PARENTAL ROLE MODELLING AND THE INFLUENCE ON OCCUPATIONAL
TRANSMISSION IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP, MEDICINE AND PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
Author: Lavinia de Haseth Möller Student UvA ID: 11427078, VU ID: 2518352
Thesis Supervisor: Roel C W van der Voort Universiteit van Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit
Preface
The copyright rests with the author. The author is solely responsible for the content of the thesis, including mistakes. The university cannot be held liable for the content of the author’s thesis.
Abstract
This research investigates the mechanism of role modelling within transgenerational transmission as well as factors which influence role modelling among university students. This research investigates and answers the following research question; How does role modelling
effect transgenerational transmission of occupational choice? Moreover, by comparing
transgenerational transmission within three occupational fields (Entrepreneurship, Medicine and Public Administration) insight is provided regarding the differences among these different fields of occupation. From the sample arises that role modelling limitedly justifies the transmission of occupation between parent and child, contrasting existing theories. A new model is forwarded including different factors of influence which strongly and significantly correlated with role modelling, including parental relationship warmth, the child assessment of parental values and norms, and the child’s perceived parental skill. These core findings provide critical insight into current theories, testing both existing assumptions and forwarding a new model, which may act as a stepping stone for further and broader empirical research.
Keywords: Transgenerational Transmission, Occupational Transmission, Role Modelling,
Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction ... 6
1.1 Research Design... 6
1.2 Transgenerational Transmission of Entrepreneurship ... 7
1.3 Role Modelling Among Entrepreneurs ... 8
1.4 Thesis Structure ... 8
Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework ... 10
2.1 An Introduction to the Development of Child Behavior ... 10
2.2 The Role Model Theory and Mentoring ...11
2.2 Parental Achievement and Emulation Worthiness ... 13
2.3 Parental-Child Relationship ... 14
2.3.1 Parental Academic Achievement ... 14
2.3.2 Parental Involvement ... 14
2.3.3 Parental Warmth ... 15
2.4 Modelling the Role Model Mechanism ... 15
Chapter 3. Method ... 17
3.1 Population Parameters ... 17
3.2 Measures and Operationalization ... 17
3.3. Approach Hypothesis Testing. ... 20
Chapter 5. Discussion and Conclusion ... 28
5.1 The Role Modelling Mechanism ... 28
5.2 A Model of Influences ... 28
5.3 Contribution to Current Research ... 29
5.4 Research Limitations and Further Research ... 29
5.5 Concluding Remarks ... 30
References ... 32
Appendix A: Questionnaire Sample... 37
PARENTAL ROLE MODELLING AND THE INFLUENCE ON OCCUPATIONAL TRANSMISSION IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP, MEDICINE AND PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
Chapter 1: Introduction
Entrepreneurship, as a research subject, has proved itself to be intriguing over the past century, where the entrepreneur is approached as a unique specimen of the human being. Recent research delves into the topic of transgenerational transmission of entrepreneurship and its suspected uniqueness (Lindquist et al., 2015). A significant transmission of entrepreneurial occupation is found, but the likely mechanism of role modelling to explicate this transmission remains to be further investigated. Within this research, I attempt to test the mechanism of role modelling within entrepreneurship as well as other occupational fields. By comparing different occupations, possible insight arises concerning the unique aspects of the entrepreneur. Thus, I intend to primarily answer the question regarding how role-modelling effects the
intergenerational transmission of occupational choice. Expectedly, the role-modelling theory
finds close relationship to other factors of influence including mentorship, emulation-worthiness and success, parental education and further parent-child relationship aspects. These factors will be theoretically and empirically explored.
1.1 Research Design
To approach the research question, a quantitative research method is performed where students who study and have an interest within different occupational fields participate in the survey. The initial field is entrepreneurship. Though not often categorized as an occupational field, it carries unique occupational characteristics. Entrepreneurship too, is considered a subject
and course category where universities and colleges offer programs centered on the entrepreneurship field, comparable to other widely accepted fields such as medicine and econometrics etc.. Although the definition of an entrepreneur is a subject of debate, considering that this research investigates the relationship between parent and child from the perception (role-model) of the child, the child’s (student) perception and categorization of the parent as an entrepreneur is most appropriate for this research. The other occupational directions that are included in this research are Medicine and Public Administration. The diversity among the fields will aid in finding additional conclusions regarding the variety among transmission and role modeling across different fields.
The proposed research will aim to provide new insight on two subjects; primarily, insights into the role modeling mechanism of intergenerational transmission of occupation, as well as the distinctiveness of the entrepreneur. This research complements current research in providing specific insight on the effect of role-modeling within the transmission of occupation in addition to differentiating entrepreneurship from other occupational fields. By performing quantitative research within a specified area, existing theories can be confirmed or challenged.
1.2 Transgenerational Transmission of Entrepreneurship
Emerging from relevant literature concerning the transmission of entrepreneurial occupation is the article by Lindquist, Sol and van Praag (2015). The article finds a significantly high transmission of entrepreneurship from parent-to-child (transgenerational transmission). The research is geared towards the difference between nature and nurture, where different potential underlying mechanisms are tested. Four plausible theories are tested; influence of the inheritance of family business, access to inexpensive capital, transference of human capital and the fourth, transmission of industry-specific skills. Each of the four mechanism do not significantly
explicate the transmission. The authors put forward a fifth mechanism which significantly correlates with transmission. This mechanism is that of role-modelling, where the authors operationalize the variable by following the assumption that role-modelling is more common for when the child shares the parent’s gender. This same-gender hypothesis is confirmed and thus it “suggests that we find a direct ‘entrepreneurship role modeling effect’”(Lindquist et al. (2015), p. 289). The authors open the doors to further research concerning the role-modeling effect of parents on their children when choosing their occupation. The authors alight the gap in existing research concerning the role modelling theory within transgenerational transmission of occupation.
1.3 Role Modeling Among Entrepreneurs
The role modeling theory which has been researched by Bosma et al. (2011) within the academic field of entrepreneurship confirms that entrepreneurs are influenced by others, more specifically, by their role models. The research performed reaches the conclusion that role models play a significant part in the lives of (young) entrepreneurs. Moreover, the role models are more likely to be ‘close to home’ than distant i.e. the relationship between the role model and the entrepreneur is more likely to be a strong tie rather than a weak one. The authors also confirm the gap in empirical research investigating the role-model influence on entrepreneurs, and suggest further empirical studies to test the role model theory within the entrepreneurial field.
1.4 Thesis Structure
The gap which has been concisely illustrated above, will be approached in a comprehensive manner where first the role-modelling theory will be explored to formulate a working definition. This exploration anticipates the further analysis of the subject. The overall theoretical study is used to formulate working hypotheses which will be examined in the
following, methodological section. From the depiction of the methodology, the results are presented. Further valid remarks and concerns are foregrounded in the final discussion and conclusion.
Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework
2.1 An Introduction to the Development of Child Behavior
The transmission of behavior and understanding how children and young adolescents behave has been subject to academic attention. The social learning theory pioneered by Bandura (1977) attempts to explain the cognitive development and learning of a child through adoption of behavioral observation and interaction and is argued to be the mechanism behind the role model theory (Dryler, 1998). The recent developments of the selective social learning thoery comprehends that children choose the knowledge and behaviors which are internalized (Koenig & Sabbagh, 2013; Poulin-Dubois & Brosseau-Liard, 2016). This selection process is not fully accounted for, by the child’s ability to assess the epistemology of the adult, but rather also the similarities and familiarities found with the adult (Koenig & Sabbagh, 2013). Furthermore, expertise and confidence of the adult are also influential factors in the selective social learning process of children (Poulin-Dubois & Brosseau-Liard, 2016). When reviewing the empirical findings of transmission of occupational choice among students and adults(Bosma, Hessels, Schutjens, Praag, & Verheul, 2012; Ficklin, Browne, Powell, & Carter, 1988; Gibson, 2004; Vinales, 2015; Wright, Wong, & Newill, 1997), and more specifically the transmission of parental occupational choice (Dryler, 1998; Lindquist, Sol, & Van Praag, 2015; van Houten, Gesthuizen, & Wolbers, 2013), the role model theory has be argued to be an explanatory theory. The factors which are found to have influence within the selective social learning theory, namely familiarity, similarity, expertise and confidence, align with the role model theory further explored in the next section.
2.2 The Role Model Theory and Mentoring
A role model can offer three functions for an individual; provide learning, motivation and inspiration and stimulate the self-concept of the individual (Gibson, 2004). An individual with many role models is expected to have more success, as the three functions are guiding principles which create a more stable identification of the individual in which to better navigate, either professionally or personally. A role model thus influences among other things, the career and educational choices and aspirations of the individual (Dryler, 1998; Gibson, 2004; Pleiss & Feldhusen, 1995; Scherer, Adams, Carley, & Wiebe, 1989; Wright, Wong, & Newill, 1997). Gibson (2004) provides a thorough analysis of the concept of role models as well as its relation to other popular terms such as behavioral modeling and mentoring. The definition provided by Gibson which encompasses the overall meaning of the term ‘role model’ is “a cognitive construction based on the attributes of people in social roles an individual perceives to be similar to him or herself to some extent and desires to increase perceived similarity by emulating those attributes” (Gibson, 2004, p. 136). A distinction is made between a mentor and a role model, where a mentor provides guidance, and the role model is imitated (Gibson, 2004; Pleiss and Feldhusen, 2010). Understanding this distinction is relevant, however there is no current evidence found which argues that the two concepts are mutually exclusive.
Role models can be active in different spheres of an individual’s life, within the educational, occupational or personal spheres (Pleiss & Feldhusen, 1995). The way in which a role model can be identified can be done in several ways, either through identification in similarity, imitation or in assimilation of attitudes and values. In this research, the personal role model (i.e. the parent) is central. Additional to the influence of the role model, Pleiss and Feldhusen argue that mentoring has an influence on a child’s academic choices. The mentor,
unlike the role model, is not being copied in behavior, but rather transmits a vision. Thus, a mentor can be identified in having shared visions and beliefs as the mentee. A likely correlation may be found between role modeling and mentoring, as it can be argued that having a shared vision strengthens the relation between parent and child, which may extend itself into the imitation of behavior. Vice versa, assimilating attitudes and values of a parent through role modeling may enforce the role of the parent being a mentor simultaneously.
A parental mentor can only be perceived simultaneously as a role model when the child identifies with the parent, as identification is essential to the role modeling theory. It is argued that mentors are a tool for children to formulate career choices (Pleiss and Feldhusen, 2010). In addition to role models having a positive effect on the career of the child (Gibson, 2004; Pleiss and Felhusen, 2010), I expect that a child who views the parent as a mentor and as a role-model, will be more likely to aspire similar career paths as the parent than when the parent solely is perceived as a role model.
HYPOTHESIS 1a (H1a): A role modelling parent is likely to be positively correlated to transmission.
HYPOTHESIS 1b (H1b): A parent who functions both as a role model and a mentor, is likely to correlate stronger to transmission.
HYPOTHESIS 2 (H2): There is a positive correlation between role modelling and mentorship.
2.2 Parental Achievement and Emulation Worthiness
The success and positive experience which the role-model has experienced as a result of certain behavior acts as a stimulant for the child to copy that behavior (Scherer et al., 1989). Positive reinforcement of role-model behavior will increase the observation of role modelling. In other words, role modelling is more likely to happen with those role models who are worthy of emulation (Hitlin, 2006; Pleiss & Feldhusen, 1995; Scherer et al., 1989; van Auken, Fry, & Stephens, 2006). Different factors which influence the determination of a ‘worthy’ role model are not only the success of the parent (Scherer, 1989) but also the skills and norms which the role model possesses (Gibson, 2004). Wright (1997) confirms this in his research on the importance of role models for medical students. In his studies, the highest ranked traits are, respectively personality, skills and competence, and the role model’s teaching ability.
The achievement of the role model is argued to have a positive effect on the child, yet as is argued by Gibson (2004), negative role models also have a significant impact. It is likely too, that a child learns how not to do things from their parents when the parent acts as a negative role model. For instance, a parent who has failed as an entrepreneur because of negative traits, may in fact be a negative role model for the child who will be weary of imitating such negative traits. Thus it can be hypothesized that both successful and unsuccessful parents will have a role-modeling effect on the child.
HYPOTHESIS 3 (H3): Perception by the child, of the parents level of skill will be positively correlated to role modeling.
HYPOTHESIS 4 (H4): A student who believes that the parent holds good values and norms will be positively correlated to role modeling.
HYPOTHESIS 5 (H5): Parental success is positively correlated to role modeling.
2.3 Parental-Child Relationship
2.3.1 Parental Academic Achievement
The relationship between the parent and the child has a sizeable influence on motivation and academic interests (Wentzel, 1998). Another mechanism which is argued to increase the parent-child relationship is the academic achievement of the parent as, research finds that parental stimulation and encouragement increases transgenerational transmission of a child’s academic choices. A cause of such encouragement is correlated to the level of parental academic achievement. A higher level of achieved education of the parent is found to be correlated with the stimulation of good academic behavior performed by children, as well as its positive relation to ‘parental warmth’(Davis-Kean, 2005). The underlying argument is that parents with academic success have an increased ability to find a balance between the stimulation and demand of the child’s behavior (Davis-Kean, 2005; Dryler, 1998). An expected positive correlation is therefore formulated between parental academic success and warmth within the relationship of the parent and the child.
2.3.2 Parental Involvement
The adoption of socially valued goals and objectives can influence a child’s behavior (Pleiss & Feldhusen, 1995). A positive, warm parent-child relationship is argued to have a positive impact on the transmission of occupational choice or academic path as is found previous studies (Davis-Kean, 2005; Pleiss & Feldhusen, 1995; Wentzel, 1998). The level of interaction between parent and child can act as an indicator of the level of relationship between parent and child. Van Auken et al. (2006) found that active role-model activities have a positive effect on the
child’s career choice. The involvement of the parent within the academic career of the child has also shown to have a positive effect on the child’s motivation and success (Jodl et al. 2001). Thus, the involvement of the parent is more likely to result in role-modeling and consequently contribute to transmission.
