Test of the Social Cognitive Model of Well-Being in Spanish College Students

Abstract

The social cognitive model of well-being was tested in a sample of 373 college students in Spain. Participants completed measures of academic self-efficacy, environmental support, goal progress, academic satisfaction and stress, trait positive affect, and overall life satisfaction. A path analysis indicated that the model fit the data well and accounted for substantial portions of the variance in academic domain satisfaction, academic stress, and life satisfaction, though a few path coefficients (e.g., from positive affect and environmental support to academic stress) were nonsignificant. We consider the findings in relation to prior tests of the well-being model and discuss implications for practice and future research.

Keywords

social cognitive career theory self-efficacy academic satisfaction academic stress life satisfaction positive affect well-being

Vocational psychology has long focused on factors that promote well-being in work and educational settings. For instance, person–environment fit theories of career development are fundamentally concerned with factors that give rise to occupational satisfaction and other aspects of positive work adjustment (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1997). Fueled in part by the positive psychology movement, recent years have seen a resurgence of interest in well-being in counseling and vocational psychology research (e.g., Magyar-Moe, Owens, & Conoley, 2015).

One theoretical approach that has been stimulating inquiry is Lent’s (2004) model of normative well-being, which conceptualizes well-being within particular life domains in terms of one’s satisfaction with and affective experience (e.g., relatively low levels of stress) in that domain. This model draws partly from general social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986, 1997) as well as from a variety of perspectives on subjective and psychological well-being. According to the model (shown in Figure 1), domain well-being is an important source of overall life satisfaction. That is, feeling satisfied and comfortable within one’s central life domains is likely to promote overall life satisfaction. Both domain well-being and life satisfaction are also seen as partly determined by personality/affective traits. For example, one’s general tendency to experience positive or negative affect is likely to influence perceived well-being both globally and in specific life domains.

Figure 1.

Integrative model of well-being under normative life conditions. Adapted from Lent (2004). Reprinted with permission. PA = positive affect; NA = negative affect; GSE = generalized self-efficacy.

While the model acknowledges the role of personality in well-being and life satisfaction, it also envisions key roles for social, cognitive, and behavioral variables. For example, the model contends that well-being in particular life domains is likely to be enhanced when people set and make progress at personally relevant goals, hold strong self-efficacy beliefs in relation to the tasks required to meet their goals and otherwise function competently in that life domain, expect their efforts to produce favorable outcomes, and are able to access environmental resources for promoting self-efficacy and goal pursuit. Successful goal pursuit is also assumed to promote one’s overall sense of life satisfaction both directly and indirectly via domain well-being.

The model also portrays interrelations among the various predictors of domain well-being and life satisfaction. For example, goal progress is linked to self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and environmental support; people are more likely to make progress on their valued goals to the extent that they possess favorable views of their self-efficacy and expected outcomes and perceive that they have the supports needed to achieve their goals. Environmental support is also seen as a source of self-efficacy, with the perception of ample supports helping to bolster self-efficacy. In addition to their direct paths, certain personality traits, such as positive and negative affect, are conceived as being linked to domain well-being and life satisfaction indirectly, through their relations to self-efficacy and environmental support. Trait positive affect, for instance, promotes generally favorable beliefs about the self and environmental support.

Lent and Brown (2006, 2008) adapted the general model of well-being to the specific life domains of school and work, incorporating it into the extended family of social cognitive career theory (SCCT) models (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). A number of studies have subsequently tested versions of the model in college and work settings (see Brown & Lent, 2016). For example, Lent et al. (2005) found that the model usefully predicted academic domain satisfaction in an ethnically heterogeneous sample of U.S. college students. Ojeda, Flores, and Navarro (2011) and Hui, Lent, and Miller (2013) found good fit to the data in predicting academic satisfaction in samples, respectively, of Mexican American and Asian American college students.

