The characteristics of prototypical occupational identities: a grounded theory of four occupations

References

• Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639. doi: 10.1002/sce.20399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagnoli, A., & Clark, A. (2010). Focus groups with young people: A participatory approach to research planning. Journal of Youth Studies, 13(1), 101–119. doi: 10.1080/13676260903173504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Blustein, D. L. (2017). The psychology of working: A new perspective for career development. Career Planning & Adult Development Journal, 33(2), 60–68.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1985). The market of symbolic goods. Poetics, 14(1–2), 13–44. doi: 10.1016/0304-422X(85)90003-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen, G. A. (2005). Preparing a qualitative research-based dissertation: Lessons learned. The Qualitative Report, 10(2), 208–222.
   Google Scholar
• Boychuk, C., Lysaght, R., & Stuart, H. (2018). Career decision-making processes of young adults with first-episode psychosis. Qualitative Health Research, 28(6), 1016–1031. doi: 10.1177/1049732318761864
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelli, L., Carraro, L., Tomelleri, S., & Amari, A. (2007). White children’s alignment to the perceived racial attitudes of the parents: Closer to the mother than the father. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25(3), 353–357. doi: 10.1348/026151006X159851
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2013). Grounded theory methods in social justice research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 291–336). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K., & Henwood, K. (2017). Grounded theory methods for qualitative psychology. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 238–260). Palo Alto: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Charon, J. M. (2010). Symbolic interactionism: An introduction, an interpretation, an integration. Boston, MA: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Cheryan, S., & Plaut, V. C. (2010). Explaining underrepresentation: A theory of precluded interest. Sex Roles, 63(7–8), 475–488. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9835-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Handron, C., & Hudson, L. (2013). The stereotypical computer scientist: Gendered media representations as a barrier to inclusion for women. Sex Roles, 69(1), 58–71. doi: 10.1007/s11199-013-0296-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen, O. (2007). A simpler understanding of classic GT: How it is a fundamentally different methodology. The Grounded Theory Review, 6(3), 39–61.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, R., & Lang, A. (2002). Blanacing Yin and Yang: Teaching and learning qualitative data analysis within an undergraduate quantitative analysis course. Teaching Sociology, 30(3), 348–360. doi: 10.2307/3211483
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653–665. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crooks, D. L. (2001). The importance of symbolic interaction in grounded theory research on women’s health. Health Care For Women International, 22(1/2), 11–27. doi: 10.1080/073993301300003054
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cutcliffe, J. R. (2003). Reconsidering reflexivity: Introducing the case for intellectual entrepreneurship. Qualitative Health Research, 13(1), 136–148. doi: 10.1177/1049732302239416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutts, B., Hooley, T., & Yates, J. (2015). Fitting in or being yourself? How undergraduates plan to use hair, clothes and make-up to smooth their transition to the workplace. Industry and Higher Education, 29(4), 271–282. doi: 10.5367/ihe.2015.0261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, L. E. (1996). Learning qualitative research: Electronic learning circles. Qualitative Health Research, 6(3), 453–457. doi: 10.1177/104973239600600311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrlinger, J., Plant, E. A., Hartwig, M. K., Vossen, J. J., Columb, C. J., & Brewer, L. E. (2018). Do gender differences in perceived prototypical computer scientists and engineers contribute to gender gaps in computer science and engineering? Sex Roles, 78(1–2), 40–51. doi: 10.1007/s11199-017-0763-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandez, C. (2012). Guest editorial, themed section. The Grounded Theory Review, 11(1), 7–28.
   Google Scholar
• Gadassi, R., & Gati, I. (2009). The effect of gender stereotypes on explicit and implicit career preferences. The Counseling Psychologist, 37(6), 902–922. doi: 10.1177/0011000009334093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445. doi: 10.2307/798843
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs forcing. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G. (2003). The grounded theory perspective II: Description's remodelling of grounded theory methodology. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545–579. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.28.6.545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottfredson, L. S. (2002). Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription, compromise, and self-creation. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (pp. 85–148). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Gough, B., Fry, G., Grogan, S., & Conner, M. (2009). Why do young adult smokers continue to smoke despite the health risks? A focus group study Psychology & Health, 24(2), 203–220. doi: 10.1080/08870440701670570
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guichard, J. (2005). Life-long self-construction. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 5(2), 111–124. doi: 10.1007/s10775-005-8789-y
   Google Scholar
• Haley, J. (1990). Strategies of psychotherapy (2nd ed.). Rockville, MD: Triangle Press. (Original work published 1963).
