Is there strong evidence that choosing a career that fits one's personality or interests is of primary importance in regards to satisfaction or performance ? (For the purpose of this question, personality and interests do NOT include skills or mental ability)
Here is a list of scholarly statements pertaining to the issue (I have this list in a much more organized way in diigo but I can post links because have zero posts.You can message me if you want the more organized list. Also, I posted the question on Research Gate, so you can check the other answers there and follow the question. The name of the discussion is "Strong evidence that choosing a career that fits one's personality or interests is of primary importance?" at research-gate website.
Academic Quotes on the Importance of Personality/Interests in Career Choice
The last bullet point is the citation for the article.
The Prediction of Professional Success in Apprenticeship: The Role of Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Abilities, of Interests and Personality
"Results: Intelligence and conscientiousness were best predictors, followed by social-emotional competence and interests, whereas other traits provided marginal contributions. Predictors varied between branches, mostly following expectations. The test battery allowed a very good prediction of apprenticeship success (max. 37%), but for some branches prediction was considerably lower."
"Conclusion: Criteria for person-job-fit are not swappable, neither are the predictors.Professional success was mostly predicted by a different predictor set|namely ability and the personality dimension of conscientiousness|then satisfaction, which was mostly predicted by non-interest in a certain occupation. As a practical implication, we conclude that choosing the right candidate for a certain branch one needs to use a broad set of predictor variables. Besides cognitive ability also personality and vocational interests had predictive validity for an individuals person-job-fit."
""Interests seem somewhat more important for satisfaction than for success (GPA) but it should be mentioned that of totally nine significant beta weights ve were negative indicating that \non-interest" for a non-relevant (or even opposite domain, cf. the RIASEC conception) contributes positively to job/school satisfaction. From this one could even conclude that|in spite of their frequent and partially substantial contributions|interests are of rather low practical utility, as it is somewhat hard to imagine how \negative interests" could be implemented e.g. in the practice of counselling."
""As a practical implication, we conclude that choosing the right candidate for a certain branch one needs to use a broad set of predictor variables. Besides cognitive ability also personality and vocational interests had predictive validity for an individuals person-job-fit "
Diedrich, Jennifer & Neubauer, Aljoscha & Ortner, Anna. (2018). The Prediction of Professional Success in Apprenticeship: The Role of Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Abilities, of Interests and Personality. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training. 5. 82-111. 10.13152/IJRVET.5.2.1.
Success in the first phase of vocational career
"Taken together our results are in line with studies showing, that vocational interest play an important role in predicting occupational outcomes (Stoll et al, 2017) especially during the early vocational career (Volodina, Nagy & K oller, 2015)."
Volodina, Anna & Nagy, Gabriel & Köller, Olaf. (2015). Success in the First Phase of the Vocational Career: The Role of Cognitive and Scholastic Abilities, Personality Factors, and Vocational Interests. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 91. 10.1016/j.jvb.2015.08.009.
Person-Environment fit. In APA Handbook of Career Interventions
"Career interventions from the perspective of P-E fit are based on the belief that guiding individuals to career paths that fit their interests, needs, values, goals, skills, and abilities improves the aforementioned outcomes. Nonetheless, the answer to the question “does fit matter” and “to what extent fit matters” has never been unequivocal. Holland’s (1997) RIASEC model, for example, has received mixed support for its proposed link between congruence and job satisfaction. Upon reviewing three meta-analyses (Assouline & Meir, 1987; Tranberg, Slane, & Ekeberg, 1993; Tsabari, Tziner, & Meir, 2005) on the relationship between interest congruence (a type of P-V fit) and job satisfaction, Tinsley (2006) stated that “hexagonal congruence is not a valid predictor of job satisfaction or of any other meaningful vocational outcome” (p. 285; see also Tinsley, 2000).More recently, updated meta-analyses with comprehensive reviews as well as advanced methods and meta-analytic techniques countered the dour out-look presented by Tinsley. Morris (2003) reexamined 93 studies with 51,091 employed adults and estimated the mean correlation (corrected for sampling error and unreliability) between interest congruence and job satisfaction to be .24 (95% confidence interval [CI] = .03–.45; fail safe N = 287). Two other meta-analyses in organizational research also cast a more positive light on the general importance of fit by establishing the associations between various forms of P-E fit and an array of crit-ical career outcomes (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Verquer et al., 2003). Some of these associations, particularly those between fit and attitudinal and affective outcomes, were found to be very strong (e.g., r = .56 for P-J fit and job satisfaction, r = .65 for P-O fit and organizational satisfaction)."
