Person - Thing Orientations, Social Skills and Gender Differences at the University Students

Öz

Different vocational fields require different levels of social skills. At the same time, it is possible to distinguish between people or thing-oriented while defining individual differences the are effective in choosing the profession. In this study, it was aimed to examine the social skill levels of university students depending on the people-thing orientation in line with vocational interest. For this purpose, reflecting the people-thing orientation three field groups of health sciences, engineering, and social sciences and psychology departments' students who are thought to have high social skills were included. The data of this descriptive study were collected via applying online form using the A Social Skills Scale-80. A total of 690 undergraduate students, 426 females and 264 males, between the ages of 18-37 participated with convenience sampling in the study. The data were examined with descriptive statistics and two-way variance analyses. In the results of the research, it was found that the social skill levels of the students varied according to the grouped in terms of people and thing orientation. Students in the psychologhy department had the highest social skills. The Psychology department was followed by other social departments and engineering departments, respectively. Also, despite being people-oriented, the social skills of the students studying in health departments were lower than in other departments. In addition, as a basic difference, it was seen a difference in social skill levels between male and female students. It’s been understood that the high number of female students in some fields and the high number of male students in some fields also affected the evaluation of social skills. The obtained results have bee people oriented, thing oriented, vocational interest, social skills n discussed within the framework of the relevant literature

Anahtar Kelimeler

• people oriented
• thing oriented
• vocational interest
• social skills

Üniversite Öğrencilerinde Kişi Nesne Yönelimleri, Sosyal Beceriler ve Cinsiyet Farklılıkları

Öz

Farklı mesleki alanlarda, farklı düzeyde sosyal becerilere gereksinim vardır. Bununla birlikte meslek seçiminde etkili olan bireysel farklılıkları tanımlarken insan ya da nesne yönemli olarak ayrıştırmak mümkündür. Bu çalışmada üniversite öğrencilerinde mesleki ilgi doğrultusunda insan-nesne yönelimine bağlı olarak sosyal beceri düzeylerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla araştırmaya insan-nesne yönelimini yansıtan sağlık, mühendislik ve sosyal bölümlerden oluşan üç alan grubu ve bunlara ek olarak sosyal beceri düzeyi yüksek olduğu düşünülen psikoloji bölümü öğrencileri dahil edilmiştir. Tanımlayıcı türde tasarlanan bu çalışmanın verileri A Sosyal Beceri Ölçeği-80 kullanılarak çevrimiçi uygulanan bir form ile toplanmıştır. Çalışmaya kolay örnekleme yöntemiyle ulaşılan 18-37 yaşları arasında 426 kadın, 264 erkek olmak üzere toplam 690 lisans öğrencisi katılmıştır. Veriler, betimleyici istatistikler ve iki yönlü varyans analizi ile incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarında insan ve nesne yönelimi açısından gruplandırılan bölümlere göre öğrencilerin sosyal beceri düzeylerinin değişiklik gösterdiği bulunmuştur. Psikoloji bölümü öğrencileri sosyal beceri düzeyi en yüksek grup olarak belirlenmiştir. Psikoloji bölümünü sırasıyla diğer sosyal bölümler ve mühendislik bölümü takip etmiştir. Ayrıca insan yönelimli olmasına karşın sağlık bölümlerinde okuyan öğrencilerin sosyal becerileri diğer bölümlerden daha düşük çıkmıştır. Bununla birlikte, temel bir farklılık olarak kadın ve erkek öğrenciler arasında sosyal beceri düzeyi farklılığı görülmüştür. Bazı alanlarda kadın, bazı alanlarda erkek öğrencilerin sayıca fazla oluşunun da sosyal beceri değerlendirmesini etkilediği anlaşılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlar ilgili alanyazını çerçevesinde tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• insan yönelimi
• nesne yönelimi
• mesleki ilgi
• sosyal beceriler

Kaynakça

1. Agran, M., Hughes, C., Thoma, C. A., & Scott, L. A. (2016). Employment social skills: What skills are really valued?. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 39(2), 111-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143414546741
2. Amdurer, E., Boyatzis, R. E., Saatcioglu, A., Smith, M. L., & Taylor, S. N. (2014). Long term impact of emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies and GMAT on career and life satisfaction and career success. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01447
3. Armstrong, P. I., & Vogel, D. L. (2009). Interpreting the interest-efficacy association from a RIASEC perspective. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(3), 392-407. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016407
4. Armstrong, P. I., Day, S. X., McVay, J. P., & Rounds, J. (2008). Holland's RIASEC model as an integrative framework for individual differences. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.55.1.1
5. Aslam, U., Ilyas, M., Imran, M. K., & Rahman, U. (2016). Intelligence and its impact on managerial effectiveness and career success (evidence from insurance sector of Pakistan). Journal of Management Development, 35(4), 505-516. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-10-2015-0153
6. Babarović, T., Dević, I., & Burušić, J. (2019). Fitting the STEM interests of middle school children into the RIASEC structural space. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 19(1), 111-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10775-018-9371-8
7. Bedwell, W. L., Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2014). Developing the future workforce: An approach for integrating interpersonal skills into the MBA classroom. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13(2), 171-186. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2011.0138
8. Borges, J. W. P., Moreira, T. M. M., & Andrade, D. F. D. (2017). Nursing care interpersonal relationship questionnaire: elaboration and validation. Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, 25, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2128.2962

