Personality Characteristics and Choice of Academic Major: Are Traditional Stereotypes Obsolete?.

Abstract

Among the many reasons for choosing an academic major are stereotypes that students hold of particular occupations and the degree to which they believe that their personalities match those sterotypes. We examined relevant personality characteristics (i.e., achievement motivation, conformity, conscientiousness, creativity and extroversion) of 899 students majoring in business administration fields. Students majoring in accounting and marketing and, to a lesser extent, in computer information systems and economics possessed personality characteristics that fit traditional societal steretypes of those occupations (e.g., marketing majors were the most extroverted; accounting students scored highest in conformity). The weakness of using stereotypes in choosing a major and ways that faculty members and advisors can supplant this common practice with more accurate information are discussed. Background College students select their major field of study for many reasons. One of those is the stereotypes that students hold of particular occupations (Noel, Michael & Levas, 2003; Schlee, Harich, Kiesler & Curren, 2007). Students and adults alike often assume that the people who hold such jobs as accountant, engineer, librarian, Marine, police officer, professor and software developer possess certain personality characteristics. So few of us are surprised when a student who is analytical and introverted chooses to major in accounting. In fact, Holland's theory of vocational choice (1985) proposes that people will enter professions where they believe the work environment will match their personalities. Hence, a common assumption is that the individuals within an occupation will share similar personality characteristics and that those characteristics will differ from those possessed by people in other occupations. The need for a personality-environment fit, of course, is not the only reason for a student's choice of an academic major. For example, studies have shown relationships between choice of major and such variables as salaries (Cebula & Lopes, 1982); perceived career opportunities (Newell, Titus & West, 1996); career prestige and self-employment opportunities (Lowe & Simons, 1997); reputation of the major, perceived quality of instruction, and amount and type of promotional information (Kim, Markham & Cangelosi, 2002); characteristics of the student's instructors in the major field (Hermanson, Hermanson & Ivancevick, 1995; Mauldin, Crain & Mounce, 2000); intellectual challenge of the field (Lowe & Simons, 1997); perceptions of courses within the major field (Cohen & Hanno, 1993); extent of the student's quantitative skills (Cohen & Hanno, 1993; Pritchard, Potter & Saccucci, 2004); the student's prior work experience (Lowe & Simons, 1997); the student's gender (Worthington & Higgs, 2003); family income (Astin, 1993); and parental and peer influence (Keillor, Bush & Bush, 1995; Newell, Titus & West 1996). Since the 1970s, however, most of the research has focused on the extent to which students with certain personality characteristics choose to major in particular fields. In this research stream there are two branches that focus on business students. The macro branch identifies personality differences that distinguish business majors from non-business students. For instance, Myers and McCaulley (1985) found that creative students are more likely to major in liberal arts than in business. Similarly, Saemann and Crooker (1999) found business students to be less creative than the general university population. Aryana, Meir and Bar-llan (1978) found accounting majors to be more conformist and less interested in general cultural, arts, and entertainment fields than psychology majors. Other research shows that students with Type A personalities are more likely to choose such majors as accounting or finance (Haemmerlie, Robinson & Carmen, 1991), while more easygoing, creative and social students are attracted to such professions as art design, art history, and art teaching (Schaubroeck, 1995). …