"Furthermore, recent advances in fit research show that fit is also related to major behavioral outcomes, such as academic achievement, school persistence, job performance, job tenure, and career success (Nye, Su, Rounds, & Drasgow, 2012; Su, 2012; Van Iddekinge, Roth, Putka, & Lanivich, 2011). Nye et al. (2012) conducted a meta-analysis of 60 empirical studies spanning 70 years and found support for the link between interest congruence and various work and academic performance criteria (with r = .30 .36, .30, and .34 for task performance, job tenure, academic grades, and academic persistence, respectively). Similar results using different meta-analytic techniques were reported for interest congruence and job performance by Van Iddekinge et al. (2011). Additional validity evidence for P-E fit and career success comes from Su’s (2012) dissertation examining a sample of approximately 400,000 students from more than 1,000 schools across the United States. Su (2012) operationalized fit between individuals’ interests and environment using polynomial regressions and found it to be a powerful predictor for college grades (r = .30) and, in particular, for income 11 years after high school graduation (r = .60). These recent studies offer an affirmative answer to the question “does fit matter” and provide critical evidence that P-E fit is not only foundational for career choices but also key to adjustment and success. Moreover, these studies shed light on possible reasons for previous null results. In addition to methodological limitations that might have obscured associations between fit and career outcomes, the level of analysis also may be an issue."
"Nyambegera, Daniels, and Spar-row (2001) conducted a study in Kenya to examine how fit between individuals’ preferences and values and their organizations’ policy and culture affected job involvement. They found that P-E fit only partially predicted job involvement in Kenya, in a way that is not consistent with theory developed in the Western context."
Su, Rong & Murdock, Chris & Rounds, James. (2015). Su, R., Murdock, C. D., & Rounds, J. (2015). Person-Environment fit. In P. J. Hartung, M. L. Savickas, & W. B. Walsh (Eds.), APA Handbook of Career Interventions (pp. 81-98). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.. 81-98. 10.1037/14438-005.
Person Environment Fit and Vocational Outcomes
"It is theorized that the greater the interest-occupational environment congruence, the greater the career outcomes such as satisfaction and productivity (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1997; Tracey & Robbins, 2006). However, the literature on this relation has yielded equivocal results (Assouline & Meir, 1987; Spokane, 1985; Spokane, Meir, & Catalano, 2000; Tsabari, Tziner, & Meir, 2005). This has caused some to question the significance of the interestoccupational environment congruence (e.g., Arnold, 2005; Tinsley, 2000) while others view the small to moderate relation as comparable to trait–behavior relations in the personality domain (Rounds & Tracey, 1990; Spokane, 1985"
"This poses a very serious issue with this assessment. So, individuals with great amounts of ‘‘misfit’’ would likely leave the major or occupation very quickly and would presumably not be available for inclusion in research."
"While some have argued for eschewing examination of person-occupational matching, we have argued that there is support for the relation of Person-Environment fit, as assessed using vocational interests, as related to key career outcome such as job satisfaction and productivity. These results indicate that indeed the common practice of matching interest to occupations is valid and a central part of career counseling."what do you mean by "there are no other interventions"
"There are no other interventions that have relations to career outcomes anywhere near as good."
"Finally, in some cultures, presumably more individualistic cultures, interest-occupation fit is more central and more highly related to satisfaction and productivity than it is in other cultures."
"We demonstrated that there is a moderate relation of interest-occupation congruence with most all indicators of career satisfaction and productivity."
"We then reviewed why this moderate relation is not minor in importance. Specifically we demonstrated that it is similar in magnitude to personality research and that given self-selection into occupations, and resulting restriction of range, one should not expect higher results."
"Interest-Occupation congruence serves as a key if not central intervention"
Wilkins, Kerrie & Tracey, Terence. (2014). Person Environment Fit and Vocational Outcomes. 123-138. 10.1007/978-3-319-00645-1_7.