   Google Scholar
• Hannover, B., & Kessels, U. (2004). Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic choices. Why high school students do not like math and science. Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 51–67. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslam, S. A., & Wilson, A. (2000). In what sense are prejudicial beliefs personal? The importance of an in-group’s shared stereotypes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(1), 45–63. doi: 10.1348/014466600164327
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hennick, M. M. (2008). Emergent issues in international focus group discussion. In S. N. HesseBiber, & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 207–220). New York: Guildford Press New York.
   Google Scholar
• Hernandez, C. A. (2008). Are there two methods of grounded theory? Demystifying the methodological debate. The Grounded Theory Review, 7(2), 39–66.
   Google Scholar
• HESA. (2014). Graduate destinations. Cheltenham: Author. Retrieved from https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/students/destinations
   Google Scholar
• Hilton, J. L., & von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 237–271. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland, J. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 6(1), 35–45. doi: 10.1037/h0040767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holton, J. A. (2007). The coding process and its challenges. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 265–389). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Holton, J. A. (2008). Grounded theory as a general research methodology. The grounded theory review, 7(2), 67–93.
   Google Scholar
• Hussein, M. E., Hirst, S., Salyers, V., & Osuji, J. (2014). Using grounded theory as a method of inquiry: Advantages and disadvantages. The Qualitative Report, 19(27), 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Hyde, A., Howlett, E., Brady, D., & Drennan, J. (2005). The focus group method: Insights from focus group interviews on sexual health with adolescents. Social Science and Medicine, 61(12), 2588–2599. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.04.040
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibarra, H., & Barbulescu, R. (2010). Identity as narrative: Prevalence, effectiveness, and consequences of narrative identity work in macro work role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 135–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, J. Y., & Young, M. (2019). The occupational/career decision-making processes of intellectually gifted adolescents from economically disadvantaged backgrounds: A mixed methods perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(1), 36–57. doi: 10.1177/0016986218804575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jussim, L., Cain, T. R., Crawford, J. T., Harber, K., & Cohen, F. (2009). The unbearable accuracy of stereotypes. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 199–227). Hove: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16(1), 103–121. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koçoğlu, İ, Akgün, A. E., & Keskin, H. (2016). The collective unconscious at the organizational level: The manifestation of organizational symbols. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235(24), 296–303. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.033
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. 1994. Thousands Oak, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Lippmann, W. (1991). Public opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published 1922).
   Google Scholar
• Lowe, A. (2005). Trust in emergence. Keynote presentation delivered to the 3rd international qualitative research convention. Malaysia: University Teknologi.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, N. J., & Langford, T. (1994). The meaning of occupational prestige scores: A social psychological analysis and interpretation. The Sociological Quarterly, 35(2), 215–245. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1994.tb00408.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mastro, D. E., Behm-Morawitz, E., & Kopacz, M. A. (2008). Exposure to television portrayals of Latinos: The implications of aversive racism and social identity theory. Human Communication Research, 34(1), 1–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00311.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson, E., Park, B., & Ito, T. A. (2018). The role of prototype matching in science pursuits: Perceptions of scientists that are inaccurate and diverge from self-perceptions predict reduced interest in a science career. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(6), 881–898. doi: 10.1177/0146167217754069
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijers, F., & Lengelle, R. (2012). Narratives at work: The development of career identity. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 40(2), 157–176. doi: 10.1080/03069885.2012.665159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myers, I. B. (1962). The Myers-Briggs type indicator: Manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Dowd, D. D., & Beardslee, D. C. (1967). Development and consistency of student images of occupations. Rochester: Michigan State University.
