, and intergenerational conflict have also been investigated. For example, Leong and Chou (1994) noted that Asian Americans who were less acculturated to the dominant culture would be more likely to experience occupational segregation. They also argued that Asian Americans who were more acculturated to the dominant culture would follow similar occupational patterns as European Americans (Leong & Chou, 1994). Similarly, Tang, Fouad, and Smith (1999) found that acculturation, family background, and self-efficacy are important factors to consider for Asian Americans when making occupational choices. They argued that the more acculturated an individual is, the stronger the relationship between his or her interests and occupational choices (Tang et al., 1999).

Similarly, Cho and Bae’s (2005) study found that Asian parents who remained attached to their cultures of origin and raised children who were accustomed to mainstream culture experienced more family conflict, which led to greater emotional concerns. In a study by Leong and Tata (1990), findings suggested that Asian Americans who endorsed higher levels of acculturation focused more on their skills and talents when choosing their occupations when compared to those who endorsed lower levels of acculturation.

Acculturation has also been associated with family conflict regarding education and career choices. Chung (2001) investigated gender, ethnicity, acculturation, and intergenerational conflict among Asian American college students. Findings suggested that Asian American college students who were more acculturated to the dominant culture reported experiencing less conflict about education and careers with their parents (Chung, 2001). Farver, Bhadha, and Narang (2002) found in their study with 180 Indian adolescents and their immigrant parents that there was less family conflict when acculturation gaps did not exist between adolescents and parents. However, one primary limitation with all of these studies is that it only takes into consideration the career development of Asian American college students. Although many studies highlight the role of family and parental influence, acculturation within a dyadic context for this population has received limited attention.

Leung, Hou, Gati, and Li (2011) furthered this idea by examining cultural values conflict and parental expectations on the career decision-making process of Chinese college students residing in China. They found that Chinese college students who acknowledged that their parents had higher expectations regarding academic achievement and felt their performance in these areas were inadequate experienced more career decision-making difficulties (Leung, Hou, Gati, & Li, 2011). Young, Ball, Valach, Turkel, and Wong (2003) examined six Chinese Canadian adolescent–parent dyads to determine the role of family on the overall career decision-making process. Each dyad was responsible for discussing and identifying career-related goals, focusing specifically on parents and adolescents communicating about career-related goals and expectations (Young, Ball, Valach, Turkel, & Wong, 2003).

Lee and Liu (2001) suggested that Asian American parents and children who experienced the fewest cultural differences (e.g., families who were all highly acculturated to Western culture) reported less likelihood of family conflict. This study is significant, as it focused on examining and recognizing differences between Asian American parents and their children (Lee & Liu, 2001). According to Ma and Yeh (2005), discrepancies between one’s family expectations and actual careers chosen by Asian Americans can lead to family conflict. Ma and Yeh (2005) found positive correlations between intergenerational family conflict and career indecision among 129 Chinese American adolescents.

In investigating the cultural, immigrant, and prejudicial contexts for Asian Indian immigrant college students and their parents, Roysircar, Carey, and Koroma (2010) found the significance of generational status when considering math and science majors for these students. Findings suggested that first-generation Asian Indian parents’ preferences for their U.S.-born children (who were second generation) were influential in their children’s ratings for math and science majors (Roysircar et al., 2010). Asian Indian college students who identified as second generation often did not prefer science-related majors but were influenced by their parents to pursue such majors (Roysircar et al., 2010). Although it is important to investigate how family influences the career choices of Asian American college students, Roysircar et al.’s (2010) study highlighted the significance of obtaining data from both Asian American college students and their parents.

Another area of interest in Asian American career development is cultural values. Gaps in the endorsement of cultural values between Asian parents and their children can frequently lead to conflict. Findings from Ahn, Kim, and Park’s (2008) study with Korean American college students suggested that participants did not adhere as strongly to Asian values in comparison to their parents. Regression analyses indicated a positive relationship between Korean American college students’ perceived gap with their parents in terms of endorsement of cultural values and the intensity of conflicts (Ahn et al., 2008).

As a whole, the literature on the career development process of Asian Americans focuses on contextual factors and how Asian American college students make career-related choices. However, there is limited information as to how family influence on careers is predicted by various contextual factors (e.g., acculturation, cultural values, and intergenerational conflict) within Asian parent–child dyads.

Theoretical Framework

This study was conceptualized within a developmental framework, specifically examining Super’s (1963) life-space, life-span theory. Super (1963) argued that there are specific developmental stages and tasks associated with the overall career development process. In particular, this study examined age ranges of 18–27 which spans the exploratory and establishment stages in Super’s (1963, 1980) model. The exploratory stage (ages 15–24) encourages individuals to explore various jobs by taking classes, engaging in hobbies, and developing tentative choices about their careers (Super, 1963, 1980). The establishment stage (ages 25–44) focuses on the development of entry level skills that are pertinent to career choices and obtaining work experience (Super, 1963, 1980). These stages are associated with developmental tasks that are crystallization (ages 14–18), specification (ages 18–21), implementation (ages 21–24), and stabilization (ages 24–35; Super, 1963, 1980). The task of crystallization involves individuals developing and planning for their vocational goals (Super, 1963, 1980). The task of specification involves individuals formulating specific vocational goals from general ones (Super, 1963).

Current Study

Although there is existing literature on the role of contextual factors influencing the career decisions of Asian Americans, the majority of research in this area has primarily focused on Asian American college students. Limited information is available regarding the role of family influence on careers within a dyadic context of Asian parents and their college-age children. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to address that gap in the literature by investigating variables that have been demonstrated to influence the career development process of Asian American college students within a dyadic context. Congruence, measured by difference scores, was utilized to understand the differences between Asian parents and their college-age children on the variables of interest.

The primary research question investigated was, is congruence of family influence (e.g., informational support, financial support, family expectations, and values/beliefs) on careers predicted by congruence of acculturation, cultural values, and intergenerational conflict for Asian parent–child dyads? It was hypothesized that congruence of family influence (e.g., informational support, financial support, family expectations, and values/beliefs) on careers will predict the congruence of acculturation, values, and intergenerational conflict for Asian parent–child dyads.

Method

Procedure

Data from this study were obtained from the first author’s dissertation. In order to participate, college-age children had to identify as Asian or Asian American, currently be attending a 2- or 4-year university in the United States, speak English, and be 18 or older. Their parent participants had to be residing in the United States, speak English, identify as Asian or Asian American, and currently be raising a college-age child who attends a 2- or 4-year university in the United States.

The study utilized a snowball sampling method to contact college students for participation. Participants were recruited through university student organizations, nonprofit organizations comprised of Asian Pacific Islander American student groups, nonprofit community organizations, social media, national organizations, and personal contacts within the Asian American community.

Upon obtaining consent, Asian American college students were instructed to fill out the surveys. They were also asked to provide contact information (e.g., mailing address and e-mail address) of the parent/guardian they felt was most influential in their career development process. The first author contacted the parent the college student listed to follow-up with the parent measures. Consent was also obtained for parent participants. For parents who could not be reached via e-mail or did not have access to e-mail, the first author sent a reminder e-mail to their children. An incentive of two raffle drawings of US$50 Amazon gift cards was also offered for participants. Data collection was conducted both in person and on Qualtrics, and the study received approval from the first author’s university Institutional Review Board.

Upon completion of data collection, several steps were taken to manage the data. Missing values for items were replaced with the mean value of the variable (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Means were imputed for five participants with missing data. Participant cases with more than two thirds of missing data were removed through listwise deletion (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).

Participants

There were 149 college student participants that met the eligibility criteria. Of this, 56 participants began the survey, but did not finish. Additionally, two participants were parents who began the student version of the study. Twenty-four participants did not provide any parent contact information. Eighty-eight participants were removed from data analysis, resulting in 61 Asian and Asian American college students that provided their parents’ contact information.

There were 39 parents who identified as Asian or Asian American whose college students had completed the student version of the survey. Of this, six did not complete the demographic questionnaire or survey measures, and three indicated that they were not currently residing in the United States. These 9 participants were removed from data analysis, totaling 30 parent participants.

Table 1 presents the demographic information for the Asian and Asian American college student participants. There were 30 college students (n = 13 female, n = 17 male) who identified as Asian or Asian American and whose students completed the student version of the survey. Their ages ranged from 18 to 27 (M = 21.50 years, SD = 2.330). Eighteen participants were born in the United States and 12 were born outside the United States. Twenty-seven participants attended a 4-year university while three attended a 2-year university. The majority of participants identified as seniors (n = 10), juniors (n = 5), sophomores (n = 5), freshmen (n = 2), and other which included PhD students (n = 2), graduate students (n = 2), master’s students (n = 2), fifth-year senior (n = 1), and unspecified (n = 1). Twenty-nine participants already declared a major and one participant had not.

Table 1.
Demographic Information for Student Participants.

n % M SD

Age 30 100 21.50 2.330

Ethnic background

Chinese 10 33.3

Indian 4 13.3

Filipino/Filipina 4 13.3

Taiwanese 3 10.0

Hmong 2 6.6

Japanese 1 3.3

Korean 1 3.3

Vietnamese/Caucasian 1 3.3

Chinese/Burmese 1 3.3

Japanese/American 1 3.3

Chinese/Polish 1 3.3

Chinese/Polish/Russian 1 3.3

Socioeconomic status

Poor 2 6.7

Working class 9 30

Middle class 11 36.7

Upper middle class 8 26.7

Type of community

Rural 1 3.3

Suburban 22 73.3

Urban 7 23.3

Other 0 0.0

Number of siblings

Zero 4 13.3

One 15 50.0

Two 9 30.0

Three 2 6.7

Generational status

First generation 12 40.0

Second generation 18 60.0

Table 2 presents the demographic information for Asian parent participants. There were 30 parents (n = 15 female, n = 15 male) who identified as Asian or Asian American and whose students completed the student version of the survey. Their ages ranged from 44 to 67 (n = 29, M = 53.55 years, SD = 6.350). One participant chose not to report her age. All 30 participants reported being married. One participant reported being born in the United States while 29 reported being born outside the United States.