2.3.3 Parental Warmth
A warm relationship between the parent and the child creates a better internalization of parental beliefs and values. Wentzel (1998) supports this hypothesis by arguing that a child’s perceived support is indirectly related to the interests in school by ways of psychological distress. The sense of belonging and support as experienced by the child is a cause of the adoption of goals and objectives. From the above studies and literature considering the child-parent relationship and the effect on occupational choice and academic paths, it is expected that a warm and involved relationship will be correlated with role modeling.
HYPOTHESIS 6 (H6): Parental academic achievement is positively correlated to relationship warmth between parent and child.
HYPOTHESIS 7 (H7): A warm parent-child relationship is likely to be positively correlated to role-modeling,
HYPOTEHSIS 8 (H8): A parent who is involved within the child’s life, is likely to contribute and be positively correlated to role-modeling.
The hypotheses formulated in this section which are based on the review of relevant current literature can be displayed in a model shown below.
The model shows that there is a suspected correlation between perceived parental success and parental skill, in addition to the parent having good values and the quality of the parent-child relationship (warmth and involvement) and role modeling. Indirectly, parental education is expected to positively influence the warmth experienced within the parent-child relationship. Moreover, when a parent also mentors a child, the transmission is expected to be positively influenced.
Good Values and Norms Perceived Parental Skill Parental Success
Parental Involvement Parental Warmth
Parental Education
Mentorship
Role Modeling
Transmission
Chapter 3. Method
3.1 Population Parameters
To investigate the transgenerational transmission of occupational choice among different occupational sectors, quantitative research is performed among students across different occupational fields; Entrepreneurship, Public Administration and Medicine. The students questioned are registered at either the University of Amsterdam (UvA) or the Vrije Universiteit (VU). By choosing two universities which offer similar programs in the same city will diminish the variance between the two universities and increase the validity of the data sample. The students partaking in the questionnaire are approached through program-related means in order to ensure the sample parameters (the correct field of study). By doing so, the definitive sample will allow investigation in the differences among transmittance, role-modelling and other relevant variables which are included in the questionnaire. The control variables are therefore, the field of study (Public Administration, Entrepreneurship and Medicine). Moreover, by having a late-adolescent population sample, the participants are likely to have specified, more so than high school students or younger, their occupational field of interest, making the conclusions drawn more specific and reliable.
3.2 Measures and Operationalization
3.2.1 Role Model
When reviewing current literature and studies which includes the role model variable, different approaches in measuring are used. The operationalization of different variables is determined on a review of existing studies and previous literature which have been accredited with reliable methods. In this study, the definition forwarded by Gibson (2004) will provide the criterion of whether the student views the parent as a role model, as it encompasses succinctly
the theories discussed regarding role modelling. Attribute similarity and emulation of certain attributes are the key aspects which constitute as a role model. Within the survey, both aspects will be formulated into questions which both need to be confirmed in order for the parent to be considered a positive role model. Conversely, disagreement with the emulation of certain
attributes will be read as a negative role model. This approach aims to be more reliable and avert from subject bias, than merely asking the student if he/she considers the parent as a role model, as this question may carry connotations. The coding will thus read, for a child reviewing the parent as both pertaining similar attributes and aspiring to adopt other parental attributes will result in a positive role model labelled with a score of 2, for disagreement with both aspect a score of 0 is awarded and coded as a negative role model. A score of 1 or ‘neutral’ coding is associated with either disagreement and/or confirmation with only 1 of the two statements and/or answering ‘neutral’ to one or more question.
3.2.2. Mentorship
To review whether a parent is regarded as a mentor, two criteria arise from the literature review. A mentor is defined as providing a form of guidance and second as well as having similar beliefs and visions as the mentee. Similar to the determination of the role model, these two characteristics will need to be confirmed by the student in order to conclude that the student views the parent as a mentor, which corresponds to H1b and H2. From the literature, however, there is no converse relationship as is found with role modeling (i.e. negative mentor), therefore the coding will be binary, where 1 is awarded to confirmation to both criteria and 0 for other scores.
3.2.3 Perceived Skill and Parental Values and Norms
To evaluate emulation worthiness as discussed in the previous literature, the two factors which contribute to the belief that the parent is worthy of emulation are skill and competence, and norms perceived as ‘good’. Thus, the survey includes questions which will derive the perception of the child regarding these variables (i.e. Do you believe that your father is skilled? and Do you think your father has good norms and values?). Both questions will be responded to on a 5-point Likert-scale and scored ranging from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree).
3.2.4 Parental Success
The variable of perceived success of the parent by the child is included in the second hypothesis. The student will be asked to consider the success of the parent, where the student will rate on a 5-point Likert scale the success of the parent. The scoring of the scale will be similar to previous, where 5 is where the student strongly agrees with parental success and 1 corresponds to disagreement with the statement of parental success.
3.2.5 Parental Academic Achievement
Parental academic achievement will be scaled according to 6 different levels (score 1-6), where a score of 6 constitutes as a Doctorate degree and a 1 score corresponds to ‘less than high school’. This operationalization will allow the parental education variable as proposed in H6, to be related to the occupational transmission.
3.2.6 Parent-Child Relationship, Warmth and Involvement
To assess the variable of warmth in the child-parent relationship in H7, the subscale of ‘warmth’ will be used from the Perception of Parents Scale (POPS) appropriate for college students(Robbins, 1994). POPS is developed and used to assess the child’s perception of the parent regarding not only warmth, but also involvement and autonomy support. Relevant to this
research, the involvement subscale will also be used to test H8. The scoring of POPS is predetermined, where students rate statement from ‘very true’ (7) to ‘not true at all’(1), where specific questions follow a reverse scoring
3.3. Approach Hypothesis Testing.
The model forwarded in the Chapter 2.4 will be tested first by applying a bivariate
correlation test. The correlation test applied will be Spearman’s Rho, chosen over Pearson R, due to the non-parametric nature of several variables. By doing so, the correlations are more
accurate. From the overview of the bivariate correlations, which will be performed both
separately for mother and fathers but also for the collective of both parents, this will allow initial information on possible relationships between variables as well as differences between different data samples (mothers, fathers and total data).
After the initial exploration through the bivariate correlations, a further exploration will arise. To test the first hypothesis, a multi-linnear regression will be performed where
Transmission is selected as the dependent variable and Role Modelling and Mentorship as the independent variables. Because transmission is a binary variable (0= no transmission, 1= transmission), another test will be performed to check the findings which arise from the multi-linear regression, namely a Binary Logistic test. The correlation and levels of significant which arise from this investigation will provide insight on the extent to which the hypotheses (H1a, H1b) are supported.
The testing of the factors of influence on Role Modelling, which are Parental Succes, Perceived Skill, Parental Warmth, Parental Involvement and Parental Values and Norms, will be intitially explored with a Spearman’s Rho correlation, due to the non-parametric nature of certain variables (Role Modelling and Mentorship), this will result in more accurate correlations. A
further investigation of these correlation coefficients will be explored through a multi-linear regression of which both correlation Beta’s and levels of significance will allow insight on the extent to which the sample supports or rejects the hypotheses (H3, H4,H5,H7,H8).
Both H2 and H6 are bivariate correlations which will be tested by exploring the relationship between two variables (H2, Mentorship and RM; H6, Warmth and Involvement) through the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient.
Further correlations not included in the hypothesis testing which arise to be significant will be explored appropriately. These will be explained in the following chapter.
Chapter 4. Results
The total amount of participants of this research were 53 students, of which 25 students reported to study in the field of Entrepreneurship, 5 in Public Administration and 24 in the field of Medicine. Because the survey investigates the relationship and tendencies of the child in relation to both parents, the total amount of possible role models are 106. However, as some participants failed to finish the survey, some tests which are run have a lower N value, as some cases will be omitted pairwise due to incompletion of the survey.
When reviewing the bivariate correlations between the variables for the total sample, Spearman’s Rho is applied regarding the non-parametric nature of the variables included. Both the variable Role Model (RM) and Mentorship are significantly and positively correlated with the transmission of occupation, as shown in the table 1.
Variables
Parent Transmission
Correlation Coefficient .141
Parental Role Modeling Sig. (1-tailed) .090
N 92
Correlation Coefficient .272
Parental Mentorship Sig. (1-tailed) .005
N 91
Table 1
Spearing to variable RM, the significance lies at 10% with a correlation of 0.141. With Mentorship, the level of significance is 1% with a stronger correlation of 0.272, which is almost twice as that of role modeling. Looking further at the significant correlations of the different variables and transmission both parental education has a correlation of 0.278 with a 1% level of significance and parental success 0.194 at a 5% significance level. Although these variables seemingly directly correlate to the transmission of occupation, both variables (Parental Education and Parental Success) are highly significantly correlated to both RM and mentorship. This
relationship will be further investigated when the factors of influence on RM and mentorship are discussed.
A multi-linear regression is applied to further investigate H1a and H1b regarding the influence of RM and Mentorship on transmission. The standardized Beta coefficients of the regression are for RM -0.014 (sig. .910) and for mentorship 0.279 (sig. 0.023) with a model R² of 0.052. Aware of the non-parametric variables, the model forwarded in the regression is further investigated by applying a binary logistic regression. This regression confirms the correlation between mentorship and transmission of occupation and its significance, as does it confirm the outcomes regarding RM in the multi-linear regression previously applied. Both models of the multi-linear regression and the binary logistic regression can be found in Appendix B. The results do not show a significant correlation between RM and Transmission and thus do not support H1a and H1b as well as that there is a limited model fit. Yet, it is found that there is a significant (5% level), strong, positive correlation between mentorship and transmission. This correlation and potential relationship is limitedly included within the reviewed literature, yet some support can be found in the work of Pleiss and Feldhusen (2010). Furthermore, there is a very strong (0.547) and highly significant (0.000) correlation between Mentorship and RM, confirming H2. The strength of this correlation is very prominent, intriguing further theoretical investigation into the definitions and relationship between these two variables and a potential overlap.
Concerning the factors of influence for dependent variable Role Modelling, Table 2 depicts the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficients paired with their significance.
Variable Mother RM Father RM Parent RM
Good Values and Norms 0.555 (.000) 0.458 (.001) 0.488 (.000)
Skill Perception 0.663 (.000) 0.416 (.004) 0.515 (.000) Perceived Success 0.572 (.000) 0.353 (.015) 0.441 (.000)
Relationship Warmth 0.344 (.024) 0.301 (.042) .327 (.002) Parental Involvement .357 (.019) 0.300 (.046) .324 (.002)
Table 2
Because the significance increases for the total sample, the total sample including both parents is more relevant. Within the total dataset, it can be seen that all variables are strongly correlated at a high level of significance (1%). Modeling these variables in a multi-linear regression analysis results in the figures resembled in table 3
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. B Std. Error Beta (Constant) -1.613 .517 -3.119 .003
Parent Values and Norms
.171 .08 9 .229 1.916 .059 Parental Skills .247 .092 .312 2.685 .009 Parental Success .037 .081 .060 .458 .648 Parental Warmth .135 .083 .175 1.621 .109 Parental Involvement .043 .062 .080 .692 .491 Table 3
From table 3, it can be reviewed that Warmth, Skill and the shared Values and Norms (VN) are the three variables which have a the strongest standardized Beta coefficients with noteworthy significance levels. However, it can be noticed that both Success and Involvement are variables which decrease in significance as well as strength as opposed to the expected relationship forwarded in table 2. Because this difference is significant a further investigation is needed to understand the significance seen in table 2. Reviewing once again the correlation coefficients of Success and Involvement when performing a Spearman’s Rho correlation test, high correlation as well as high significance is found in relation to variable VN (Success: .501 (0.000 sig.); Involvement: .359 (0.001 sig.). These correlations provide support for further inspection in the relationship between variables VN and Success and VN and Involvement. Attempting to understand the correlation, a multi-linear regression is applied where VN is the
dependent variable and Success and Involvement as independent. The results are presented below in table 4.
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig. B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 1.429 .390 3.667 .000 Parental Success .455 .068 .549 6.668 .000 Parental Involvement .212 .059 .295 3.600 .001 Table 4
In this model it can be seen that Success and Involvement have a highly significant and strong correlation with VN. Thus, it can be argued that both Success and Involvement are positively correlated factors of influence to VN, which is positively correlated to Role Modeling. The results presented in table 3 support H3, H4and H7, but does not support H5 and H8. Table 5 explores a relationship not hypothesized which attempts to elucidate the correlation significance not supported by the Multi-linear regression presented in Table 3.
When looking at the variable Education, hypothesized to be positively correlated to warmth in H6, the correlation coefficient is -.011 (sig. .922) which appears as a trivial result and does not support H5. Education, however does appear to be significantly correlated to other factors of influence (VN, Skills and Success). However, when integrated in a multi-linear regression, the standardized Beta coefficients lose both significance and strength in correlation. Thus, the relationship between education and other variables remain to be further investigated.
From the results discussed to this point, the following model is forwarded:
Success β: .549 Parental Involvement β: .295 Values and Norms Parental Perceived Skill Relationship Warmth
Role Modelling
Model of Influences
The Model of Influences hypothesizes that parental success and parental involvement are factors which are positively correlated to the extent that the child rates the values and norms of the parent. Moreover, the level that the child perceives the parent to be skilled at, in addition to the parent having good values and norms, and the warmth of the relationship, contribute to role modeling.
Furthermore, when reviewing the three different occupational fields and the relationship with occupational transmission, both Medicine and Entrepreneurship arise as positively, significantly correlated. This is shown in the table 5.
Variable Transmission Correlation Coefficient (significance)
Entrepreneurship 0.431 (.000)
Medicine 0.352 (.000)
Public Administration -.090 (.368)
Table 5
The results portrayed in table 5 show a stronger correlation with Entrepreneurship than for Medicine. Participants with an interest to continue within the field of public administration were limited (n=5), thus the statistic arising in table 5 is not representative fior this variable.
