10817_Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory

Graduate Theses and Dissertations
Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and
Dissertations
2017
Predicting academic major satisfaction using
environmental factors and self-determination
theory
Mary Catherine Schenkenfelder
Iowa State University
Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd
Part of the Counseling Psychology Commons, Other Education Commons, and the Social
Psychology Commons
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital
Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital
Repository. For more information, please contact digirep@iastate.edu.
Recommended Citation
Schenkenfelder, Mary Catherine, “Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination theory”
(2017). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 15411.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/15411

Predicting academic major satisfaction using environmental factors and self-determination
theory

by

Mary Schenkenfelder

A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE

Major: Psychology

Program of Study Committee:
Lisa M. Larson, Major Professor
Patrick Armstrong
Daniel Russell

The student author and the program study committee are solely responsible for the
content of this thesis. The Graduate College will ensure this thesis is globally accessible
and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred.

Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa
2017
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES
………………………………………………………………………………………. iv
LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………………………….. v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS …………………………………………………………………………….. vi
ABSTRACT
…………………………………………………………………………………………… vii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………..
1

The Importance of Academic Major Satisfaction in a Counseling Context ……..
1

Academic Major Satisfaction and Self-Determination Theory ………………………
2

Environmental Supports for Academic Major Satisfaction ……………………………
4
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………………………………………
9

Self-Determination Theory ……………………………………………………………………….
9

Academic Major Satisfaction
…………………………………………………………………….
15

Measuring Environmental Factors
……………………………………………………………..
22

Basic Psychological Needs and the Environment
…………………………………………
26

The Present Study ……………………………………………………………………………………
26
CHAPTER 3
METHODS ………………………………………………………………………….
28

Design ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
28

Participants ……………………………………………………………………………………………
28

Measures ………………………………………………………………………………………………..
29

Procedure ……………………………………………………………………………………………….
35

Hypotheses
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
36

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS …………………………………………………………………………… 37

Preliminary Analyses ……………………………………………………………………………….
37

Main Analyses ………………………………………………………………………………………..
41

Additional Analyses
…………………………………………………………………………………
47

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION ………………………………………………………………………
51

Hypotheses
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
51

Implications ……………………………………………………………………………………………
55

Limitations ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
58

Future Directions …………………………………………………………………………………….
59

iii

REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………………………………….
61
APPENDIX A. FACULTY INTEGRATION …………………………………………………..
80
APPENDIX B. STUDENT INTEGRATION
……………………………………………………
81
APPENDIX C. PERCEIVED VOLITIONAL AUTONOMY …………………………….
82
APPENDIX D. PERCEIVED COMPETENCE ………………………………………………..
83
APPENDIX E. ACADEMIC SELF-EFFICACY SUBSCALE……………………………
84
APPENDIX F. PERCEIVED RELATEDNESS SUBSCALE …………………………….
85
APPENDIX G. THE ACADEMIC MAJOR SATISFACTION SCALE ………………
86
APPENDIX H. DEMOGRAPHICS QUESTIONNAIRE …………………………………..
87
APPENDIX I. ACADEMIC MAJOR CERTAINTY SCALE …………………………….
88
APPENDIX J. INFORMED CONSENT
………………………………………………………….
89
APPENDIX K. IRB APPROVAL …………………………………………………………………..
91

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary of Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for All

Variables under Examination for All Participants ………………………………… 69

Table 2. Summary of Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for All

Variables under Examination for Males and Females …………………………… 69

Table 3. Bootstrap Analysis of Magnitude and Statistical Significance of Indirect

Effects of Faculty and Student Integration on Academic Major

Satisfaction through Perceived Volitional Autonomy, Perceived

Competence and Perceived Relatedness (Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction)

in the Adjusted Fully Mediated Model ……………………………………………….. 70

Table 4. Bootstrap Analysis of Magnitude and Statistical Significance of Indirect

Effects of Faculty and Student Integration on Academic Major

Satisfaction through Perceived Volitional Autonomy, Perceived

Competence and Perceived Relatedness (Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction)

in the Fully Mediated Model……………………………………………………………… 71
v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. The Hypothesized Partially Mediated Model
……………………………………… 72

Figure 2. The Hypothesized Fully Mediated Model
………………………………………….. 72

Figure 3. The Adjusted Hypothesized Partially Mediated Model ……………………….. 73

Figure 4. The Adjusted Hypothesized Fully Mediated Model ……………………………. 74

Figure 5. The Adjusted Partially Mediated Model ……………………………………………. 75

Figure 6. The Adjusted Fully Mediated Model ………………………………………………… 76

Figure 7. The Partially Mediated Model
………………………………………………………….. 77

Figure 8. The Fully Mediated Model
………………………………………………………………. 77

Figure 9. The Adjusted Fully Mediated Model without Faculty Integration
…………. 78

Figure 10. The Adjusted Fully Mediated Model without Student Integration ………. 79

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Lisa Larson, without whom this
document would not exist. Her unwavering support, high expectations, and complete belief in
my competence are at the heart of this project. I would also like to thank my committee
members, Dr. Patrick Armstrong and Dr. Dan Russell, for their expertise, particularly in
vocational psychology and statistical measurement.
I would like to acknowledge my friends (both in my cohort and out) who kept me feeling
relatively sane and stable by providing care and support at times and by providing a much-
needed distraction from work at other times. Additionally, I would like to thank Patrick Heath
and Rachel Brenner for their invaluable statistical support, given so generously and
enthusiastically.
I would also like to acknowledge my family: Karen (who has always been my biggest
cheerleader), Chris (who has never not been proud of me), and Dan (who has always been a
better big brother than I deserve). Without them I would not have had the opportunity to make it
this far.
And lastly, perhaps most importantly, I would like to acknowledge my fiancé, Taylor,
who somehow managed to live with me every day of this project and come out the other end still
liking me enough to marry me. I feel lucky to have someone at my side who is so willing to be
my partner as I pursue my goals.

vii

ABSTRACT
Environmental factors (faculty integration and student integration) and self-determination
theory factors (perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness) were
used to predict academic major satisfaction. It was hypothesized that environmental factors and
self-determination factors would directly predict major satisfaction. In line with this, it was
predicted that a path model which included environmental factors would prove to be a better fit
than a model that did not. It was also predicted that environmental factors would directly predict
self-determination factors, and that self-determination factors would mediate the relation
between environmental factors and major satisfaction. Path analysis was used to test the
hypotheses. In a sample of 332 college students, it was found that environmental factors did not
directly predict major satisfaction, and a path model which included environmental factors was
not a better fit. Environmental factors did indirectly predict major satisfaction, with self-
determination factors as a mediator. Self-determination factors were directly predicted by
environmental factors, and did directly predict major satisfaction. Implications, limitations, and
future directions are discussed.

Keywords: academic major satisfaction, perceived autonomy, perceived competence,
perceived relatedness, perceived autonomy, faculty integration, student integration
1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

The Importance of Academic Major Satisfaction in a Counseling Context
When doing career counseling with college students, counselors have two options for the
focus of the counseling. Career counselors can focus on finding a job the student will be satisfied
with and a major that will allow the client to eventually do that job. Or they can focus on what
major a student will be satisfied with and explore which jobs a student might get after graduating
with that major. Neither of these approaches is perfect. A focus only on academic major
satisfaction might lead a student to choose a major that leads to limited career options or career
options that are not attractive to the student. In contrast, focusing only on potential satisfaction of
a future job (as opposed to potential satisfaction with a current major) means student and
counselor will have to focus more on hypotheticals, instead of being able to focus on the present.
This approach could be problematic if it leads a student to think about what she might be
interested in, rather than what she is interested in now. Focusing on future job satisfaction might
also mean that a student ends up in a major she doesn’t enjoy—a concern that should not be
ignored, since most students will be in their major for at least four significant years of their life.
Since academic major satisfaction has been linked to life satisfaction among college students, we
know that ignoring major satisfaction will lead to less-than-optimal outcomes in career
counseling (Sovet, Park, & Jung, 2014).
Major satisfaction is associated with both positive current outcomes and positive future
outcomes for students. Students are less likely to drop out of school when they are satisfied with
their majors (Nauta, 2007) and are more likely to have a higher GPA (Leach & Patall, 2013;
McIlveen, Beccaria, & Burton, 2013; Nauta, 2007). Choosing a major students will be satisfied
with may be easier for them than choosing a job they will be satisfied with, since major is more
2

temporally relevant. Together, these advantages suggest that major satisfaction is a relevant and
important topic for career counseling.
It is important, then, to understand what predicts academic major satisfaction so that
career counselors might best help students find majors that will fit for them. Almost all of the
research around academic major satisfaction has focused on how individual differences
contribute to students’ major satisfaction. The most studied topic in this area is interest (Allen,
1996; Nadziger, Holland, & Gottfredson, 1975; Logue, Lounsbury, Gupta, & Leong, 2007;
Tranberg, Slane, & Ekeberg, 1993). Intrinsic motivation for a subject (Deemer, 2015),
personality (Logue et al., 2007), and patterns of thinking, such as counterfactual thinking
(Dahling & Thompson, 2012; Leach & Patall, 2013), also have been linked to major satisfaction.
This research helps us understand what we should know about students who have come
in for career counseling, in order to be able to direct them toward a major they will be satisfied
with. What it does not tell us is what environmental characteristics are predictive of major
satisfaction.
Academic Major Satisfaction and Self-Determination Theory
One promising model for understanding how environmental factors support major
satisfaction is self-determination theory (SDT), a theory of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1980,
1991; Baumeister, 1994). An important subset of SDT is basic psychological needs theory,
which suggests that intrinsic motivation (motivation to act for the sake of the action itself,
instead of an external reward) can lead to well-being in many domains. The theory also suggests
that in order to be intrinsically motivated, we must perceive three needs as being met: volitional
autonomy, competence, and relatedness. For these three needs to be met, factors in the
3

environment must support them. If these environmental supports are absent, students’ needs are
thwarted, and they are less happy and less effective.
The research connecting SDT and major satisfaction is limited, and the connections
between the two are indirect. Jadidian & Duffy (2012) examined the relations between academic
major satisfaction and work volition (which is conceptually related to perceived volitional
autonomy, defined as the feeling that one is able to make one’s own decisions despite barriers),
and found that work volition positively predicted academic major satisfaction. Other researchers
have explored the relations between academic major satisfaction and academic self-efficacy
(which is conceptually related to perceived competence, defined as a student’s feeling that he or
she can be successful at academic tasks), and found that academic self-efficacy positively
predicted academic major satisfaction (Larson, Toulouse, Ngumba, Fitzpatrick, & Heppner,
1994). The evidence that factors conceptually similar to perceived volitional autonomy and
competence have been predictive of major satisfaction suggests that perceived volitional
autonomy and perceived competence should be predictive of major satisfaction.
In another study, college students’ experiences of volitional autonomy, competence, and
relatedness in the classroom predicted student ratings of teachers and courses. Specifically,
higher perceived volitional autonomy and competence predicted higher ratings of courses, and
higher perceived volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness predicted higher teacher
ratings (Filak & Sheldon, 2003). This suggests that environmental support for needs is predictive
of course and teacher satisfaction, and since classes are related to major satisfaction, it seems
likely that perceived volitional autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness will
also be predictive of major satisfaction. Additionally, researchers found that students in natural
sciences courses reported lower perceived volitional autonomy and perceived relatedness than
4

those in social science or humanities classes (Filak & Sheldon, 2003). This suggests that there
may be a difference in the way psychological needs are supported across academic subjects, and
possibly across majors.
Additionally, academic major satisfaction is part of a larger concept of career well-being,
which is influenced by perceptions of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness. For
college students, choosing an academic major and engaging in the tasks of that major constitute
the developmentally appropriate tasks that contribute to career well-being, since what major one
chooses, how well one does in that major, and how satisfied one is in that major will contribute
to a person’s career path. One study has suggested that perceived volitional autonomy and
perceived competence partially mediate the relation between environmental supports—namely,
parental volitional autonomy support—and career well-being (Pesch, Larson, & Surapaneni,
2015). Additionally, perceptions of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness have been
found to predict job satisfaction (which is conceptually related to major satisfaction; Boezeman
& Ellemers, 2009; Gillet, Colombat, Michinov, Pronost, & Fouquereau, 2013).
The foregoing studies provide strong evidence that the extent to which needs (as defined
by self-determination theory) are perceived to be met is a strong predictor of satisfaction in areas
that are closely related to academic major satisfaction.
Environmental Supports for Academic Major Satisfaction
Even if we assume that college students’ major satisfaction will be predicted by the
extent to which they perceive their needs as being met, it is not enough to simply understand
whether or not students perceive their needs as being met. A complete model of satisfaction also
requires an understanding of the circumstances under which students perceive their needs as
5

being met. That is, we must understand which environmental factors contribute to the perception
of needs being met.
There is some research that addresses environmental supports in academic major
satisfaction. Some research suggests that the proportion of men and women in classes and in the
major can affect satisfaction. Women tend to be more satisfied in science, technology,
engineering, and math (STEM) majors when fewer men are in their classes, possibly because
they feel a greater sense of belonging (Deemer, 2015). There is also evidence that a greater
proportion of women in a department leads to increased major satisfaction within that
department (Umbach & Porter, 2002). However, there is also evidence that the relation between
proportion of women and student outcomes may be better accounted for by factors such as
characteristics of students, aspects of the college environment, and effects of the major field
(Sax, 1996). Data also suggests that departmental characteristics such as amount of faculty
contact with students and emphasis on research can increase major satisfaction (Umbach &
Porter, 2002).
Literature that seems relevant for understanding what environmental factors might predict
major satisfaction includes that which uses environmental factors to predict college student
outcomes, such as student retention. Some of this literature comes from the field of vocational
psychology, and some of it comes from the field of education. Predicting these outcomes is not
the same as predicting major satisfaction, but the outcomes are related. Major satisfaction has
been linked to higher retention rates among college students (Nauta, 2007). If these
environmental factors and major satisfaction have been shown to predict similar outcomes, then
it is not illogical to conclude that environmental factors and major satisfaction will be related.
6

As discussed above, very few authors have examined the environment and major
satisfaction. In identifying a way to conceptualize the college environment, a measure was
located that has been conceptualized as institutional integration but is synonymous for the
purposes of this study with campus environment. This measure is conceptualized as
operationalizing the construct, institutional integration, and is embedded in a model developed
by Vincent Tinto (1993). The model was originally developed with the purpose of predicting
which students would drop out of college, and was intended to be comprehensive, including both
individual differences and environmental factors. Within Tinto’s model, environmental factors
are conceptualized as institutional integration, which is essentially a student’s perceptions of
their academic and social environments, including both faculty and students. Tinto’s model
conceptualizes the reasons for student dropouts in an accurate and practical way, incorporating
both individual differences and students’ experiences of environmental factors. Tinto categorizes
these experiences of environmental factors (or institutional experiences) as happening in two
domains—the academic system and the social system.
The academic system includes support for academic growth and informal faculty/staff
interactions. The social system includes extracurricular activities and informal peer group
interactions. Since developing the model, Tinto has argued that academic integration (which is
built through institutional experiences) is one of the most predictive factors of student retention
(Tinto, 2007). Additionally, Tinto’s model has been used extensively, and there is significant
evidence that it can be used to effectively predict retention (e.g., Robbins et al., 2004; Chemers,
Hu, & Garcia, 2001), as well as other student outcomes such as GPA (e.g., Richardson,
Abraham, & Bond, 2012). Although Tinto’s model conceptualizes environmental factors as
falling into two categories (social and academic integration), recent research suggests that
7

environmental factors Tinto proposes as important might better be categorized as faculty
integration and student integration (French & Oakes, 2004).
From the strong support for Tinto’s model in the literature, we can conclude that the
environmental factors Tinto proposes as useful for predicting retention (which have also been
shown to be an effective predictor for other outcomes) might be useful in predicting other
student outcomes—such as major satisfaction.
Considering the research on major satisfaction and its relations to the environment and to
perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness, I proposed that
perceptions of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness would mediate the relation
between academic environmental factors and academic major satisfaction. That is, environmental
factors would directly predict perceptions of volitional autonomy, competence, and relatedness,
which would predict academic major satisfaction. Additionally, environmental factors would
directly predict major satisfaction. This led to the following prediction:
Hypothesis 1: A partially mediated model (Figure 1) presents a significantly better fit to
the data than a fully mediated model (Figure 2).
Hypothesis 2: Major satisfaction is directly predicted by faculty integration (path b),
student integration (path g), perceived autonomy (path i), perceived competence (path j), and
perceived relatedness (path k), as seen in Figure 1.
Hypothesis 3: Perceived volitional autonomy is directly predicted by faculty integration
(path a) and student integration (path e). Perceived competence is directly predicted by faculty
integration (path c) and student integration (path f). Perceived relatedness is directly predicted by
faculty integration (path d) and student integration (path h).
8

Hypothesis 4: Perceived autonomy mediates the relation between faculty integration and
major satisfaction (path a, path i), and the relation between student integration and major
satisfaction (path e, path i). Perceived competence mediates the relation between faculty
integration and major satisfaction (path c, path j), and the relation between student integration
and major satisfaction (path f, path j). Perceived relatedness mediates the relation between
faculty integration and major satisfaction (path d, path k), and the relation between student
integration and major satisfaction (path h, path k).

9

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The following literature review is intended to present a comprehensive overview of the
research that is relevant to the present study. First, the theoretical framework for understanding
the relationship between academic major satisfaction and environmental factors will be
presented. Next, a review of the research on academic major satisfaction will be reported.
Finally, the strategy this study will use to measure environmental factors will be discussed.
Self-Determination Theory

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a theory of motivation that may be useful for
understanding how environmental factors relate to major satisfaction (Deci & Ryan, 1980, 1991;
Baumeister, 1994). SDT is a multifaceted theory of motivation, but the piece that is most
relevant for understanding the relation between the environment and major satisfaction is basic
psychological needs theory (BPNT; Ryan & Deci, 2000). BPNT describes the relation between
three needs (perceived volitional autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness)
and well-being. In self-determination theory, perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and
perceived relatedness are necessary for well-being; if any one of these needs is not met, well-
being suffers. In the context of this theory, perceived autonomy is defined as the feeling that one
is in charge of one’s own actions and decisions; perceived competence is defined as the feeling
that one is able to accomplish important tasks, even if they are difficult; and perceived
relatedness is defined as the feeling that one is connected to important people in one’s life. For
these needs to be satisfied, the environment a person is in must support them. In the context of a
major, for example, a student’s autonomy need might not be met if the student were not allowed
to choose which classes to take; his competence need might not be met if he felt unable to
10

succeed in his classes; and his relatedness need might not be met if he felt isolated from the other
students in his classes.

There are conceptual reasons, supported by empirical evidence, to believe that SDT
might predict academic major satisfaction. One aspect of well-being is career well-being, which
has been operationalized as the presence of career satisfaction and the absence of career distress.
For students in college, career well-being and major satisfaction are linked. The career tasks of a
college student are choosing a major and succeeding in that major. This means that for students,
career well-being is major well-being, and major well-being can be operationalized as the
presence of academic major satisfaction and the absence of academic major distress. Since
perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness predict well-being, they
should predict career well-being, and since they predict career well-being, they should predict
major satisfaction. In one study, perceived autonomy (β = .22) and perceived competence (β =
.26) partially mediated the relation between environmental supports—namely, parental
autonomy support—and career well-being (Pesch et al., 2015). This suggests that perceived
autonomy and perceived competence are related to career well-being and, therefore, major
satisfaction. Approaching this topic through the lens of SDT, it is likely that if perceived
autonomy and perceived competence are related to career well-being, perceived relatedness
would be, too.