   Google Scholar
• Packard, B. W. L., & Nguyen, D. (2003). Science career-related possible selves of adolescent girls: A longitudinal study. Journal of Career Development, 29(4), 251–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, K., Ryan, M., Haslam, S. A., & Fernandes, H. (2012). To belong or not to belong: Evidence that women’s occupational disidentification is promoted by lack of fit with masculine occupational prototypes. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11(3), 148–158. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pisarik, C. T., Rowell, P. C., & Currie, L. K. (2013). Work-related daydreams: A qualitative content analysis. Journal of Career Development, 40(2), 87–106. doi: 10.1177/0894845311430947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratt, M. G., & Rafaeli, A. (1997). Organisational dress as a symbol of multilayered social identities. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4), 862–898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratt, M. G., & Rafaeli, A. (2001). 3. Symbols as a language of organizational relationships. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 93–132. doi: 10.1016/S0191-3085(01)23004-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramarajan, L., & Reid, E. (2013). Shattering the myth of separate worlds: Negotiating nonwork identities at work. Academy Of Management Review, 38(4), 621–644. doi: 10.5465/amr.2011.0314
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 573–605. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, M. (2014). Who is like a scientist? A self-prototype matching approach to women’s underrepresentation in STEM fields (Doctoral dissertation). University of Washington.
   Google Scholar
• Savickas, M. L. (2013). Career construction theory and practice. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (2nd ed., pp. 144–180). Hoboken: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Savickas, M. L., & Hartung, P. J. (2012). My career story. An autobiographical workbook for life-career success. Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Career Development Association.
   Google Scholar
• Savickas, M. L., Nota, L., Rossier, J., Dauwalder, J. P., Duarte, M. E., Guichard, J., … Van Vianen, A. E. (2009). Life designing: A paradigm for career construction in the 21st century. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(3), 239–250. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2009.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, D. J. (2004). The psychology of stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schreiber, R. S. (2001). The “how to” of grounded theory, avoiding the pitfalls. In R. S. Schreider & P. N. Stern (Eds.), Using grounded theory in nursing (pp. 55–84). Philadelphia: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sherriff, N., Gugglberger, L., Hall, C., & Scholes, J. (2014). “From start to finish”: Practical and ethical considerations in the use of focus groups to evaluate sexual health services interventions for young people. Qualitative Psychology, 1(2), 92–106. doi: 10.1037/qup0000014
   Google Scholar
• Sim, J. (1998). Collecting and analysing qualitative data: Issues raised by the focus group. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(2), 346–352. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00692.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starr, C. R. (2018). “I’m not a science nerd!” STEM stereotypes, identity, and motivation among undergraduate women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(4), 489–503. doi: 10.1177/0361684318793848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, P. N. (1980). Grounded theory methodology: Its uses and processes. Image, 12(1), 20–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.1980.tb01455.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Strati, A. (1998). Organizational symbolism as a social construction: A perspective from the sociology of knowledge. Human Relations, 51(11), 1379–1402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research – techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, K., Griffin, M. A., & Parker, S. K. (2012). Future work selves: How salient hoped-for identities motivate proactive career behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 580–598. doi: 10.1037/a0026423
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tolich, M. (2009). The principle of caveat emptor: Confidentiality and informed consent as endemic ethical dilemmas in focus group research. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 6(1), 99–108. doi: 10.1007/s11673-008-9124-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warr, D. J. (2005). “It was fun … but we don’t usually talk about these things”: Analyzing sociable interaction in focus groups. Qualitative Inquiry, 11(2), 200–225. doi: 10.1177/1077800404273412
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
   Google Scholar
• Wuest, J. (1995). Feminist grounded theory: An exploration of the congruency and tensions between two traditions in knowledge discovery. Qualitative health research, 5(1), 125–137. doi: 10.1177/104973239500500109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates, J. (2017). A meta-theoretical framework for career practitioners. The Indian Journal of Career and Livelihood Planning, 5(1), 15–25.
   Google Scholar
• Yates, J., & Cahill, S. (2018). What kind of shoes does a social worker wear? A content analysis of four occupational prototypes. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling. doi: 10.1080/03069885.2018.1437596
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar