El pasado, el presente, el futuro y la autoeficacia ocupacional: una perspectiva de atribuciones y diferencias culturales entre estudiantes de posgrado en Estados Unidos y México

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20983/noesis.2022.1.7

Palabras clave:

Perspectiva de tiempo, autoeficacia, diferencias culturales, análisis de moderación

Resumen

El objetivo de este trabajo fue examinar la relación entre tres dimensiones de perspectiva de tiempo (futura, presente fatalista y pasado negativa) y la autoeficacia ocupacional. La autoeficacia ocupacional se refiere a la creencia personal de poder movilizar los recursos necesarios para afrontar las demandas inherentes al trabajo en un dominio ocupacional determinado (Schyns & von Collani, 2002). Mediante una encuesta aplicada a respondientes mexicanos (n = 286) y estadounidenses (n = 272), también se puso a prueba el papel de la cultura. Un análisis de regresión reveló que las dimensiones de la perspectiva de tiempo analizadas tienen relaciones significativas con la autoeficacia ocupacional, siendo la perspectiva futura de tiempo más potente que sus contrapartes pasado negativa y presente fatalista. Ninguna de las relaciones examinadas entre la perspectiva de tiempo y la autoeficacia varió significativamente entre EE. UU. y México. En general, las relaciones entre la perspectiva de tiempo y la autoeficacia ocupacional varían de acuerdo con diferentes dimensiones temporales. Los valores culturales podrían no ejercer influencia en la conexión entre la perspectiva de tiempo y la autoeficacia.

The past, the present, the future, and occupational self-efficacy: An attributions and cultural differences perspective between postgraduate students in the United States and Mexico

Abstract

This study´ s objective was to examine empirical relationships between three dimensions of time perspective (future, present fatalistic, and past negative) and occupational self-efficacy. Occupational self-efficacy refers to the belief that one can mobilize necessary resources needed to meet the situation demands encountered in a work-related occupational domain (Schyns & von Collani, 2002). By surveying Mexican (n = 286) and U.S. (n = 272) respondents, we also tested the moderating role of culture. Regression analyses revealed that time perspective dimensions have significant associations with occupational self-efficacy, being future time perspective more potent than its past negative and present fatalistic counterparts. Moderation analyses indicated that none of the examined time perspective-self-efficacy relationships varied significantly between the U.S. and Mexico. Overall, this study suggests that relationships between time perspective and occupational self-efficacy vary according to different temporal dimensions, that future time perspective is key to develop occupational self-efficacy, and that cultural values may not exert a significant influence on the time perspective-occupational self-efficacy connection.

Keywords: Time perspective, self-efficacy, cultural differences, moderation analysis.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Daniel Arturo Cernas Ortiz, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México

Doctor en Gestión por la Universidad del Norte de Texas. Investigador de tiempo completo en la Facultad de Contaduría y Administración de la Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México.

Citas

Abramson, L., Alloy, L., & Metalsky, G. (1989). Hopelessness depression: A theory-based subtype of depression. Psychological Review, 96 (2), 358-372. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.96.2.358

Avey, J., Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. (2010). The additive value of positive psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Management, 36 (2), 430-452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308329961

Azen, R., & Budescu, D. (2003). The dominance analysis approach for comparing predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Methods, 8 (2), 129-148. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.8.2.129

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 34 (2), 191-252. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191

Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in Changing Societies (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Bond, M. H. (1988). Finding universal dimensions of individual variation in multi-cultural studies of values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55 (6), 1009-1015. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.55.6.1009

Byrne, B. (1998). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (1st ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Cernas-Ortiz, D. A., & Davis, M. A. (2016). Future and past negative time perspective influences on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in Mexico and the United States. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 14 (3), 317-338. https://doi.org/10.1108/mrjiam-04-2016-0665

Cernas-Ortiz, D. A. & Mercado-Salgado, P. (2020). Perspectiva futura de tiempo y autoeficacia: Un análisis de mediación (dureza psicológica, esperanza y vitalidad) en México y EE.UU. Revista Interamericana de Psicología, 54 (3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.30849/ripijp.v54i3.1037

Davis, M., & Cernas-Ortiz, D.A. (2017). Revisiting the structural and nomological validity of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 98-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.037

Epel, E., Bandura, A., & Zimbardo, P. (1999). Escaping hopelessness: The influences of self-efficacy and time perspective on coping with homelessness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29 (3), 575-596 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb01402.x

Fuller, C., Simmering, M., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y. & Babin, B. (2016). Common method variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69 (8), 3192-3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008

Gits, M., & Mitchell, T. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Journal, 17 (2), 183-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/258770

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis (6th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.