Because this sample includes both Father and Mother information regarding transmission and other variables, it is valuable to investigate new possible correlations. A Spearman’s Rho correlation test is performed regarding the relationship between the variables of fathers and mothers, the results are shown in Table 6. Significant and strong correlations between the mother and the father, leading to the understanding that there is a possible relationship between the overall family relationship and the variables included. In other words, a child may likely review both parents in the same way ecause of the sentiment and setting provided with the family. This could be further explore by investaging other variables such as potential similarity among siblings, the marital status of the parents and the composition of the family.
T ab le 7 N o rm s
Chapter 5. Discussion and Conclusion
5.1 The Role Modeling Mechanism
The central question to this thesis primarily concerns the effect of role modeling on occupational transgenerational transmission, and the aim of this thesis is to answer the question as to how role-modeling effects the intergenerational transmission of occupational choice. From the sample there appears to be a limited effect of role modeling on transmission of occupational choice, in contrast to the reviewed literature. A potential explanation of this limited correlation regards the operationalization of the Role Modeling variable and how this is in itself could be restricted. As it was derived from current definitions and attempting to transpose the criterion of role modeling within the survey, nuances could have been overlooked. For future research, it is valuable to first investigate empirically the value of role modeling and how one can code this within a survey. By doing so, a more sensitive survey could arise which may be more accurate towards the relationship between transmission and role modeling. This argument also applies to the operationalization of the Mentorship variable. Furthermore, it can also be argued that the mechanism underlying a significant transmission is yet to be found and that transmission is a more complex subject which is not at all defined by role modeling.
5.2 A Model of Influences
The model forwarded for the influences of role modeling is valuable as, within this sample, most hypotheses were supported and new insights arose with strong correlations and high levels of significance. Although the model presented is well supported by the results, I suggest further investigation with larger and more diverse population in order to refine the model and increase the external validity. As previously discussed, new correlations are found and previously hypothesized correlations are confirmed. The positive correlation between parental
success and parental involvement with the parent having good values and norms, is not explained within the literature reviewed and is worth investigating further in order to understand the apparent correlation.
Parental education was found to be highly correlated with both transmission as well as other variables, yet when included in regression, no significant effect on dependent variable was found. Thus, further research is necessary to investigate the relationship with parental education and transmission and the child’s relationship.
5.3 Contribution to Current Research
The research and conclusions presented in this thesis challenged several existing theories. Mainly, it is the role modeling mechanism which arises from current literature which has not been supported in this research. As previously discussed, a different approach in
operationalization may result in contrasting results to the result presented here. However, this outcome contributes to current research by highlighting the need for a more universal way in which role modeling can be defined and also operationalized. Furthermore, the new model which has risen from the results, allow further clarification in the role modeling phenomenon. Because of the correlations found, I advise to further review the role of the factors of influence within the definition of role modeling.
5.4 Research Limitations and Further Research
Due to the well-defined population parameters, the total participants within the survey are limited. However, the observations from the focused data show valid insights in order to ground the theories which lie at the heart of the hypothesis and thus act as an agent for larger empirical studies in order to extend the external reliability and validity. The population parameters have also excluded potential insights in difference in child’s educational levels, as all participants were
university students. The external validity of this research could be expanded, as this research provides insight on carefully selected fields of occupation and study in order to increase the reliability of the research. In this study university students who follow a program in a specific field are the population, yet different fields of study may provide different results as well as that different levels of education may also effect the role modeling and transmissive effect. By including Community College students and students at the University of Applied Science, results will provide insight regarding the level of education of the student and a possible effect on both the Model of Influences as well as on transmission. By including a more diverse population, more data can be collected on occupational transmission with multiple occupations.
The measures have been carefully selected according to the evaluation of previous studies as well as the transcription of the reviewed literature. In order to increase internal validity an in-depth interview with students could provide more information and be more sensitive to nuances.
5.5 Concluding Remarks
Within this thesis I have also attempted to give insight in the transmission correlation differences between different, diverse occupational fields. This was not the focus of this research and thus the underlying mechanisms for these correlations are not investigated in this research. However, by reviewing that there are significant correlations with Entrepreneurial transgenerational transmission as well as transgenerational transmission within the Medical field of occupation, it is worth investigating this transmission to illuminate the mechanisms behind this transmission. As discussed in the introduction, the entrepreneur is commonly assumed as unique, yet when comparing the occupational transmission with other occupational field, the correlation does not defer too strongly with that of Medicine. This is a significant outcome as it highlights a phenomenon apparently not exclusive to entrepreneurship. To draw reliable
conclusions a larger sample is needed, as well as more insight into the underlying motivations and mechanisms of this transmission.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. London: Englewood Cliffs.
Bosma, N., Hessels, J., Schutjens, V., Praag, M. V., & Verheul, I. (2012). Entrepreneurship and role models. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(2), 410-424. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2011.03.004
Bozeman, B., & Su, X. (2015). Public service motivation concepts and theory: A critique. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 700-710. doi:10.1111/puar.12248
Calvó-Armengol, A., & Jackson, M. O. (2009). Like father, like son: Social network externalities and parent-child correlation in behavior. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 1(1), 124-50.
Crewson, P. E.Public-service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence and effect
Davis-Kean, P. E. (2005). The influence of parent education and family income on child achievement: The indirect role of parental expectations and the home environment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(2), 294. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.2.294
Dryler, H. (1998). Parental role models, gender and educational choice. The British Journal of Sociology, 49(3), 375-398. doi:10.2307/591389
Ficklin, F. L., Browne, V. L., Powell, R. C., & Carter, J. E. (1988). Faculty and house staff members as role models. Journal of Medical Education, 63(5), 392.
Finer, H. (1941). Administrative responsibility in democratic government. Public Administration Review, 1(4), 335-350. doi:10.2307/972907
Gibson, D. E. (2004). Role models in career development: New directions for theory and research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 134-156. doi:http://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00051-4
Hitlin, S. (2006). Parental influences on children's values and aspirations: Bridging two theories of social class and socialization. Sociological Perspectives, 49(1), 25-46. doi:10.1525/sop.2006.49.1.25
Hout, M. (1982; 1982). The association between husbands' and wives' occupations in two-earner families. American Journal of Sociology, 88(2), 397-409.
Jodl, K. M., Michael, A., Malanchuk, O., Eccles, J. S., & Sameroff, A. (2001). Parents' roles in shaping early adolescents' occupational aspirations. Child Development, 72(4), 1247-1266. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00345
Karimi, S., Biemans, H. J. A., Lans, T., Chizari, M., Mulder, M., & Mahdei, K. N. (2013). Understanding role models and gender influences on entrepreneurial intentions among college students doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.179
Koenig, M. A., & Sabbagh, M. A. (2013). Selective social learning: New perspectives on learning from others. Developmental Psychology, 49(3), 399. doi:10.1037/a0031619
Laband, D. N., & Lentz, B. F. (1983). Occupational inheritance in agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65(2), 311-314.
Lentz, B. F., & Laband, D. N. (1990). Entrepreneurial success and occupational inheritance among proprietors. The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue Canadienne d'Economique, 23(3), 563-579. doi:10.2307/135648
Lindquist, M. J., Sol, J., & Van Praag, M. (2015). Why do entrepreneurial parents have entrepreneurial children? Journal of Labor Economics, 33(2), 269-296. doi:10.1086/678493
London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation. The Academy of Management Review, 8(4), 620-630. doi:10.2307/258263
London, M. (1993). Relationships between career motivation, empowerment and support for career development. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66(1), 55-69. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1993.tb00516.x
London, M., & Noe, R. A. (1997). London's career motivation theory: An update on measurement and research. Journal of Career Assessment, 5(1), 61-80. doi:10.1177/106907279700500105
Meier, K. J., & Nigro, L. G. (1976). Representative bureaucracy and policy preferences: A study in the attitudes of federal executives. Public Administration Review, 36(4), 458-469. doi:10.2307/974854
Necker, S., & Voskort, A. (2014). Intergenerational transmission of risk attitudes – A revealed preference approach. European Economic Review, 65, 66-89. doi:http://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.10.005
Noe, R. A., Noe, A. W., & Bachhuber, J. A. (1990). An investigation of the correlates of career motivation doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(90)90049-8
Pleiss, M., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Mentors, role models, and heroes in the lives ofgifted children. Educational Psychologist, 30(3), 159. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3003_6
Poulin-Dubois, D., & Brosseau-Liard, P. (2016). The developmental origins of selective social learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(1), 60-64. doi:10.1177/0963721415613962
Scherer, R. F., Adams, J. S., Carley, S. S., & Wiebe, F. A. (1989). Role model performance effects on development of entrepreneurial career preference. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13(3), 53.
Schoon, I. (2008). A transgenerational model of status attainment: The potential mediating role of school motivation and education. National Institute Economic Review, 205(1), 72-82. doi:10.1177/0027950108096590
Scott, M. G., & Twomey, D. F. (1988). The long-teerm supply of entrepreneurs: Students'career aspirations in relation to entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 26(4), 5.
Stringer, K. J., & Kerpelman, J. L. (2010). Career identity development in college students: Decision making, parental support, and work experience. Identity, 10(3), 181-200. doi:10.1080/15283488.2010.496102
Tziner, A., Loberman, G., Dekel, Z., & Sharoni, G. (2012). The influence of the parent offspring relationship on young people's career preferences. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(2), 99-105.
van Auken, H., Fry, F. L., & Stephens, P. (2006). The influence of role models on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 11(02), 157-167. doi:10.1142/S1084946706000349
van Houten, J. M. A., Gesthuizen, M., & Wolbers, M. H. J. (2013). Intergenerational transmission of occupational status: The role of voluntary association membership as an emerging compensatory strategy of reproduction. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 33, 13-26. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2013.04.002
Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social rleationships and motivation in middle school: The role f parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 202. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202
Wright, S., Wong, A., & Newill, C. (1997). The impact of role models on medical students. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 12(1), 53-56. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.1997.12109.x
Appendix A: Questionnaire Sample
Q. 1I study in the field of... Entrepreneurship (1)
Public Administration (2) Medicine (3)
Q2. I have an interest to continue in the field of... Entrepreneurship (1) Public Administration (2) Medicine (3) Q3. I am... Male (1) Female (2) Transgender (3) Q.4 I study at the ...
University of Amsterdam (UvA) (1) Vrije Universiteit (VU) (2)
Q. 5What nationality are you?
Q.6 Please indicate the level of education your mother has completed Less than high school (1)
High school graduate (2) Some college (3)
Bachelor's degree (4) Master's degree (5) Doctorate (6)
Q7. Please indicate the level of education your father has completed Less than high school (1)
High school graduate (2) Some college (3)
Bachelor's degree (4) Master's degree (5) Doctorate (6)
Q8. I consider my mother an entrepreneur Yes (1)
No (2)
Q. 9 I consider my father an entrepreneur Yes (1)
No (2)
Q. 10 Is/was your mother employed in the field of medicine? Yes (1)
No (2)
Q. 11 Is/was your father employed in the field of medicine? Yes (1)
No (2)
Q. 12 Is/was your mother employed in the field of public administration (i.e. government, nonprofits/NGO's, international consulting, education etc.)?
Yes (1) No (2)
Q. 13 Is/was your father employed in the field of public administration (i.e. government, nonprofits/NGO's, international consulting, education etc.)?
Yes (1) No (2)
Please answer the following questions
No (1) Neutral (2) Yes (3)
Do you have similar attributes to your father? (1)
Do you wish to emulate attributes your father has? (2)
Please answer the following questions
No (1) Neutral (2) Yes (3)
Do you believe that your father provides you with (a form) guidance? (1)
Do you share visions and/or beliefs with your father? (2)
Please answer the following questions
Strongly disagree (1) Somewhat disagree (2) Neither agree nor disagree (3) Somewhat agree (4) Strongly agree (5) Do you believe that your father is skilled? (1)
Do you think that your father has good norms & values (2)
Please rate the following statements Strongly disagree (1) Somewhat disagree (2) Neither agree nor disagree (3) Somewhat agree (4) Strongly agree (5) I think my father is successful (1)
Please use the following scale to answer the questions below WARMTH ______ My father accepts me and likes me as I am. (1)
______ My father clearly conveys his love for me. (2) ______ My father makes me feel very special. (3)
______ My father is often disapproving and unaccepting of me. (4) ______ My father is typically happy to see me. (5)
______ My father seems to be disappointed in me a lot. (6)
Please use the following scale to answer the questions below INVOLVEMENT ______ My father finds time to talk with me. (1)