Table 2.
Demographic Information for Parent Participants.

n % M SD

Age 29 53.55 6.350

Ethnic background

Chinese 13 43.3

Indian 4 13.3

Filipino/Filipina 4 13.3

Taiwanese 3 10.0

Hmong 2 6.6

Japanese 1 3.3

Korean 1 3.3

Biracial (Chinese/Burmese) 1 3.3

Chinese/Indonesian 1 3.3

Socioeconomic status

Working class 9 30

Middle class 14 46.7

Upper middle class 6 20.0

Wealthy 1 3.3

Type of community

Rural 1 3.3

Suburban 22 73.3

Urban 6 20.0

Other 1 3.3

Number of children

One 4 13.3

Two 15 50.0

Three 9 30.0

Four 2 6.7

Generational status

First generation 26 86.7

Third generation 1 3.3

Fifth generation 2 6.7

Other 1 3.3

Highest level of education

Elementary/secondary school 2 6.7

Some high school 3 10.0

High school diploma or equivalent 4 13.3

Some college 1 3.3

Associate or 2-year degree 1 3.3

Bachelor’s or 4-year degree 10 33.3

Graduate or professional degree 8 26.7

Not applicable or don’t know 1 3.3

Measures

Tables 3 and 4 show reliability estimates, means, and standard deviations for scales and subscales for student and parent participants.

Table 3.
Scale Reliability, Means, and Standard Deviations for Student Participants.

Scale n α M SD

Family Influence Scale

Financial support 4 0.58 4.41 0.92

Family expectations 6 0.87 3.58 1.30

Values and beliefs 3 0.73 3.62 1.19

Informational support 8 0.91 3.94 1.12

Asian Values Scale–Revised 25 0.82 2.51 0.32

Intergenerational Conflict Items Pool

Self-belief on major/career-related values 10 0.92 3.37 0.89

Parent’s belief on major/career-related values 10 0.95 3.95 0.99

General intergeneration conflict with frequency measure 10 0.84 2.47 0.84

General intergeneration conflict with severity measure 10 0.88 2.32 0.89

Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale

Culture of Origin 15 0.90 4.35 0.93

Asian American 15 0.91 3.22 0.99

European American 15 0.78 4.62 0.60

Table 4.
Scale Reliability, Means, and Standard Deviations for Parent Participants.

Scale n α M SD

Family Influence Scale

Financial support 5 −0.16 4.50 0.48

Family expectations 6 0.75 3.77 1.26

Values and beliefs 3 0.74 3.90 1.19

Informational support 8 0.65 4.76 0.79

Asian Values Scale–Revised 25 0.84 2.71 0.35

Intergenerational Conflict Items Pool

Self-belief on major/career-related values 10 0.95 3.82 0.96

Child’s belief on major/career-related values 10 0.93 3.59 0.81

General intergeneration conflict with frequency measure 10 0.88 2.33 0.86

General intergeneration conflict with severity measure 10 0.86 2.20 0.88

Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale

Culture of Origin 15 0.94 5.30 0.85

Asian American 15 0.91 3.02 1.04

European American 15 0.94 3.50 0.85

Demographic questionnaire

Asian and Asian American college students completed a demographic questionnaire soliciting self-reported information about gender, age, country of origin, college major, and intended career choice, among other variables. Their parents were also asked to answer a modified version of this demographic questionnaire.

Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale (AAMAS)

The AAMAS was administered to both Asian parents and their college-age children to measure acculturation after permission to use the scale was obtained (Chung, Kim, & Abreu, 2004). The AAMAS is comprised of three scales: (1) AAMAS—Culture of Origin (CO), (2) AAMAS—Asian American (AA), and (3) AAMAS—European American (EA; Chung et al., 2004). Each of these scales are comprised of 15 items using a 6-point Likert-type type scale that ranges from not very much (1) to very much (6; Chung et al., 2004).

To test the psychometric properties of this scale, Chung et al. (2004) administered the AAMAS, the Suinn-Lew Asian Self Identity Acculturation Scale (SL-ASIA; Suinn, Rickard-Figueroa, Lew, & Vigil, 1987), the Intergenerational Conflict Inventory (ICI; Chung, 2001), and the Cultural Identification Scale (CIS; Oetting & Beauvais, 1991) to Asian American undergraduate students. Correlation coefficients between the scores for each of the three AAMAS scales and the scores from the SL-ASIA, CIS-Origin, and CIS-Anglo scales were calculated to examine concurrent validity (Chung et al., 2004). Divergent validity was examined by comparing the AAMAS scores on each of the three scales with the ICI total and subscale scores (Chung et al., 2004).

The scale’s reliability, validity, and factor structure was also examined utilizing Asian American undergraduate students (Chung et al., 2004). Reliability estimates for the AAMAS scales were the following: 0.89 (AAMAS-CO), 0.83 (AAMAS-AA), and 0.81 (AAMAS-EA; Chung et al., 2004). Negative correlations were also found between the AAMAS-CO and generational status, and there were nonsignificant correlations between the AAMAS-EA and AAMAS-AA and generational status (Chung et al., 2004).

Family Influence Scale (FIS)

The FIS was administered to both Asian parents and their college-age children to examine the role of family influence on careers (Fouad et al., 2010). The FIS is comprised of 22 items with four subscales: (1) informational support, (2) financial support, (3) values/beliefs, and (4) family expectations (Fouad et al., 2010). The FIS was modified with permission to reflect items relevant to Asian parent participants. For example, Asian American college students responded to items such as “My family shared information with me about how to obtain a job,” whereas Asian parents responded to “I/we shared information with our child about how to obtain a job.” The instructions for the FIS parent version were also modified so that it was clear that parents were answering items based on their college-age child who completed the student version of the survey.