Other studies have examined the model’s range of cultural and international applicability, finding that it usefully predicted academic satisfaction in college students in Portugal (Lent, Taveira, & Lobo, 2012; Lent, Taveira, Sheu, & Singley, 2009), Taiwan and Singapore (Sheu, Chong, Chen, & Lin, 2014), and Angola and Mozambique (Lent et al., 2014), as well as in African college students studying in the United States (Ezeofor & Lent, 2014). Versions of the model have also been tested in the context of job satisfaction in samples of workers in the United States (Duffy & Lent, 2009), Abu Dhabi (Badri, Mohaidat, Ferrandino, & El Mourad, 2013), Italy (Lent et al., 2011), and Turkey (Buyukgoze-Kavas, Duffy, Guneri, & Autin, 2014).

The present study was designed to extend research on the SCCT model of well-being model by examining its tenability in a novel linguistic and cultural context, that of a Spanish university. In addition, following the procedures of Lent et al. (2012), we sought to test the model by “unpacking” academic domain well-being into separate but related indicators of academic satisfaction and stress. Such an approach examines the possibility that satisfaction and stress may each relate differently to the variables that are posited to be their antecedents (e.g., self-efficacy) or consequents (overall life satisfaction). By contrast, most prior studies of the model have operationalized domain well-being either by using measures of academic or job satisfaction alone (i.e., without including a separate measure of experienced distress) or by modeling satisfaction and stress as indicators of a common latent adjustment construct.

It should be noted that the model we tested represents an abbreviated version of the model shown in Figure 1. In particular, we did not include outcome expectations as a predictor of the well-being outcomes in order to limit survey length and because past findings have not always supported the unique predictive role of outcome expectations in the model (e.g., Lent et al., 2005; Ojeda, Flores, & Navarro, 2011; Sheu et al., 2014). The omission of outcome expectations represents a fairly common alteration of the model (e.g., Hui, Lent, & Miller, 2013; Lent et al., 2005, study 2; Lent et al., 2012). In addition, although the well-being model posits a reciprocal relationship between domain and life satisfaction, we modeled only a unidirectional path from domain to life satisfaction because of the cross-sectional nature of the study’s design.

Method

Participants

Participants were 373 students (292 women, 81 men) undergraduate students at a major university in the northeast of Spain. Most of the participants were first- (90%) or second-year (9%) students enrolled in education (89%) courses. Their average age was 21.61 (SD = 4.07) years. Ninety-seven percent of the participants were Spanish citizens.

Procedure and Instruments

Students were recruited for participation by faculty research partners at the university. Data were gathered during the second semester of the academic year, so that all students would have had some prior college experience as a basis for their responses to the survey. Students completed Spanish language versions of the measures in classrooms and did not receive incentives to participate in the study. The measures were originally developed in English and translated into Portuguese (see Lent et al., 2009). For the current study, the Portuguese measure versions were translated into Spanish and then backtranslated into Portuguese by faculty research partners who were fluent in both languages. For each scale, total scores were obtained by summing item responses and dividing by the number of items on the scale. Higher scores on all scales reflected more favorable expectations (e.g., stronger self-efficacy) or experiences (e.g., lower stress). Coefficient α estimates for each scale in the current sample are shown in Table 1; values ranged from .62 (academic stress) to .82 (academic self-efficacy, academic satisfaction, and life satisfaction).

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations, and Internal Consistency Estimates.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	M	SD	α
1. Self-efficacy	–							7.28	0.81	.82
2. Goal progress	.51	–						3.76	0.47	.81
3. Support	.22	.23	–					4.01	0.41	.67
4. Acad. satisfac.	.39	.40	.41	–				3.75	0.57	.82
5. Stress	.35	.38	.17	.36	–			3.46	0.65	.62
6. Positive affect	.50	.40	.24	.44	.27	–		3.75	0.44	.76
7. Life satisfac.	.27	.23	.29	.39	.26	.34	–	5.17	1.02	.82

Note. N = 373. Acad. satisfac. = academic satisfaction; life satisfac. = life satisfaction.

All correlations significant, p < .001.