______ My father doesn't seem to think of me often. (2) ______ My father spends a lot of time with me. (3)
______ My father often seems too busy to attend to me. (4) ______ My father is not very involved with my concerns. (5) ______ My father puts time and energy into helping me. (6)
Please answer the following questions
No (1) Neutral (2) Yes (3)
Do you have similar attributes to your mother? (1)
Do you wish to emulate attributes your mother has? (2)
Please answer the following questions
No (1) Neutral (2) Yes (3)
Do you believe that your mother provides you with (a form) guidance? (1)
Do you share visions and/or beliefs with your mother? (2)
Please answer the following questions
Strongly disagree (1) Somewhat disagree (2) Neither agree nor disagree (3) Somewhat agree (4) Strongly agree (5) Do you believe that your father is skilled? (1)
Do you think that your father has good norms & values (2)
Please rate the following statements Strongly disagree (1) Somewhat disagree (2) Neither agree nor disagree (3) Somewhat agree (4) Strongly agree (5) I think my mother is successful (1)
Please use the following scale to answer the questions below (scale 1-7) ______ My mother accepts me and likes me as I am. (1)
______ My mother clearly conveys his love for me. (2) ______ My mother makes me feel very special. (3)
______ My mother is often disapproving and unaccepting of me. (4) ______ My mother is typically happy to see me. (5)
______ My mother seems to be disappointed in me a lot. (6)
Please use the following scale to answer the questions below (scale 1-7) ______ My mother finds time to talk with me. (1)
______ My mother doesn't seem to think of me often. (2) ______ My mother spends a lot of time with me. (3)
______ My mother often seems too busy to attend to me. (4) ______ My mother is not very involved with my concerns. (5) ______ My mother puts time and energy into helping me. (6)
Mother Transmission Mother Role Model Mother Mentorship Occupational Interest Education Level Values and Beliefs Mother Skills Mother Success Mother-Child Warmth Mother-Child
Involvement Child Gender
Spearman's rho Mother Transmission Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .276 .322* -.159 .298* .280 .015 .311* .033 -.050 -.018
Sig. (2-tailed) . .070 .033 .266 .034 .069 .923 .042 .834 .750 .898
N 51 44 44 51 51 43 43 43 43 43 51
Mother Role Model Correlation Coefficient .276 1.000 .643** -.065 .532** .555** .663** .572** .344* .357* -.153
Sig. (2-tailed) .070 . .000 .675 .000 .000 .000 .000 .024 .019 .322
N 44 44 44 44 44 43 43 43 43 43 44
Mother Mentorship Correlation Coefficient .322*
.643** 1.000 -.075 .298* .403** .405** .374* .284 .248 -.050 Sig. (2-tailed) .033 .000 . .626 .049 .007 .007 .014 .065 .109 .746 N 44 44 44 44 44 43 43 43 43 43 44
Child Occupational Interest Correlation Coefficient -.159 -.065 -.075 1.000 -.089 .088 .068 .034 .211 .118 .370**
Sig. (2-tailed) .266 .675 .626 . .534 .575 .663 .829 .175 .451 .007
N 51 44 44 51 51 43 43 43 43 43 51
Mother Education Level Correlation Coefficient .298* .532** .298* -.089 1.000 .502** .417** .490** -.105 -.001 -.176
Sig. (2-tailed) .034 .000 .049 .534 . .001 .005 .001 .505 .995 .217
N 51 44 44 51 51 43 43 43 43 43 51
Good Values and Beliefs Correlation Coefficient .280 .555** .403** .088 .502** 1.000 .429** .424** .253 .329* -.109
Sig. (2-tailed) .069 .000 .007 .575 .001 . .004 .005 .102 .031 .488
N 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43
Mother Skills Correlation Coefficient .015 .663** .405** .068 .417** .429** 1.000 .660** .181 .249 -.027
Sig. (2-tailed) .923 .000 .007 .663 .005 .004 . .000 .244 .108 .865
N 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43
Perceived Mother Success Correlation Coefficient .311*
.572** .374* .034 .490** .424** .660** 1.000 .170 .310* -.032 Sig. (2-tailed) .042 .000 .014 .829 .001 .005 .000 . .277 .043 .841 N 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43
Mother-Child Warmth Correlation Coefficient .033 .344*
.284 .211 -.105 .253 .181 .170 1.000 .479**
-.016
Sig. (2-tailed) .834 .024 .065 .175 .505 .102 .244 .277 . .001 .920
N 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43
Mother-Child Involvement Correlation Coefficient -.050 .357* .248 .118 -.001 .329* .249 .310* .479** 1.000 -.049
Sig. (2-tailed) .750 .019 .109 .451 .995 .031 .108 .043 .001 . .754
N 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43
Child Gender Correlation Coefficient -.018 -.153 -.050 .370** -.176 -.109 -.027 -.032 -.016 -.049 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .898 .322 .746 .007 .217 .488 .865 .841 .920 .754 .
N 51 44 44 51 51 43 43 43 43 43 51
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Transmission Role Model Mentorship Child Gender Level Beliefs Skills Success Warmth Involvement
Spearman's rho Father Transmission Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .019 .184 .103 .306* -.021 .105 .125 -.148 -.093
Sig. (2-tailed) . .900 .215 .471 .029 .890 .481 .403 .325 .545
N 51 48 47 51 51 47 47 47 46 45
Father Role Model Correlation Coefficient .019 1.000 .590** -.135 .116 .458** .416** .353* .301* .300*
Sig. (2-tailed) .900 . .000 .361 .434 .001 .004 .015 .042 .046
N 48 48 47 48 48 47 47 47 46 45
Father Mentorship Correlation Coefficient .184 .590** 1.000 .064 .365* .549** .407** .455** .089 .302*
Sig. (2-tailed) .215 .000 . .671 .012 .000 .005 .001 .557 .044
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 46 45
Child Gender Correlation Coefficient .103 -.135 .064 1.000 -.120 -.018 .100 .043 .060 -.004
Sig. (2-tailed) .471 .361 .671 . .402 .903 .503 .773 .690 .981
N 51 48 47 51 51 47 47 47 46 45
Father Education Level Correlation Coefficient .306*
.116 .365* -.120 1.000 .405** .215 .385** .073 .179 Sig. (2-tailed) .029 .434 .012 .402 . .005 .146 .008 .632 .240 N 51 48 47 51 51 47 47 47 46 45
Shared Values and Beliefs Correlation Coefficient -.021 .458** .549** -.018 .405** 1.000 .523** .677** .208 .307*
Sig. (2-tailed) .890 .001 .000 .903 .005 . .000 .000 .165 .041
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 46 45
Father Skills Correlation Coefficient .105 .416** .407** .100 .215 .523** 1.000 .606** .198 .234
Sig. (2-tailed) .481 .004 .005 .503 .146 .000 . .000 .188 .123
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 46 45
Perceived Father Success Correlation Coefficient .125 .353* .455** .043 .385** .677** .606** 1.000 .131 .275
Sig. (2-tailed) .403 .015 .001 .773 .008 .000 .000 . .386 .068
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 46 45
Father-Child Warmth Correlation Coefficient -.148 .301*
.089 .060 .073 .208 .198 .131 1.000 .613**
Sig. (2-tailed) .325 .042 .557 .690 .632 .165 .188 .386 . .000
N 46 46 46 46 46 46 46 46 46 45
Father-Child Involvement Correlation Coefficient -.093 .300* .302* -.004 .179 .307* .234 .275 .613** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .545 .046 .044 .981 .240 .041 .123 .068 .000 .