Fouad et al. (2010) examined the convergent validity of the FIS with a diverse sample, using FIS with the Parental Attachment Questionnaire, Individualism/Collectivism Scale, the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale, and Satisfaction with Life Scale. Two confirmatory factor analyses with oblique rotations were performed to confirm the four factors proposed. Content validity for the scale was achieved by a thorough review of literature on how family influences the career decision-making process (Fouad et al., 2010).

Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool

The Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool was administered to both Asian parents and their college-age children after permission was obtained to use the scale (Qin, 2010). Modifications were made with permission for the scale’s instructions. This scale was specifically developed in Qin’s (2010) dissertation to assess occupational conflicts. The scale is comprised of 40 items measuring specific conflicts regarding to major/career-related values and general intergenerational conflicts (Qin, 2010). For Items 1–10, participants responded based on how they think their parents hold specific values (Qin, 2010). For this particular study, the sum of the first 10 items was calculated to drive a total score for perceived parent’s belief on major/career-related values. Higher scores on these 10 items indicate that a student perceives his or her parents to hold strong beliefs about major/career-related values (Qin, 2010). For Items 11–20, participants responded to how much they agreed with the values assessed, with higher scores meaning higher levels of agreement (Qin, 2010). The sum of the second set of 20 items was then calculated to drive a total score for perceived self-belief (child belief for the student version of the survey) on major/career-related values (Qin, 2010).

Asian parents and their college-age children were asked to respond to items 21–30 based on the frequency of conflicts. Scores were summed to create the general intergeneration conflict with frequency measure subscale, with higher scores indicating more frequency of conflicts (Qin, 2010). Similarly, participants were asked to respond to Items 31–40 based on the severity of conflicts. Scores were summed to create the general intergeneration conflict with severity measure subscale, with higher scores indicating greater levels of severity of conflicts (Qin, 2010).

There has been limited research conducted with this scale. However, Qin (2010) tested for concurrent validity of the Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool with the Family Acculturation Conflicts Scale (FCS). The FCS consists of 10 items about the likelihood and seriousness of problems on 10 family situations (Lee et al., 2000). Concurrent validity for this study found that the FCS was moderately correlated with family-based acculturative stress (Qin, 2010).

Asian Values Scale–Revised (AVS-R)

The AVS-R was administered to both Asian parents and their college-age children to assess endorsement of Asian cultural values (Kim, Atkinson, & Yang, 1999). This measure consists of 25 items designed to assess various dimensions of Asian cultural values. During the initial development of the AVS, six dimensions of cultural values were found which were (1) conformity to norms, (2) family recognition through achievement, (3) emotional self-control, (4) collectivism, (5) humility, and (6) filial piety (Kim et al., 1999). Internal consistency for these subscales ranged from 0.39 to 0.69 (Kim et al., 1999). Since the internal consistencies for the subscale scores were low, the researchers recommended using the total AVS score instead (Kim et al., 1999). Kim and Hong (2004) revised the AVS, creating a newer version with 25 items using a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Internal consistency estimates for the AVS-R ranged from 0.81 to 0.86 (Kim et al., 1999; Kim & Atkinson, 2002).

Results

Congruence was measured by calculating difference scores between Asian parents and their college-age children on each of the variables of interest. All items for the student version of the FIS subscales were added, taking their absolute value, to obtain a total score for Asian American college students’ perceptions on the various aspects of family influence on careers. All items for the parent version of the FIS subscales were also added, taking their absolute value, to obtain a total score for Asian parents’ perceptions. The Asian parents’ total scores were then subtracted from the students’ total scores on each of the FIS subscales to create a total difference score among the dyads. Similarly, total difference scores were calculated for the dyads the AVS-R, AAMAS scales, and Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool subscales. Higher total difference scores suggested lower levels of congruence whereas lower total difference scores suggested higher levels of congruence.

Since this study utilized difference scores to measure congruence, it is important to highlight the rationale for its use. Tisak and Smith (1994) highlighted that difference scores, particularly in dyadic research, can be useful to measure similarities and differences between pairs. Further, using difference scores in dyadic research can provide researchers with more information about the pairs than independently examining one member of a dyad (Tisak & Smith, 1994). Due to this, differences obtained among the pairs, rather than using both parent and child scores, were used to calculate the overall difference score for each variable of interest and included in the regressions.

Regression Analyses

To answer the research question, three multiple regression analyses were performed. The first regression analysis examined congruence of the informational support subscale of the FIS as the outcome variable. Congruence of values, acculturation subscales, and intergenerational subscales were entered as the predictor variables. Table 5 presents the findings from this analysis. Results indicated that congruence of these variables did not account for a significant amount of informational support variability, R² = .293, F(8, 21) = 1.086, p > .05. However, the total effect for the differences in values (t = 2.104, p < .05) was statistically significant, suggesting that the higher the differences between Asian parent–child dyads is in endorsing Asian cultural values, the higher the differences between the dyads in their perceptions of informational support on careers. Specifically, Asian parents endorsed more Asian cultural values than their college-age children.