The self-efficacy measure contained 11 items asking students to rate their confidence in their ability to perform well academically and to cope with barriers to academic success (e.g., “do your best … during the next semester,” “deal with lack of support by the teachers or supervisors”). Participants responded using a 10-point scale, from no confidence (0) to complete confidence (9). Versions of this scale have produced adequate reliability estimates and theory-consistent relations with academic outcomes in prior research (e.g., Lent et al., 2005). Lent et al. (2009) reported coefficient αs for the Portuguese version of the academic self-efficacy scale of .87 and .90.

To measure goal progress, students completed 8 items indicating the amount of progress (from 1 = no progress to 5 = excellent progress) they were making at a variety of academic goals (e.g., “actively participate in class”). The original version of this measure yielded internal consistency reliability estimates of .84 to .86 and correlated with measures of academic self-efficacy, outcome expectations, environmental supports, and domain satisfaction (Lent et al., 2005). The Portuguese version of this scale has yielded coefficient α values of .80 and .85 (Lent et al., 2009). Environmental supports were assessed with 9 items listing a variety of conditions that may support students’ academic progress (e.g., “I am encouraged by my friends to go on with my studies”). Students indicated their agreement with each statement, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Lent et al. (2005) reported internal consistency estimates of .81 and .84 and found that the scale correlated with measures of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goal progress, and domain satisfaction. The Portuguese version of the scale has produced internal consistency estimates of .76 and .81 (Lent et al., 2009).

On the academic domain satisfaction measure, students completed 7 items indicating how satisfied they were with various aspects of their academic life (e.g., “In general, I am satisfied with my academic life”) using a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) scale. Lent et al. (2005) reported reliability estimates of .86 and .87 and found that the scale correlated with measures of positive affect, social domain satisfaction, and overall life satisfaction. The Portuguese version of this scale has produced α coefficients of .85 and .89 (Lent et al., 2009). Academic stress was assessed with a 4-item measure asking students to rate the stress they experienced in academic situations (e.g., “How often did you feel that academic difficulties were piling up in such a way that you could not overcome them?”). Ratings were made on a 1–5 scale, from 1 = never to 5 = frequently. This measure was modified by Lent et al. (2009) from the Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983), a general measure of stress. Item responses were reversed, so that higher scores would reflect less stress. The Portuguese version employed by Lent et al. yielded α values of .75 and .76.

The tendency to experience positive emotions was assessed with the Positive Affect Scale from the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). Students responded by indicating the extent to which they generally feel 10 positive emotions (e.g., “proud”), from 1 = very little or not at all to 5 = extremely. Lent et al. (2005) found that the Positive Affect Scale related to life satisfaction, academic self-efficacy, and environmental supports in theory-consistent ways. The Portuguese version yielded internal consistency estimates of .86 at each of two assessment intervals (Lent et al., 2009). Finally, the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffen, 1985) was used to index overall life satisfaction. The SWLS contains five statements (e.g., “I am satisfied with my life”) that are rated along a 7-point scale, from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. It has produced adequate internal consistency (.88–.91) and validity estimates in prior research with Portuguese college students (Lent et al., 2009).

Results

The means, standard deviations, internal consistency reliability α values, and correlations among the scales are displayed in Table 1. The well-being model was tested with a path analysis using the covariance matrices of the observed variables and the MLM estimator setting (maximum likelihood parameter estimates with standard errors and a mean-adjusted chi-square test statistic that are robust to non-normality) of Mplus 7.4 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2015). Adequacy of model-data fit was assessed with the comparative fit index (CFI), the standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) index, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Hu and Bentler (1999) suggested that SRMR values close to .08 in combination with CFI values close to .95 or RMSEA values close to .06 imply good model-data fit.