N 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Parent Transmission Role Modeling Parent Mentorship Entreprene urship Parent Medicine Administratio n Parent Education Values and Beliefs Parental Skills Parental Success Parental Warmth Involvemen t Spearman' s rho
Parent Transmission Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .141 .272*
.431** .352** -.090 .278** .131 .037 .194* -.049 -.028 Sig. (1-tailed) . .090 .005 .000 .000 .184 .002 .109 .366 .034 .323 .398 N 102 92 91 102 102 102 102 90 90 90 89 88
Parent Role Modeling Correlation Coefficient .141 1.000 .547**
.080 .171 .146 .290** .488** .515** .441** .327** .324** Sig. (1-tailed) .090 . .000 .223 .052 .083 .003 .000 .000 .000 .001 .001 N 92 92 91 92 92 92 92 90 90 90 89 88
Parent Mentorship Correlation Coefficient .272** .547** 1.000 .076 .175* .205* .281** .427** .305** .337** .179* .279**
Sig. (1-tailed) .005 .000 . .236 .049 .026 .003 .000 .002 .001 .047 .004
N 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 90 90 90 89 88
Parent Entrepreneurship Correlation Coefficient .431** .080 .076 1.000 .099 -.091 .162 -.140 .105 .180* -.235* -.231*
Sig. (1-tailed) .000 .223 .236 . .159 .178 .052 .094 .163 .045 .013 .015
N 102 92 91 104 104 104 102 90 90 90 89 88
Parent Medicine Correlation Coefficient .352**
.171 .175* .099 1.000 .009 .360** .172 .066 .151 -.026 -.027 Sig. (1-tailed) .000 .052 .049 .159 . .466 .000 .053 .268 .077 .404 .400 N 102 92 91 104 104 104 102 90 90 90 89 88 Parent Public Administration Correlation Coefficient -.090 .146 .205* -.091 .009 1.000 .209* .250** .016 .103 .007 .197* Sig. (1-tailed) .184 .083 .026 .178 .466 . .017 .009 .439 .167 .475 .033 N 102 92 91 104 104 104 102 90 90 90 89 88
Parent Education Correlation Coefficient .278** .290** .281** .162 .360** .209* 1.000 .396** .336** .436** -.011 .063
Sig. (1-tailed) .002 .003 .003 .052 .000 .017 . .000 .001 .000 .461 .280
N 102 92 91 102 102 102 102 90 90 90 89 88
Parent Values and Beliefs Correlation Coefficient .131 .488** .427** -.140 .172 .250** .396** 1.000 .403** .501** .263** .359**
Sig. (1-tailed) .109 .000 .000 .094 .053 .009 .000 . .000 .000 .006 .000
N 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 89 88
Parental Skills Correlation Coefficient .037 .515** .305** .105 .066 .016 .336** .403** 1.000 .633** .155 .172
Sig. (1-tailed) .366 .000 .002 .163 .268 .439 .001 .000 . .000 .074 .055
N 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 89 88
Parental Success Correlation Coefficient .194*
.441** .337** .180* .151 .103 .436** .501** .633** 1.000 .140 .241* Sig. (1-tailed) .034 .000 .001 .045 .077 .167 .000 .000 .000 . .095 .012 N 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 89 88
Parental Warmth Correlation Coefficient -.049 .327**
.179* -.235* -.026 .007 -.011 .263** .155 .140 1.000 .570** Sig. (1-tailed) .323 .001 .047 .013 .404 .475 .461 .006 .074 .095 . .000 N 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 88
Parental Involvement Correlation Coefficient -.028 .324** .279** -.231* -.027 .197* .063 .359** .172 .241* .570** 1.000
Sig. (1-tailed) .398 .001 .004 .015 .400 .033 .280 .000 .055 .012 .000 .
N 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).
Mean Std. Deviation N
Parent Transmission .500 .5025 102
Parent Role Modeling 1.5000 .58366 92
Parent Mentorship .5275 .50201 91 Model Summaryb Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Change Statistics
R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change
1 .272a .074 .053 .4890 .074 3.514 2 88 .034
a. Predictors: (Constant), Parent Mentorship, Parent Role Modeling b. Dependent Variable: Parent Transmission
Correlations
Parent Transmission
Parent Role
Modeling Parent Mentorship
Pearson Correlation Parent Transmission 1.000 .131 .272
Parent Role Modeling .131 1.000 .520
Parent Mentorship .272 .520 1.000
Sig. (1-tailed) Parent Transmission . .106 .005
Parent Role Modeling .106 . .000
Parent Mentorship .005 .000 .
N Parent Transmission 102 92 91
Parent Role Modeling 92 92 91
1 Regression 1.681 2 .840 3.514 .034b
Residual 21.042 88 .239
Total 22.723 90
a. Dependent Variable: Parent Transmission
b. Predictors: (Constant), Parent Mentorship, Parent Role Modeling
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
95.0% Confidence Interval for
B Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Lower Bound Upper Bound Part Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) .370 .143 2.589 .011 .086 .655 Parent Role Modeling -.012 .103 -.014 -.114 .910 -.217 .194 -.012 .729 1.371 Parent Mentorship .279 .120 .279 2.321 .023 .040 .518 .238 .729 1.371 Collinearity Diagnosticsa Mode l Dimensio n Eigenvalu e Condition Index Variance Proportions (Constan t) Parent Role Modeling Parent Mentorship 1 1 2.646 1.000 .02 .01 .04 2 .296 2.989 .12 .02 .78 3 .057 6.799 .86 .97 .18
Residuals Statisticsa Minimu m Maximu m Mean Std. Deviation N Predicted Value .347 .650 .500 .1366 91 Residual -.6495 .6531 .0385 .4823 91 Std. Predicted Value -1.120 1.094 .000 1.000 91 Std. Residual -1.328 1.336 .079 .986 91 a. Dependent Variable: Parent Transmission
Unweighted Casesa N Percent Selected Cases Included in Analysis 91 82.0
Missing Cases 20 18.0
Total 111 100.0
Unselected Cases 0 .0
Total 111 100.0
a. If weight is in effect, see classification table for the total number of cases.
Categorical Variables Codings
Frequency
Parameter coding (1) (2) Parent Role Modeling Negative Role Model 4 .000 .000
Neutral 37 1.000 .000
Positive Role Model 50 .000 1.000
Parent Mentorship .00 43 .000
1.00 48 1.000
Dependent Variable Encoding
Original Value Internal Value
.0 0
Classification Tablea,b
Observed
Predicted
Parent Transmission Percentage Correct .0 Transmission
Step 0 Parent Transmission .0 0 42 .0
Transmission 0 49 100.0
Overall Percentage 53.8
a. Constant is included in the model. b. The cut value is .500
Variables in the Equation
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)
Step 0 Constant .154 .210 .537 1 .464 1.167
Variables not in the Equation
Score df Sig. Step 0 Variables TRM 1.715 2 .424 TRM(1) 1.566 1 .211 TRM(2) 1.691 1 .193 TMship(1) 6.718 1 .010 Overall Statistics 6.764 3 .080
Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients Chi-square df Sig. Step 1 Step 6.844 3 .077 Block 6.844 3 .077 Model 6.844 3 .077 Classification Tablea Observed Predicted
Parent Transmission Percentage Correct .0 Transmission
Step 1 Parent Transmission .0 26 16 61.9
Transmission 17 32 65.3
Overall Percentage 63.7
a. The cut value is .500
Variables in the Equation
Model Summary
Step -2 Log likelihood
Cox & Snell R Square
Nagelkerke R Square
1 118.769a .072 .097
a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 3 because parameter estimates changed by less than .001.
Hosmer and Lemeshow Test
Step Chi-square df Sig.
1 .753 3 .861
Contingency Table for Hosmer and Lemeshow Test
Parent Transmission = .0 Parent Transmission = Transmission
Total Observed Expected Observed Expected
Step 1 1 7 6.841 4 4.159 11
2 18 17.450 11 11.550 29
3 1 1.709 2 1.291 3
4 13 13.159 26 25.841 39
Step 1a TRM .049 2 .976
TRM(1) -.132 1.085 .015 1 .903 .876 .105 7.349
TRM(2) -.217 1.112 .038 1 .845 .805 .091 7.118
TMship(1) 1.172 .531 4.873 1 .027 3.229 1.140 9.145
Constant -.281 1.037 .073 1 .787 .755