9. Boyatzis, R., Rochford, K., & Cavanagh, K. V. (2017). Emotional intelligence competencies in engineer’s effectiveness and engagement. Career Development International, 22(1), 70-86. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-08-2016-0136
10. Carter, S. R., Moles, R., White, L., & Chen, T. F. (2015). The impact of patients' perceptions of the listening skills of the pharmacist on their willingness to re-use Home Medicines Reviews: a structural equation model. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 11(2), 163-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2014.07.002
11. Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143(1), 1-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000052
12. Deming, D. J. (2017). The growing importance of social skills in the labor market. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), 1593-1640. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjx022
13. Graziano, W. G., Habashi, M. M., & Woodcock, A. (2011). Exploring and measuring differences in person-thing orientations. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(1), 28-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.004
14. Graziano, W. G., Habashi, M. M., Evangelou, D., & Ngambeki, I. (2012). Orientations and motivations: Are you a “people person,” a “thing person,” or both?. Motivation and Emotion, 36(4), 465-477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-011-9273-2
15. Groen, Y., Fuermaier, A. B. M., Tucha, L. I., Koerts, J., & Tucha, O. (2018). How predictive are sex and empathizing-systemizing cognitive style for entry intothe academic areas of social or physical sciences? Cognitive Processing, 19(1), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-017-0848-z
16. Haase, S., Chen, H. L., Sheppard, S., Kolmos, A., & Mejlgaard, N. (2013). What does it take to become a good engineer? Identifying cross-national engineering student profiles according to perceived importance of skills. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(3), 698-713.
17. Hargie, O. D., Morrow, N. C., & Woodman, C. (2000). Pharmacists’ evaluation of key communication skills in practice. Patient Education and Counseling, 39(1), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00091-9
18. Haşıloğlu, S. B., Baran, T. ve Aydın, O. (2015). Pazarlama araştırmalarındaki potansiyel problemlere yönelik bir araştırma: Kolayda örnekleme ve sıklık ifadeli ölçek maddeleri. Pamukkale İşletme ve Bilişim Yönetimi Dergisi, 2(1), 19-28.
19. Hidi, S. (2006). Interest: A unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review, 1(2), 69-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2006.09.001
20. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006) The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127.https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
21. Hoff, K. A., Briley, D. A., Wee, C. J. M., & Rounds, J. (2018). Normative changes in interests from adolescence to adulthood: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 144(4), 426-451. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000140
22. Hogan, R., Chamorro‐Premuzic, T., & Kaiser, R. B. (2013). Employability and career success: Bridging the gap between theory and reality. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12001
23. Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326, 1410-1412. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1177067
24. Kılıç, S . (2013). Örnekleme yöntemleri. Journal Of Mood Disorders, 3(1) , 44-6 . https://doi.org/10.5455/jmood.20130325011730
25. Lakhal, S., Frenette, É., Sevigne, S., & Khechine, H. (2012). Relationship between choice of a business major type (thing-oriented versus person-oriented) and big five personality traits. The International Journal of Management Education, 10(2), 88-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2012.03.003
26. Lexén, A., & Bejerholm, U. (2016). Exploring communication and interaction skills at work among participants in individual placement and support. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 23(4), 314-319. https://doi.org/10.3109/11038128.2015.1105294
27. Lippa, R. (1998). Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 996-1009. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.996
28. Lippa, R. A. (2010). Gender differences in personality and interests: When, where, and why?. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(11), 1098-1110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00320.x
29. Lopes, D. C., Gerolamo, M. C., Del Prette, Z. A. P., Musetti, M. A., & Del Prette, A. L. M. I. R. (2015). Social skills: A key factor for engineering students to develop interpersonal skills. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31(1), 405-413.
30. Lounsbury, J. W., Fisher, L. A., Levy, J. J., & Welsh, D. P. (2009). An investigation of character strengths in relation to the academic success of college students. Individual Differences Research, 7(1), 52-69.
31. McIntyre, M. M., Gundlach, J. L., & Graziano, W. G. (2021). Liking guides learning: The role of interest in memory for STEM topics. Learning and Individual Differences, 85, 101960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101960
32. Nelis, D., Kotsou, I., Quoidbach, J., Hansenne, M., Weytens, F., Dupuis, P., & Mikolajczak, M. (2011). Increasing emotional competence improves psychological and physical well-being, social relationships, and employability. Emotion, 11(2), 354-366. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021554