Heine, S. J., & Hamamura, T. (2007). In search of East Asian self-enhancement. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11 (1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294587

Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G, J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations. Software of the Mind (3rd ed.). McGrawHill

House, R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, Leadership and Societies. The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies (1st ed.). SAGE Publications.

Karniol, R., & Ross, M. (1996). The motivational impact of temporal focus: Thinking about the future and the past. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 593-620. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.593

Lehman, D., Chui, C. & Schaller, M. (2004). Psychology and culture. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 689-714. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141927

Leone, S. (2010). A disabling combination: fatigue and depression. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 197 (2), 86-87. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.109.076604

Minkow, M. (2009). Predictors of differences in subjective well-being across 97 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 43 (2), 152-179 https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397109332239

Navarro, J., Roe, R. A., & Artiles, M. I. (2015). Taking time seriously: Changing practices and perspectives in work/organizational psychology. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 31 (3), 135-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2015.07.002

Oettingen, G. (1995). Cross-cultural perspectives on self-efficacy. In Bandura, A. (Ed.), Self-efficacy in Changing Societies (pp. 149-176). Cambridge University Press.

Park, I., & Jung, H. (2015). Relationships among future time perspective, career and organizational commitment, occupational self-efficacy and turnover intention. Social Behavior and Personality, 43 (9), 1547-1562. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2015.43.9.1547

Perry, J., Temple, E., Worrell, F., Zivkovik, U., Mello, Z., Musil, B., Cole, J., & Mckay, M. (2020). Different version, similar result? A critical analysis of the multiplicity of shortened versions of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory. SAGE Open, 10 (2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020923351

Rigotti, T., Schyns, B., & Mohr, G. (2008). A short version of the occupational self-efficacy scale: Structural and construct validity across five countries. Journal of Career Assessment, 16 (2), 238-255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072707305763

Santamaría, A., Cubero, M. & De la Mata (2018). Towards a cultural psychology: Meaning and social practice as key elements. Universitas Psychologica, 18 (1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy18-1.tcpm

Schyns, B., & von Collani, G. (2002). A new occupational self-efficacy scale and its relation to personality constructs and organizational variables. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11 (2), 219-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320244000148

Seijts, G. (1998). The importance of future time perspective in theories of work motivation. The Journal of Psychology, 132 (2), 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989809599156

Seligman, M. (2006). Learned Optimism. How to Change your Mind and your Life (3rd ed.). Vintage Books.

Shipp, A., Edwards, J., & Lambert, L. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110 (1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.001

Sobol-Kwapinska, M., Jankowski, T., Przepiorka, A., Oinyshi, I., Sorokowsiki, P. & Zimbardo, P. (2018). What is the structure of time? A study on time perspective in the United States, Poland, and Nigeria. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02078

Soroka, S. N., Fournier, P., & Nir, L. (2019). Cross-national evidence of negativity bias in psychophysiological reactions to news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 116 (38), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908369116

Stolarski, M., Mattews, G., Postek, S., Zimbardo, P., & Bitner, J. (2014). How we feel is a matter of time: Relationship between time perspective and mood. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 809-827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9450-y

Walker, T., & Tracey, T. (2012). The role of future time perspective in career decision making, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 150-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.06.002

Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45 (1), 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433596

Weiner, B. (2019). Wither attribution theory? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 540 (5), 603-604. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2398

Williams, L., Hartman, N., & Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13 (3), 477-514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428110366036

Wilson, J. (2014). The surprising power of impulse control. Harvard Business Review, 92 (5), 24-25.

Wolf, F., & Savickas, M. (1985). Time perspective and causal attributions for achievement, Journal of Educational Psychology, 77 (4), 471-480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.77.4.471

Worrell, F. C., & Mello, Z. R. (2007). The reliability and validity of Zimbardo time perspective scores in academically talented adolescents. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67 (3), 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406296985

Yan. W., & Gaier, E. (1994). Causal attributions for college success and failure. An Asian American comparison. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25 (1), 146-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022194251009

Zimbardo, P., & Boyd, J. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 (6), 1271-1288. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07368-2_2

Descargas

Publicado

2021-10-15 — Actualizado el 2021-12-10

Cómo citar

Cernas Ortiz, D. A. (2021). El pasado, el presente, el futuro y la autoeficacia ocupacional: una perspectiva de atribuciones y diferencias culturales entre estudiantes de posgrado en Estados Unidos y México. Nóesis. Revista De Ciencias Sociales, 31(61), 134–154. https://doi.org/10.20983/noesis.2022.1.7

Número

Sección

Ciencias Sociales