The model fit the data well according to the SRMR (.03) and CFI (.97) indices; Santorra–Bentler (S-B) χ²(3, N = 373) = 19.01, p < .001. The RMSEA value was, however, higher than optimal (.12), and modification indices indicated that fit could be improved with the addition of a path from positive affect to goal progress. This path was also found to improve model fit in a previous study (Lent et al., 2012) and seems reasonable on conceptual grounds in that the cognitive manifestation of positive trait affect may promote more favorable appraisals of one’s life conditions, including perceived progress toward valued goals. When this path was included in the model (β = .18), each of the fit indices improved, SRMR = .02, CFI = .99, RMSEA = .09, S-B χ²(2, N = 373) = 7.61, p < .05.

The path coefficients are shown in Figure 2. Most of the theoretical predictors produced significant direct paths to each of the well-being outcomes. Specifically, academic satisfaction was linked to self-efficacy, environmental support, positive affect, and goal progress. Academic stress was predicted by self-efficacy and goal progress, though not by support or positive affect. Support was linked to the experience of stress only indirectly via the self-efficacy/goal progress pathway (the total indirect effect of support on stress, based on 5,000 bias-corrected bootstrap samples, was B = .08, SE = .03, 95% CI [.03, .15]). As expected, academic satisfaction and stress covaried significantly, with more satisfied students tending to report less stress. Life satisfaction was linked to higher levels of academic satisfaction and positive affect and lower levels of stress. Contrary to expectations, goal progress did not produce a significant direct path to life satisfaction. It was, however, linked to life satisfaction indirectly via academic satisfaction and stress (total indirect effect, B = .16, SE = .05, 95% CI [.07, .27]). (A table of all indirect effects can be obtained from the first author.) The set of predictors accounted for 33%, 18%, and 19% of the variance, respectively, in academic satisfaction, stress, and life satisfaction.

Figure 2.

Adaptation of the social cognitive model of well-being to academic adjustment. *p < .05 (one-tailed).

Examining the paths among the predictor variables, it can be seen that goal progress was significantly predicted by both self-efficacy and support (R² = .28); the addition of the path from positive affect to goal progress explained an additional 2% of the variance in goal progress. Support and positive affect each produced significant paths to self-efficacy (R² = .26), and positive affect was also modestly linked to perceptions of support (R² = .06). Thus, positive affect was associated with each of the social cognitive predictors. However, two or more of the social cognitive variables accounted for unique variance (beyond positive affect) in the academic well-being criteria (i.e., academic satisfaction and stress) which, in turn, helped predict life satisfaction.

Discussion

The present study replicates and extends earlier applications of the social cognitive model of well-being within a novel cultural context, higher education in Spain. Similar to prior studies with college students in Portugal (Lent et al., 2012) and in Taiwan and Singapore (Sheu et al., 2014), we tested a model in which the larger construct of academic well-being was disaggregated into two components, academic satisfaction and academic stress. Our findings were largely consistent with those of these prior studies, supporting the model’s tenability across a range of cultures and countries and adding to the view that domain and general well-being are not simply reflections of traits, like positive affectivity. These findings instead suggest that traits may function along with cognitive, behavioral, and environmental variables in the maintenance of well-being; thus, people may be able to assert some agency in their experience of domain comfort (e.g., academic satisfaction and stress) and life satisfaction (Lent, 2004)—and not simply have to resign themselves to a sense of biological fatalism regarding their affective functioning (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996).

Specifically, positive affect produced significant direct paths to two of the three well-being variables (academic satisfaction and life satisfaction, but not academic stress); it was also linked to these outcomes indirectly through its relations to the social cognitive variables. Along with goal progress, self-efficacy and support contributed, directly and/or indirectly, to the prediction of academic satisfaction and stress. Levels of academic satisfaction and stress, in turn, were predictive of overall life satisfaction. Only 3 of the 18 predicted direct paths in the model did not reach significance: the paths from positive affect and support to stress and the path from goal progress to life satisfaction.