Are You Interested? A Meta-Analysis of Relations Between Vocational Interests and Employee Performance and Turnover
"A common belief among researchers is that vocational interests have limited value for personnel selection. However, no comprehensive quantitative summaries of interests validity research have been conducted to substantiate claims for or against the use of interests"
"Overall validity estimates (corrected for measurement error in the criterion but not for range restriction) for single interest scales were .14 for job performance, .26 for training performance, –.19 for turnover intentions, and –.15 for actual turnover."
"Overall, the results suggest that vocational interests may hold more promise for predicting employee performance and turnover than researchers may have thought."
Van Iddekinge, Chad & L Roth, Philip & Putka, Dan & Lanivich, Stephen. (2011). Are You Interested? A Meta-Analysis of Relations Between Vocational Interests and Employee Performance and Turnover. The Journal of applied psychology. 96. 1167-94. 10.1037/a0024343.
Interest Congruence and Performance
"Recent meta-analyses from two independent research teams ( Nye et al., 2012Nye et al., , 2017; Van Iddekinge et al., 2011) provided support for the link between interests and job performance"
"This work shows that -with better measures and appropriate statistical corrections - interest congruence is a weak but significant predictor of job performance (Nye, Su, Rounds, & Drasgow, 2017)"
Nye, Christopher & Su, Rong & Rounds, James & Drasgow, Fritz. (2016). Interest congruence and performance: Revisiting recent meta- analytic findings. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 98. 138-151. 10.1016/j.jvb.2016.11.002.
Person–environment fits as drivers of commitment
"Person-environment fit is a significant driver of commitment"
van Vianen, Annelies & Hamstra, Melvyn & Koen, Jessie. (2016). Person–environment fits as drivers of commitment..
(Working Paper) The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 100 Years of Research Findings
"Earlier research (e.g., Hunter & Hunter, 1984) indicated low validity (.10) for interests in predicting job performance. In the earlier studies these meta-analyses were based on, no attempt was made to match the type of interest measure with the type of job. For example, Realistic interests (in the Holland RIASEC interest model) are relevant to the job of mechanic".
" Given this sort of appropriate matching of interest scale to job type, interest measures show an average operational validity of .31 for job performance and produce an incremental validity of .062, or 10%. In Table 2, it can be seen that the situation is similar for the prediction of training program success: an operation validity of .34 and an incremental validity of .070, a validity increase of 11%"
" Clearly, earlier research created a misleading picture of the potential of interest measures to predict both job performance and amount learned in training programs."
"The zero order validity of personality-based EI measures is .32, with incremental validity of .029, a 5% increase."
" Both the validity and the incremental validity are lower than assumed by advocates of these measures. Emotional intelligence measures have not been studied in the prediction of training performance and so do not appear in Table 2. "
"Person-Organization Fit measures assess the degree of match between characteristics of the applicants (such as values, goals, desires, and interests) and the values, purposes, and goals of the organization as a whole. These measured do not include any cognitive, ability, or skills component. Measures of Person-Organization Fit have recently become popular in business and industry. For the prediction of job performance they have a low average validity (.13) and produce an incremental validity increase of only 4%. Both these figures are disappointing to the advocates of these measures. Person-organization fit measures have not been studied in relation to performance in job training programs and so do not appear in Table 2."
" 15. Person-Job Fit Measures The next predictor is Person-Job Fit measures. These measures assess the degree of match between characteristics of the applicants (such as values, desires, and interests) and those embodied in, or offered by, the job the applicant is applying for. They do not include matching on applicant GMA and job GMA requirements. The process of constructing these fit measures for each job can be time consuming and costly. These measures have an average validity of .18 and produce only a 2% increment in validity over that of GMA. Both the zero order operational validity and the incremental validity are lower than had been anticipated by those researching these measures. No studies have been conducted on the validity of Person-Job Fit measures for predicting training performance and so they do not appear in Table 2. "
" Some, such as person-job fit, person organization fit, and amount of education, have low validity. Others, such as graphology, have essentially no validity; they are equivalent to hiring randomly. Still others, such as GMA tests and integrity tests, have high validity. Of the combinations of predictors examined, two stand out as being both practical to use for most hiring and as having high composite validity: the combination of a GMA test and an integrity test (composite validity of .78); and the combination of a GMA test and a structured interview (composite validity of .76). Both of these combinations can be used with applicants with no previous experience on the job (entry level applicants), as well as with experienced applicants. Both combinations predict performance in job training programs quite well (.78 and .72, respectively), as well as performance on the job. And both combinations are less expensive to use than many other combinations. "
" And in the U.S. many organizations rely on measures of “emotional intelligence”, person-job fit, or person-organization fit measures. In a competitive world, these organizations are unnecessarily creating a competitive disadvantage for themselves (Schmidt, 1993) "
Schmidt, Frank. (2016). The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 100 Years of Research Findings.