Table 5.
Findings from Values, Acculturation, and Intergenerational Conflict Predicting Informational Support.

b SE b β p R ²

Model 1 .486 .293

(constant) 0.4203 5.932

AVS-R 0.500* 0.238* 0.446* .048*

AAMAS-CO 0.064 0.135 0.098 .642

AAMAS-AA 0.012 0.122 0.019 .923

AAMAS-EA −0.090 0.114 −0.156 .437

IG-Child 0.246 0.466 0.136 .551

IG-Parent −0.319 0.328 −0.216 .343

IG-Frequency 0.023 0.212 −0.022 .915

IG-Severity 0.039 0.251 0.034 .877

Note. AVS-R = Asian Values Scale–Revised; AAMAS-CO = Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale—Country of Origin; AAMAS-AA = Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale—Asian American; AAMAS-EA = Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale—European American; IG-Self = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Child Belief on Major/Career-Related Values; IG-Parent = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Parent Belief on Major/Career-Related Values, IG-Frequency = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Frequency; IG-Severity = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Severity.

p < .05.

The second regression examined congruence of the family expectations subscale of the FIS. Congruence of values, acculturation subscales, and intergenerational conflict subscales were entered as the predictor variables. Table 6 presents the findings from this analysis. Results indicated that these subscale difference scores did account for a significant amount of family expectations variability, R² = .560, F(8, 21) = 3.339, p < .05. The total effects for the differences in the General Intergeneration Conflict with Severity subscale (t = 3.958, p < .05) and differences in the Intergenerational Conflict Parent Belief on Major/Career-Related Values subscale (t = 2.327, p < .05) were significant. The significance of the General Intergeneration Conflict with Severity subscale suggests that the more serious general and major/career-related conflicts are within the dyads, the likelihood that more disagreement exists surrounding family expectations on careers. Similarly, the more the dyads disagree on Asian parents’ perceptions of conflicts around these issues, the more disagreement on family expectations on careers among the dyads. Asian American college students, on average, endorsed experiencing more severity of conflicts around majors and careers. They also endorsed experiencing more conflict regarding their parents’ beliefs on major and career-related values when compared to their parents’ perceptions.

Table 6.
Findings From Values, Acculturation, and Intergenerational Conflict Predicting Family Expectations.

b SE b* β p R ²

Model 1 .560

(constant) 0.307 2.315 .896

AVS-R −0.089 0.093 −0.161 .347

AAMAS-CO 0.086 0.053 0.266 .119

AAMAS-AA −0.032 0.048 −0.104 .507

AAMAS-EA −0.056 0.044 −0.197 .218

IG-Child −0.167 0.158 −0.187 .303

IG-Parent 0.298* 0.128* 0.408* .030*

IG-Frequency 0.100 0.083 0.197 .243

IG-Severity 0.388* 0.098* 0.670* .001*

Note. AVS-R = Asian Values Scale–Revised; AAMAS-CO = Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale—Country of Origin; AAMAS-AA = Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale—Asian American; AAMAS-EA = Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale—European American; IG-Self/Child = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Child Belief on Major/Career-Related Values; IG-Parent = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Parent Belief on Major/Career-Related Values; IG-Frequency = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Frequency; IG-Severity = Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool Severity.

*p < .05.

The third regression examined congruence of the values and beliefs subscale of the FIS. Congruence of the values, acculturation subscales, and intergenerational conflict subscales were entered as the predictor variables. Results indicated that these subscale difference scores did not account for a significant amount of values and beliefs variability, R² = .260, F(8, 21) = 0.681, p < .05. None of the total effects were statistically significant.

Discussion

Our findings suggested that differences between Asian parent–child dyads on the family expectations subscale of the FIS was predicted by differences between Asian parent–child dyads on values, acculturation, and intergenerational conflict. More specifically, our findings indicated that differences in endorsing cultural values, differences in the degree of seriousness regarding general and major/career-related values, and differences in conflict regarding parents’ perceptions around major/career-related values were predictive of differences in family expectations on careers.

As a model, the first regression analysis yielded nonsignificant findings. However, the total effects of differences in cultural values were found to be statistically significant. While previous research has examined adherence to cultural values for Asian American college students, it has not done so within a dyadic context. Nevertheless, the finding is consistent with existing literature pertaining to Asian American college students experiencing conflict related to the endorsement of Asian cultural values. For example, in Leung et al.’s (2011) study examining cultural values conflict and parental expectations on the career decision-making process of Chinese college students living in China, findings suggested that a relational component is important to consider within Chinese communities due to its collectivist orientation. The researchers hypothesized that Chinese college students would most likely experience conflict due to cultural values if they were exposed to both traditional and Western cultural values and that these conflicts could lead to increased difficulties in career decision making (Leung et al., 2011).

The second regression analysis yielded significant results, specifically that the total effects of differences in General Intergenerational Conflict with the Severity subscale and differences in Intergenerational Conflict Parent Belief on Major/Career-Related Values subscale were significant. These findings are surprising, as they have not been thoroughly investigated in previous literature within a dyadic context or solely with conflicts specific to majors and careers. One possible explanation for these findings is the degree to which the dyads have expectations regarding the career decision-making process. For instance, Asian American college students can receive information and support around potential major choices and careers. They can also receive information regarding their cultures of origin and cultural values. However, they might not endorse these ideas, beliefs, and practices, which can lead to potential conflict with their parents.