33. Noel, N. M., Michaels, C., & Levas, M. G. (2003). The relationship of personality traits and self-monitoring behavior to choice of business major. Journal of Education for Business, 78(3), 153-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320309599713
34. Noel, N. M., Trocchia, P., & Luckett, M. (2016). A predictive psychometric model to identify personality and gender differences of college majors. The International Journal of Management Education, 14(3), 240-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2016.05.004
35. Pertegal-Felices, M. L., Castejón-Costa, J. L., & Jimeno-Morenilla, A. (2014). Differences between the personal, social and emotional profiles of teaching and computer engineering professionals and students. Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1185-1201. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.777410
36. Phillips, B. N., Kaseroff, A. A., Fleming, A. R., & Huck, G. E. (2014). Work-related social skills: Definitions and interventions in public vocational rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 59(4), 386-398. https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000011
37. Piopiunik, M., Schwerdt, G., Simon, L., & Woessmann, L. (2018). Skills, signals, and employability: An experimental investigation. European Economic Review, 123, 103374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103374
38. Rúa, S. M. H., Stead, G. B., & Poklar, A. E. (2019). Five-factor personality traits and RIASEC interest types: A multivariate meta-analysis. Journal of Career Assessment, 27(3), 527-543. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072718780447
39. Sagiv, L. (2002). Vocational interests and basic values. Journal of Career Assessment, 10(2), 233-257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072702010002007
40. Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 197-223). New York, NY: Routledge.
41. Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 23-52. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009004801455
42. Stanley, S., & Bhuvaneswari, G. M. (2016). Reflective ability, empathy, and emotional intelligence in undergraduate social work students: A cross-sectional study from India. Social Work Education, 35(5), 560-575. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2016.1172563
43. Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2018). The gender-equality paradox in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Psychological Science, 29(4), 581-593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617741719
44. Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2020). ”The gender-equality paradox in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education”: Corrigendum. Psychological Science, 31(1), 110-111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619892892
45. Su, R., & Rounds, J. (2015). All STEM fields are not created equal: People and things interests explain gender disparities across STEM fields. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00189
46. Su, R., Rounds, J., & Armstrong, P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 859-884. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017364
47. Tatar, A. (2021). Gelişim psikolojisinde araştırma yöntemleri. İç. D. M. Siyez (Ed.), Çocuk ve ergen gelişimi: çok boyutlu bir bakış (1. bas. s. 38-85). Pegem Akademi. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786257676090
48. Tatar, A., Özdemir, H., Haşlak, F. D., Atsızelti, Ş., Özüdoğru, M. T., Çavuşoğlu, F., Çelikbaş, B., Uysal, A. R., Toklu, N., Uyğur, G., Astar, M., & Saltukoğlu, G. (2018). Yetişkinler için A Sosyal Beceri Ölçeği’nin geliştirilmesi ve psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(68), 69-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.16992/ASOS.13508
49. Varella, M. A. C., Ferreira, J. H. B. P., Pereira, K. J., Bussab, V. S. R., & Valentova, J. V. (2016). Empathizing, systemizing, and career choice in Brazil: sex differences and individual variation among areas of study. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 157-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.058
50. Vedel, A. (2016). Big Five personality group differences across academic majors: A systematic review. Personality and Individual Differences, 92, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.12.011
51. Weinberger, C. J. (2014). The increasing complementarity between cognitive and social skills. Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(4), 849-861. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00449
52. Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M., Derous, E., & Schmidt, H. G. (2014). Do students’ topic interest and tutors’ instructional style matter in problem-based learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 919-933. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037119
53. Woodcock, A., Graziano, W. G., Branch, S. E., Habashi, M. M., Ngambeki, I., & Evangelou, D. (2013). Person and thing orientations psychological correlates and predictive utility. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(1), 116-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612444320
54. Yang, Y., & Barth, J. M. (2015). Gender differences in STEM undergraduates' vocational interests: People-thing orientation and goal affordances. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 91, 65-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.09.007
55. Yong, E., & Ashman, P. J. (2019). Integration of the structured development of communication skills within a chemical engineering curriculum at the University of Adelaide. Education for Chemical Engineers, 27, 20-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2018.12.002