On balance, these findings are quite consistent with those of Lent et al. (2012, study 1), who tested the present version of the academic well-being model cross-sectionally in a sample of Portuguese college students. Sheu, Chong, Chen, and Lin (2014), testing a similar model in Taiwanese and Singaporean college students, also reported good overall model-data fit in both samples, though somewhat fewer individual paths conformed to expectations in their samples (e.g., self-efficacy was linked to the academic well-being variables only indirectly, through goal progress). However, Sheu et al.’s study differed from the current one in some notable ways. For example, in addition to the variables we studied, Sheu et al. included measures of outcome expectations, two different personality variables (extroversion and emotional stability), and two cultural variables (independence and interdependence).

Compared to our cross-sectional findings, Lent et al.’s (2012, study 2) longitudinal study found that positive affect at Time 1 did not produce direct relations to academic satisfaction, stress, or life satisfaction at Time 2. Moreover, Time 1 environmental support and self-efficacy were found to be predictive of Time 2 positive affect, suggesting that the linkages between social cognitive variables and positive affect may well be reciprocal in nature rather than only unidirectional (from positive affect to support and self-efficacy). Such a reciprocal pathway was also observed by Lent et al. (2009). These contrasting findings highlight some of the limitations of the cross-sectional design of the current study. For example, unlike longitudinal studies (e.g., Singley, Lent, & Sheu, 2010), they do not enable examination of temporal predominance between predictors and criterion variables or allow for an adequate test of reciprocal linkages. By failing to account for autoregressive paths, they may also portray a distorted picture of predictor-criterion relations.

The current findings should also be interpreted in light of the study’s other limitations, which have useful implications for future research. First, we tested a version of the well-being model that did not include outcome expectations. More research is needed on the incremental value of this variable in model tests. Second, the measures of academic stress and support both produced marginal internal consistency reliability estimates in the present sample. Third, while our findings with Spanish students are consistent with those of an earlier cross-sectional study in Portugal (Lent et al., 2012, study 1), we did not test for measurement invariance across these two studies. It would be valuable in future research to determine the extent to which the measures reflect common constructs despite linguistic and cultural differences between samples (cf. Sheu & Lent, 2009).

These limitations notwithstanding, the present findings are consistent with a theoretical view of well-being as representing a multidimensional concept that incorporates distinct but related aspects of functioning within specific life domains (e.g., academic satisfaction and stress) as well as across life domains (e.g., global life satisfaction). Together with other recent international studies, these findings suggest the value of further research testing versions of the social cognitive well-being model in more diverse national contexts (Sheu & Lent, 2009). There is also a need for additional research testing the model with samples of employed workers (e.g., Badri et al., 2013; Duffy & Lent, 2009; Lent et al., 2011), complementing the predominant focus on college student samples in the existing literature. Such research can help to better establish the range of the model’s cultural and developmental applicability.

At a practice level, the present findings, along with those of longitudinal studies, suggest that efforts to promote academic self-efficacy and to provide sufficient environmental support for students’ academic behavior offer viable routes to facilitating students’ academic adjustment to college (as indexed by academic domain satisfaction and levels of stress) and overall life satisfaction. Methods for increasing academic self-efficacy can draw upon the four sources of efficacy information (e.g., exposure to relevant models), and supports can be provided via tutoring, living-learning communities, and others outlets that help students to function well academically and that afford ties to cohesive social structures. These practice suggestions would, of course, be bolstered by additional longitudinal findings supporting the hypothesized temporal relations among the variables in the model and, especially, by experimental findings showing that interventions derived from the model do, in fact, facilitate students’ experience of academic well-being and life satisfaction.

In sum, the present findings largely replicate in the Spanish context the results of a prior study on Portuguese college students (Lent et al., 2012, study 1) that operationalized academic satisfaction and stress as distinct aspects of academic well-being. These findings are also generally consistent with prior results that have linked the social cognitive predictors either to indicators of academic satisfaction alone (e.g., Lent et al., 2005, study 1) or to latent academic adjustment variables that reflect multiple aspects of academic well-being (e.g., Lent et al., 2009). The confluence of cross-sectional and longitudinal findings to this point suggests that the model as a whole, and particular paths in the model, are tenable in diverse cultural contexts.