Similarly, expectations regarding majors and career choices might not always be explicitly communicated between Asian parent–child dyads. Additionally, if Asian parent–child dyads are already disagreeing on how much they endorse specific cultural values and acculturation levels, they are more likely to be experiencing some form of conflict within the family unit. According to Ma, Desai, George, San Filippo, and Varon’s (2014) study, conflict specific to majors and careers can occur due to a mismatch of values and interests between Asian parents and their children. This idea is supported by the significant total effect of the differences in parent’s belief on major/career-related values for this study.

The third regression analysis also yielded nonsignificant results and none of the variables had significant total effects. Previous research within vocational psychology has not closely examined the degree to which cultural values, acculturation, and intergenerational conflict influence values and beliefs in regard to career choices. Future research in this area would be interesting to explore further.

A potential explanation for the overall nonsignificant findings for the first and third regression models is the age range of the student participants, which were 18–27. Previous research has focused on examining the specific developmental stages and tasks that are associated with this time frame (e.g., Super, 1963, 1980). Since this study was conceptualized within a developmental framework, it is important to note whether or not these tasks are appropriate for this population. Per Super’s (1963) life-span, life-space theory, the participants in this study encompassed the exploratory (ages 15–24) and establishment stages (ages 25–44). Since the majority of participants in this study identified as seniors (n = 10) and graduate students (n = 6), they may have already engaged in some of the exploratory activities highlighted by Super. Additionally, they may have already had conversations with their parents regarding majors and career choices. As a result, conflict surrounding these issues may have already been reduced. Previous research also suggests that older students, regardless of their ethnic backgrounds, are more willing to challenge their parents regarding education and career-related values (e.g., Leung et al., 2011). Therefore, it is important to take this into consideration when interpreting our findings.

Theoretical Contributions

This study was conceptualized from a developmental framework, focusing specifically on the age ranges of Super’s life-span, life-space theory. However, it is important to note that the majority of research in vocational psychology focuses on how people make career choices at the individual level. Therefore, the traditional career development theories may not be as useful or applicable to dyadic research in vocational psychology. Since our study yielded nonsignificant findings, it is important to think critically about how the relational contexts of Asian American college students and their parents are influenced by one another in the overall career decision-making process. Because this study was dyadic in nature, it is important to modify traditional career development theories and take into consideration the relational aspect of career decision making.

Limitations

The primary limitation of this study is the sample size due to difficulties with recruitment. First, Asian American college students may have been interested in participating but not have had a parent available to complete the parent version of the survey. Several barriers for parents may have also contributed to lack of dyadic data such as language concerns and access to the parent survey. Additionally, a parent might not have been an influential figure in regard to family influence on careers which limited participation.

Due to the limited number of dyads in the analyses, findings should not be generalized to Asian Americans as a whole. Further, we could not perform any within group analyses or comparisons due to this limitation. The measures were also limited, as they relied solely on participants’ self-reported information. Participants could have over- or underreported the degrees of family influence, acculturation, endorsement of values, and levels of conflict within the family.

Similarly, Asian American college students may have been interested in participating but not have had a parent available to complete the parent version of the survey. Additionally, a parent might not have been an influential figure in regard to family influence on careers. It is important to note that several of the FIS subscales for the parent version had low reliabilities. Therefore, further investigation in the validity of the FIS with parents is needed to determine whether these items are relevant for Asian parents.

Another limitation is the data collection methods utilized. The majority of the data was collected through university student organizations, nonprofit organizations, and professional organizations. Individuals who are members of these organizations may already be endorsing higher levels of acculturation, Asian cultural values, and family influence. Therefore, participants may not be an accurate representation of all students that identify as Asian or Asian American.

Future Directions

Recommendations and Future Research

Based on previous research, it is evident that there should be further investigation in this area. While there is extant literature on the role of family influence on careers, there is limited information about how it is manifested within a dyadic context. Based on our findings and implications, two recommendations are made for future research.

The first recommendation is in regard to methodology. It is important that any research conducted with this population gain the trust of its community members. Future research with Asian parent–child dyads should focus on fostering and maintaining relationships with the community to better understand their perspectives. It may be beneficial to pursue qualitative research instead of quantitative so potential participants have the opportunity to interact with the researchers and ask them questions.

Another methodological recommendation is that the FIS be validated with parents to determine whether or not the scale’s items are relevant to parents. This information can be useful in modifying the scale for use with parents in addition to determining how parents perceive the role of family influence on careers for their children.

The second recommendation is theoretical. As previously noted, there are limited theories in vocational psychology that take the dyad into context when considering career choices. There are also several theories outside of vocational psychology, such as the concept of emerging adulthood, which may be more appropriate for this population and how they make career-related decisions.