Basic psychological needs and academic major satisfaction. The research addressing
the relation between SDT and major satisfaction focuses on the three basic psychological needs
(perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness). Correlations have been
found between academic major satisfaction and perceived autonomy with rs of .33 and .38
(Leach, & Patall, 2013; Pesch et al., 2015). Perceived autonomy may also directly and indirectly
11

predict major satisfaction. In a mediation model, perceived volitional autonomy predicted
academic major satisfaction directly (β = .27) and fully mediated the relation between mother’s
autonomy support and academic major satisfaction (Pesch et al., 2015), and in a regression
predicting student’s satisfaction with courses, perceived autonomy was a significant predictor
(β = .17; Filak & Sheldon, 2003). Major satisfaction has also been related to constructs which are
conceptually similar to volitional autonomy. Academic major satisfaction has been correlated
with work volition (r = .35) and work locus of control r = .35, and in a mediation model, work
volition predicted major satisfaction (with a coefficient of .23), and work locus of control
predicted academic major satisfaction (with a coefficient of .23; Jadidian & Duffy, 2012).

Significant correlations have also been found between perceived competence and
academic major satisfaction with rs of .32 and .45 (Leach & Patall, 2013; Pesch et al., 2015). In a
mediation model, perceived competence directly predicted academic major satisfaction (β = .22;
Pesch et al., 2015). Perceived competence also mediated the relation between father’s autonomy
support and academic major satisfaction, with father’s autonomy support predicting perceived
academic competence (β = .29; Pesch et al., 2015). In a regression predicting students’
satisfaction with courses, perceived competence was a significant predictor (β = .59; Filak &
Sheldon, 2003).
Self-efficacy (the belief that one can accomplish a task despite potential barriers) is
conceptually related to perceived competence (the belief that one can be successful at a task,
even if it is challenging), so the evidence that supports a link between self-efficacy and major
satisfaction can also be considered as evidence to support a link between perceived competence
and major satisfaction.
12

There is evidence that self-efficacy and major satisfaction are related. Academic major
satisfaction and career decision-making self-efficacy have been correlated, with rs ranging from
.24 to .47 (Jadidian & Duffy, 2012; Komarraju, Swanson, & Nadler, 2013; Nauta, 2007; Sovet et
al., 2014). Career decision self-efficacy has also predicted major satisfaction in a regression (β =
.23; Komarraju et al., 2013). Additionally, major satisfaction has been correlated with general
self-efficacy (r = .21; McIlveen et al., 2013).
Major satisfaction has also been related to constructs that are conceptually similar to self-
efficacy. Academic major satisfaction has been correlated with work volition (r = .35) and work
locus of control (r = .35), and in a mediation model, work volition predicted major satisfaction
(with a coefficient of .23), and work locus of control predicted academic major satisfaction (with
a coefficient of .23; Jadidian & Duffy, 2012).

Although relatively little research has been done on the relations between perceived
autonomy, perceived competence, and major satisfaction, even less has been done on the relation
between perceived relatedness and major satisfaction. This may be because perceived relatedness
is not seen as important by researchers in this area. It is also possible that some researchers have
included relatedness in their initial data collection but have not published their results about
relatedness because those results were not significant.

Although I was unable to find any articles directly linking perceived relatedness with
major satisfaction, there were some articles that link perceived relatedness to other student
outcome variables. One of these studies predicts students’ satisfaction with classes and students’
satisfaction with instructors in a regression. There was no significant relation between perceived
relatedness and students’ satisfaction with courses; however, perceived relatedness did predict
students’ satisfaction with instructors (β = .17; Filak & Sheldon, 2003). Additionally, in a meta-
13

analysis, social support (which is conceptually related to relatedness) was significantly related to
retention of college students (r = .20, k = 26; Robbins et al., 2004). Students’ perceptions of
affiliation in a classroom, or their sense that the classroom is supportive, cooperative, and student
focused (attributes that are similar to relatedness), also are positively correlated with major
satisfaction (r = .13), and in a moderated mediation model, perceptions of affiliation predicted
major satisfaction (β = .58; Deemer, 2015).