Footnotes

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

Badri

M. A.

Mohaidat

Ferrandino

El Mourad

(2013). The social cognitive model of job satisfaction among teachers: Testing and validation. International Journal of Educational Research, 57, 12–24.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.

Brown

S. D.

Lent

R. W.

(2016). Vocational psychology: Agency, equity, and well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 541–565.

Buyukgoze-Kavas

Duffy

R. D.

Guneri

O. Y.

Autin

K. L.

(2014). Job satisfaction among Turkish teachers: Exploring differences by school level. Journal of Career Assessment, 22, 261–273.

Cohen

Kamarck

Mermelstein

(1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396.

Dawis

R. V.

Lofquist

L. H.

(1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Diener

Emmons

R. A.

Larsen

R. J.

Griffen

(1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.

Duffy

R. D.

Lent

R. W.

(2009). Test of a social cognitive model of work satisfaction in teachers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75, 212–223.

10.

Ezeofor

Lent

R. W.

(2014). Social cognitive and self-construal predictors of well-being among African college students in the United States. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85, 413–421.

11.

Holland

J. L.

(1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

12.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

13.

Hui

Lent

R. W.

Miller

M. J.

(2013). Social cognitive and cultural orientation predictors of well-being in Asian American college students. Journal of Career Assessment, 21, 587–598.

14.

Lent

R. W.

(2004). Toward a unifying theoretical and practical perspective on well-being and psychosocial adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 482–509.

15.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

(2006). Integrating person and situation perspectives on work satisfaction: A social-cognitive view. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 236–247.

16.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

(2008). Social cognitive career theory and subjective well-being in the context of work. Journal of Career Assessment, 16, 6–21.

17.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Hackett

(1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance [Monograph]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–122.

18.

Lent

R. W.

Nota

Soresi

Ginevra

M. C.

Duffy

R. D.

Brown

S. D.

(2011). Predicting the job and life satisfaction of Italian teachers: Test of a social cognitive model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79, 91–97.

19.

Lent

R. W.

Singley

Sheu

Gainor

Brenner

B. R.

Treistman

Ades

(2005). Social cognitive predictors of domain and life satisfaction: Exploring the theoretical precursors of subjective well-being. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 429–442.

20.

Lent

R. W.

Taveira

Lobo

(2012). Two tests of the social cognitive model of well-being in Portuguese college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 362–371.

21.

Lent

R. W.

Taveira

Pinto

J. C.

Silva

A. D.

Blanco

Faria

Goncalves

A. M.

(2014). Social cognitive predictors of well-being in African college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84, 266–272.

22.

Lent

R. W.

Taveira

Sheu

Singley

(2009). Social cognitive predictors of academic adjustment and life satisfaction in Portuguese college students: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 190–198.

23.

Lykken

Tellegen

(1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7, 186–189.

24.

Magyar-Moe

J. L.

Owens

R. L.

Conoley

C. W.

(2015). Positive psychological interventions in counseling: What every counseling psychologist should know. The Counseling Psychologist, 43, 508–557.

25.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(1998–2015). Mplus user’s guide. Seventh edition. Los Angeles, CA: Author.

26.

Ojeda

Flores

L. Y.

Navarro

R. L.

(2011). Social cognitive predictors of Mexican American college students’ academic and life satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 61–71.

27.

Sheu

Chong

S. S.

Chen

Lin

(2014). Well-being of Taiwanese and Singaporean college students: Cross-cultural validity of a modified social cognitive model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61, 447–460.

28.

Sheu

Lent

R. W.

(2009). A social cognitive perspective on well-being in educational and work settings: Cross-cultural considerations. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 9, 45–60.

29.

Singley

Lent

R. W.

Sheu

(2010). Longitudinal test of a social cognitive model of academic and life satisfaction. Journal of Career Assessment, 18, 133–146.

30.

Watson

Clark

L. A.

Tellegen

(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.