Future research should also address other significant constructs for this population’s career development such as gender and age differences that were not investigated in this study. Previous research examining gender and age differences among European American, Mexican, Chinese, and Filipino/Filipina adolescents found that girls, regardless of cultural background, had later expectations for autonomy than boys (Fuligini, 1998). In terms of age-related differences, older adolescents expressed more of a willingness to disagree with their parents on parental authority and autonomy (Fuligini, 1998). Other variables that would be helpful to investigate in the future would be how the Asian parent–child coped with the conflict experienced and what the outcomes of these conflicts were.

	n	%	M	SD
Age	30	100	21.50	2.330
Ethnic background
Chinese	10	33.3
Indian	4	13.3
Filipino/Filipina	4	13.3
Taiwanese	3	10.0
Hmong	2	6.6
Japanese	1	3.3
Korean	1	3.3
Vietnamese/Caucasian	1	3.3
Chinese/Burmese	1	3.3
Japanese/American	1	3.3
Chinese/Polish	1	3.3
Chinese/Polish/Russian	1	3.3
Socioeconomic status
Poor	2	6.7
Working class	9	30
Middle class	11	36.7
Upper middle class	8	26.7
Type of community
Rural	1	3.3
Suburban	22	73.3
Urban	7	23.3
Other	0	0.0
Number of siblings
Zero	4	13.3
One	15	50.0
Two	9	30.0
Three	2	6.7
Generational status
First generation	12	40.0
Second generation	18	60.0

	n	%	M	SD
Age	29		53.55	6.350
Ethnic background
Chinese	13	43.3
Indian	4	13.3
Filipino/Filipina	4	13.3
Taiwanese	3	10.0
Hmong	2	6.6
Japanese	1	3.3
Korean	1	3.3
Biracial (Chinese/Burmese)	1	3.3
Chinese/Indonesian	1	3.3
Socioeconomic status
Working class	9	30
Middle class	14	46.7
Upper middle class	6	20.0
Wealthy	1	3.3
Type of community
Rural	1	3.3
Suburban	22	73.3
Urban	6	20.0
Other	1	3.3
Number of children
One	4	13.3
Two	15	50.0
Three	9	30.0
Four	2	6.7
Generational status
First generation	26	86.7
Third generation	1	3.3
Fifth generation	2	6.7
Other	1	3.3
Highest level of education
Elementary/secondary school	2	6.7
Some high school	3	10.0
High school diploma or equivalent	4	13.3
Some college	1	3.3
Associate or 2-year degree	1	3.3
Bachelor’s or 4-year degree	10	33.3
Graduate or professional degree	8	26.7
Not applicable or don’t know	1	3.3

Scale	n	α	M	SD
Family Influence Scale
Financial support	4	0.58	4.41	0.92
Family expectations	6	0.87	3.58	1.30
Values and beliefs	3	0.73	3.62	1.19
Informational support	8	0.91	3.94	1.12
Asian Values Scale–Revised	25	0.82	2.51	0.32
Intergenerational Conflict Items Pool
Self-belief on major/career-related values	10	0.92	3.37	0.89
Parent’s belief on major/career-related values	10	0.95	3.95	0.99
General intergeneration conflict with frequency measure	10	0.84	2.47	0.84
General intergeneration conflict with severity measure	10	0.88	2.32	0.89
Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale
Culture of Origin	15	0.90	4.35	0.93
Asian American	15	0.91	3.22	0.99
European American	15	0.78	4.62	0.60

Scale	n	α	M	SD
Family Influence Scale
Financial support	5	−0.16	4.50	0.48
Family expectations	6	0.75	3.77	1.26
Values and beliefs	3	0.74	3.90	1.19
Informational support	8	0.65	4.76	0.79
Asian Values Scale–Revised	25	0.84	2.71	0.35
Intergenerational Conflict Items Pool
Self-belief on major/career-related values	10	0.95	3.82	0.96
Child’s belief on major/career-related values	10	0.93	3.59	0.81
General intergeneration conflict with frequency measure	10	0.88	2.33	0.86
General intergeneration conflict with severity measure	10	0.86	2.20	0.88
Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale
Culture of Origin	15	0.94	5.30	0.85
Asian American	15	0.91	3.02	1.04
European American	15	0.94	3.50	0.85

	b	SE b	β	p	R ²
Model 1				.486	.293
(constant)	0.4203	5.932
AVS-R	0.500*	0.238*	0.446*	.048*
AAMAS-CO	0.064	0.135	0.098	.642
AAMAS-AA	0.012	0.122	0.019	.923
AAMAS-EA	−0.090	0.114	−0.156	.437
IG-Child	0.246	0.466	0.136	.551
IG-Parent	−0.319	0.328	−0.216	.343
IG-Frequency	0.023	0.212	−0.022	.915
IG-Severity	0.039	0.251	0.034	.877

	b	SE b	β	p	R ²
Model 1					.560
(constant)	0.307	2.315		.896
AVS-R	−0.089	0.093	−0.161	.347
AAMAS-CO	0.086	0.053	0.266	.119
AAMAS-AA	−0.032	0.048	−0.104	.507
AAMAS-EA	−0.056	0.044	−0.197	.218
IG-Child	−0.167	0.158	−0.187	.303
IG-Parent	0.298*	0.128*	0.408*	.030*
IG-Frequency	0.100	0.083	0.197	.243
IG-Severity	0.388*	0.098*	0.670*	.001*

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the following members of the first author’s dissertation committee for their contribution and feedback for this study: Drs. Shannon Chavez-Korell, Susie Lamborn, Christine Larson, and Wen Luo.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Ahn

A. J.

Kim

B. S. K.

Park

Y. S.

(2008). Asian cultural values gap, cognitive flexibility, coping strategies, and parent-child conflicts among Korean Americans. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14, 353–363.