Taken as a whole, the research connecting perceived autonomy, perceived competence,
and perceived relatedness with major satisfaction and other academic outcomes supports the
proposition of the present study that SDT will provide a good theoretical framework for
understanding the relation between environmental factors and major satisfaction. However, given
the limited research connecting perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived
relatedness and major satisfaction, the following research connecting perceived autonomy,
perceived competence, and perceived relatedness with job satisfaction is presented, in order to
make a stronger case for the use of SDT in a vocational context.
Basic psychological needs and job satisfaction. Not much research has been done
relating SDT to major satisfaction, but there has been a significant amount of research
connecting major satisfaction and job satisfaction. Major satisfaction and job satisfaction are
conceptually related, so evidence that supports a relation between basic psychological needs and
job satisfaction can also be used to support the idea that there will be a relation between basic
psychological needs and major satisfaction.
For the most part, perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness
have been considered as separate constructs in the research on job satisfaction. In one study,
however, they were considered together as basic psychological needs. In this study, higher
14

perceptions of these needs being met predicted higher work satisfaction in a structural equation
model (β = .30; Gillet et al., 2013).
Perceived autonomy has been correlated with job satisfaction, with rs between .17 and
.45 (Boezeman & Ellemers, 2009; Gillet et al., 2013; Guntert, 2015), and in a multiple mediation
analysis predicting job satisfaction, the total effect of autonomy-supportive leadership on job
satisfaction was significant (β = .31; Guntert, 2015). Moreover, in a stepwise regression
predicting job satisfaction using perceived autonomy, relatedness, and competence, perceived
autonomy was a significant predictor of job satisfaction for volunteer workers (β = .31;
Boezeman & Ellemers, 2009).
Perceived competence has been shown to be related to job satisfaction. In a meta-
analysis, the mean correlation between job satisfaction and self-efficacy was r = .38 (k = 12;
Judge & Bono, 2001). However, in one study, perceived competence did not predict job
satisfaction among volunteer workers (Boezeman & Ellemers, 2009).
Perceived relatedness also seems to be related to job satisfaction. A meta-analysis found
consistent positive relations between social integration (a dynamic and structured process that is
intended to bring people together as a social group) at work and job satisfaction; across eight
types of social integration, r ranged from .14 to .40, with ks ranging from 10 to 14 (Saks,
Uggerslev, & Fassina, 2006). It is likely that social integration would foster relatedness in a
group, increasing a group’s sense of relatedness and job satisfaction. Perceived relatedness has
also been correlated with job satisfaction among volunteers (r = .60; Boezeman & Ellemers,
2009). Additionally, in a stepwise regression predicting job satisfaction using perceived
autonomy, perceived relatedness, and perceived competence, perceived relatedness was a
significant predictor of job satisfaction for volunteers (β = .44; Boezeman & Ellemers, 2009).
15

Moderate effect sizes connecting perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and
perceived relatedness with job satisfaction show that the three basic psychological needs predict
job satisfaction. Given that they predict job satisfaction, major satisfaction, and other academic
outcome variables, it seems reasonable to view SDT as an appropriate lens for approaching the
relation between environmental factors and academic major satisfaction. Following is a review
of the literature that addresses major satisfaction, including a review of the literature connecting
major satisfaction and environmental factors.
Academic Major Satisfaction
Outcomes. Academic major satisfaction has been shown to be related to important
outcomes, including grade point average (GPA) and persistence in a major. Major satisfaction
was significantly correlated with GPA, with rs between .11 and .35 (Leach & Patall, 2013;
McIlveen et al., 2013; Nauta, 2007). These correlations are not large, but they are consistently
significant across studies. Major satisfaction may also predict student persistence; in one study,
major satisfaction was significantly higher for those who remained in their majors than for those
who didn’t (t[102] = 3.44, p = .001, d = .74), and each item in the measure of major satisfaction
had an effect size of .50 to .70 in differentiating between those who stayed in their major and
those who didn’t (Nauta, 2007).
Additionally, major satisfaction is related to other positive outcomes for students. In a
Korean sample, academic major satisfaction was correlated with life satisfaction (r = .39) and
positive affect (r = .21; Sovet et al., 2014). Major satisfaction has also been negatively correlated
with negative affect in two different samples, resulting in rs of –.25 and –.23 (Dahling &
Thompson, 2012; Sovet et al., 2014). In a mediation model, negative affect had a direct effect on
major satisfaction (b = –.17), and negative affect also fully mediated the relation between
16