How important is finding a career that matches your strengths? - 80,000 Hours
11:55 sept 30
"You’ll be fantastic at the career that best matches you, and terrible at other careers, so the mission should be to find the career that’s the best match. We haven’t found much support for this idea so far. "
"but several meta-analyses have found no or only a very weak relationship between Holland-type match and performance (or job satisfaction)."
"On the other hand, we’ve encountered some important general predictors of success. For instance, hundreds of studies have found that the smarter you are, the more likely you are to succeed in almost every career."
"the Virtues in Action (VIA) Signature Strengths test and Strengths Finder –"
"Strengths Finder 2.0 is more focused on workplace"
"Strengths Finder 2.0 costs ~$15 to take, the VIA Survey is free."
"Using Strengths Finder 2.0 has been studied by Gallup and linked to increased employee engagement, productivity and profitability, as well as reduced turnover. The sample sizes are quite large, and there are a couple are experimental and quasi experimental studies with wait-list controls. However, most/all of these studies were sponsored by Gallup, so there’s likely to be bias there, and more importantly, it looks like none of the studies are published in peer reviewed journals.3 Because of this, we decided to focus the rest of our research on the VIA Signature Strengths test."
"and there are Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) that show using signature strengths in new ways (or monitoring one’s use of strengths) increases general happiness."
"In general, there are more similarities across occupational type than differences in the strengths that relate to satisfaction at work.”"
"and there are Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) that show using signature strengths in new ways (or monitoring one’s use of strengths) increases general happiness."
"In sum, there is some evidence that using signature strengths at work is useful for job satisfaction and performance, but it’s relatively weak. "
"increases general happiness, but we didn’t find RCTs testing the effects on increasing job satisfaction or job performance:"
"From the evidence there so far, not very. "
"Rather, knowledge of a worker’s character strengths is probably more useful in helping a worker craft the job that he or she already has.”"
"Yes – it’ll probably make you a bit happier. The evidence is still weak, but it’s an intuitive idea and doesn’t cost much, so seems worth doing, if not as a top priority. It’s especially worth doing if you’re already in a job, since signature strengths are not helpful for career selection. "
Does your personality matter in picking a career? - 80,000 Hours
"Having investigated the leading personality tests, however, we’ve concluded they’re not very useful in choosing your career. This is because they haven’t been shown to predict the real world outcomes that matter: (i) finding careers you will find satisfying (ii) finding careers that you will succeed in. "
"To judge your chances of success, put more weight on IQ, grit and experience."
"Often, it explains 30-60% of the variance, meaning that it dwarfs conscientiousness."
"An emerging line of research suggests that grit – the propensity to stick to your goals over long periods of time – matters more than conscientiousness. One recent paper2 showed that grit could explain 5% of the variance in performance across six different areas, compared to only 2% for conscientiousness. (Though note that IQ was still found to be a much better predictor of performance than grit)."
gladwell on termites
"Why is there so much focus on personality in career choice then? And why do personality tests continue to be so popular? We suspect it’s because the message that certain types of personality suit certain types of job is a nice one. Many of these other factors are much less encouraging. If the nature of the work is what’s important in job satisfaction, then that means that on average some jobs are more satisfying than others."
"And you can’t change your IQ or height."
Interview: Holden Karnofsky on the importance of personal fit - 80,000 Hours
"One issue in organisational psychology is to what extent are predictors of success general or specific? It’s interesting that 30 years ago, people thought it would all be person specific, but predictors that have been firmly established are ones that apply pretty generally, such as IQ, conscientiousness and grit. "
see my question about their position at Effective Altruism Careers Discussion Public Group | Facebook
Please add any important studies or points that I missed. Your thoughts and insights are much appreciated.
This question was posted on
I will update the post on Research Gate next week with valuable insights I get. If you prefer that I don't share your reply or mention your name, please let me know.