Cho

Bae

S. W.

(2005). Demography, psychosocial factors, and emotional problems of Korean American adolescents. Adolescence, 40, 533–550.

Chung

R. H. G.

(2001). Gender, ethnicity, and acculturation in intergenerational conflict in Asian American college students. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 376–386.

Chung

R. H. G.

Kim

B. S. K.

Abreu

J. M.

(2004). Asian American multidimensional acculturation scale: Development, factor analysis, reliability and validity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10, 66–80.

Farver

J. A.

Bhadha

B. R.

Narang

S. K.

(2002). Acculturation and psychological functioning in Asian Indian adolescents. Social Development, 11, 11–29.

Fouad

N. A.

Cotter

E. W.

Fitzpatrick

M. E.

Kantamneni

Carter

Bernfeld

(2010). Development and validation of the Family Influence Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 18, 276–291.

Fuligini

A. J.

(1998). Authority, autonomy, and parent-adolescent conflict and cohesion: A study of adolescents from Mexican, Chinese, Filipino, and European backgrounds. Developmental Psychology, 34, 782–92.

Kim

B. S. K.

Atkinson

D. R.

(2002). Asian American client adherence to Asian cultural values, counselor expression of cultural values, counselor ethnicity, and career counseling process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 3–13.

Kim

B. S. K.

Atkinson

D. R.

Yang

P. H.

(1999). The Asian Values Scale: Development, factor analysis, validation, and reliability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 342–352.

10.

Kim

B. S. K.

Hong

(2004). A psychometric revision of the Asian values scale using the Rasch model. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 37, 15–27.

11.

Lee

R. M.

Cho

Kim

Ngo

(2000). Construction of the Asian American Family Conflicts Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 211–222.

12.

Lee

R. M.

Liu

H. T. T.

(2001). Coping with intergenerational family conflict: Comparison of Asian American, Hispanic, and European American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 410–419.

13.

Leong

F. T. L.

Chou

E. L.

(1994). The role of ethnic identity and acculturation in the vocational behavior of Asian Americans: An integrative review. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 155–172.

14.

Leong

F. T. L.

Gupta

(2007). Career development and vocational behavior of Asian Americans. In Leong

F. T. L.

Inman

A. G.

Ebreo

Yang

L. H.

Kinoshita

L. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of Asian American psychology (2nd ed., pp. 159–178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

15.

Leong

F. T. L.

Tata

S. P.

(1990). Sex and acculturation differences in occupational values among Chinese-American children. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 208–212.

16.

Leung

S. A.

Hou

Z. J.

Gati

(2011). Effects of parental expectations and cultural-values orientation on career decision-making difficulties of Chinese university students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78, 11–20.

17.

P.-W. W.

Desai

George

L. S.

San Filippo

A. A.

Varon

(2014). Managing family conflict over career decisions: The experience of Asian Americans. Journal of Career Development, 41, 487–506.

18.

P.-W. W.

Yeh

C. J.

(2005). Factors influencing the career decision status of Chinese American youths. The Career Development Quarterly, 53, 337–347.

19.

Oetting

E. R.

Beauvais

(1991). Orthogonal cultural identification theory: The cultural identification of minority adolescents. The International Journal of the Addictions, 25, 655–685.

20.

Qin

(2010). Family impact on Asian American’s career choice (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PDQT). 3452104

21.

Roysircar

Carey

Koroma

(2010). Asian Indian college students’ science and math preferences: Influences of cultural contexts. Journal of Career Development, 36, 324–347.

22.

Suinn

R. M.

Rickard-Figueroa

Lew

Vigil

(1987). The Suinn-Lew Asian Self-Identity Acculturation Scale: An initial report. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, 401–407.

23.

Super

D. E.

(1963). Self-concepts in vocational development. In Super

D. E.

(Ed.), Career development: Self-concept theory (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.

24.

Super

D. E.

(1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16, 282–298.

25.

Tabachnick

Fidell

L. S.

(2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

26.

Tang

(2002). A comparison of Asian American, Caucasian American, and Chinese college students: An initial report. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 30, 124–134.

27.

Tang

Fouad

N. A.

Smith

P. L.

(1999). Asian Americans’ career choice: A path model to examine factors influencing their career choices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 142–157.

28.

Tisak

Smith

C. S.

(1994). Defending and extending difference scores. Journal of Management, 20, 675–682.

29.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Asian/Pacific American heritage month: May 2010. Retrieved May 1, 2012, from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/cb10-ff07.html

30.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Asian/Pacific American heritage month: May 2011. Retrieved May 1, 2012, from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/cb11-ff06.html

31.

Young

R. A.

Ball

Valach

Turkel

Wong

Y. S.

(2003). The family career development project in Chinese Canadian families. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 287–304.

Family Influence on Careers Among Asian Parent–Child Dyads

Abstract

Keywords

Theoretical Framework

Current Study

Method

Procedure

Participants

Measures

Demographic questionnaire

Asian American Multidimensional Acculturation Scale (AAMAS)

Family Influence Scale (FIS)

Intergenerational Conflicts Item Pool

Asian Values Scale–Revised (AVS-R)

Results

Regression Analyses

Discussion

Theoretical Contributions

Limitations

Future Directions

Recommendations and Future Research

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

References