maximization (focusing on making the best possible decision) and academic major satisfaction,
as can be seen through the change in b with the addition of negative affect as a mediator from
significant to nonsignificant (b = –.21 to b = –.16; Dahling & Thompson, 2012). Major
satisfaction predicted intrinsic motivation to learn science in a moderated mediation model (b =
.44; Deemer, 2015). Finally, academic major satisfaction has also been correlated with career
choice satisfaction (r = .43; McIlveen, Burton, & Beccaria, 2013). Overall, effect sizes between
major satisfaction and positive outcomes for students are moderate, suggesting a positive relation
between major satisfaction and positive student outcomes.
Demographic variables. Demographics have been shown to relate to major satisfaction
in some studies. Gender and ethnicity and grade point average (GPA) differentially affected
major satisfaction in one study. Identifying as female and identifying as Asian both predicted
lower academic major satisfaction scores in a multilevel model (with slope coefficients of –.13
and –.18, respectively), while a higher cumulative GPA predicted higher major satisfaction
scores (with a slope coefficient of .21; Umbach & Porter, 2002).
In a comparison of major satisfaction between a Korean sample and an American sample,
the Korean sample had a significantly lower mean major satisfaction than the American sample
(t[523] = 8.19, p < .001, ɳ2 = .11; Nauta, 2007; Sovet et al., 2014). There may also be differences in average satisfaction across schools. In one study, significant differences were found in satisfaction between a suburban liberal arts college and a large state university (F = 30.77; Nadziger et al., 1975). Time in school also may be related to major satisfaction. In a paired samples t-test comparing students’ satisfaction scores across a year, academic major satisfaction was higher at the end of the year than at the beginning of the year (t[44] = 2.07, p = .04), both for students who 17 stayed in their majors and for students who switched majors (Nauta, 2007). Overall, the effect sizes relating major satisfaction and demographics are low. Individual differences. The majority of the research that has been done in the academic major satisfaction literature has examined individual differences. That is, most of the research about academic major satisfaction has been about what intrapersonal factors are related to or can be used to predict academic major satisfaction. There has also been a significant amount of research done identifying links between personality and academic major satisfaction. Several studies have examined relations between academic major satisfaction and Big 5 personality variables. Openness has been modestly correlated with major satisfaction in one study (r = .14; McIlveen et al., 2013). Relatively consistent correlations have been found between conscientiousness and academic major satisfaction, with rs between .13 and .24 (Logue et al., 2007; McIlveen et al., 2013; Pozzebon, Ashton, & Visser, 2014). Correlations have been found for extraversion and major satisfaction (rs between .15 and .27), and in a multiple regression, extraversion predicted major satisfaction (β = .16; Logue et al., 2007; Pozzebon, Ashton, & Visser, 2014). Correlations have also been found between agreeableness and major satisfaction, with rs between .12 and .14 (McIlveen et al., 2013; Pozzebon, Ashton, & Visser, 2014), and between neuroticism and major satisfaction, with rs between .14 and .21 (Logue et al., 2007; McIlveen et al., 2013). Additionally, assertiveness (a subfactor of extraversion) has been correlated with major satisfaction (r = .24; Logue et al., 2007). Finally, a stepwise regression predicting major satisfaction with optimism, conscientiousness, and extraversion has a multiple R of .384 (Logue et al., 2007). In summary, there is evidence that major satisfaction and the Big 5 variables are related; however, the effect sizes are consistently small.