Career Decision Ambiguity Tolerance: Psychometric Evaluation of the Polish Version and Further Evidence for the Distinction Between Tolerance and Confidence
Description
The present study introduces the concept of career decision ambiguity tolerance (CDAT) proposed by Xu and Tracey, and examines the psychometric properties of the Polish adaptation of the CDAT-R scale. CDAT refers to individuals' responses to unfamiliar, complex, inconsistent, and unpredictable information encountered in career- decisions making. Data were collected from two samples of young adults: Sample 1 (N = 435; 63% female; aged 18-34, M = 23.8, SD = 3.4) was used for exploratory factor analysis, and Sample 2 (N = 229; 63% female,; aged 19-26, M = 22.7, SD = 1.8) was used for confirmatory factor analysis and validity testing. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency. Convergent and discriminant validity were examined using theoretically related constructs, including life orientation, stimulating and instrumental risk-taking, regulatory focus, need for cognitive closure, and courage. Results provided qualified support for the four-factor structure of preference, tolerance, confidence, and aversion, and indicated good reliability and validity, largely consistent with findings for the original instrument, except for the tolerance dimension. The Polish CDAT appears to be a reliable and valid measure of career decision ambiguity tolerance among young adults.
Files
Steps to reproduce
Participants were recruited from one of the largest nationwide online research panels in Poland. Participation was voluntary and compensated with loyalty points redeemable for cash. Data were collected from June to September 2024. The panel implements quality-control procedures that monitor completion time, response patterns, and attention checks. The study included 664 participants (420 women and 244 men) aged 18–34 years (M = 23.38, SD = 2.97). For the purposes of scale validation, the full sample was divided into two independent subsamples. Sample 1 (N = 435; 63% women, 37% men; age range = 18–34 years, M = 23.8, SD = 3.4) was used for exploratory factor analysis. Sample 2 (N = 229; 63% women, 37% men; age range = 19–26 years, M = 22.7, SD = 1.8) was used for confirmatory factor analysis and analyses convergent/discriminant evidence.. Sample size adequacy was considered in relation to model complexity, the number of indicators per factor, and the magnitude of factor loadings, rather than by relying solely on a fixed participant-to-item ratio (MacCallum et al., 1999; Wolf et al, 2013). The exploratory analysis was conducted in a relatively large sample (N = 435), whereas the independent confirmatory sample included 229 participants. With four factors represented by five indicators each and generally moderate-to-high primary loadings in the exploratory solution, both samples were considered reasonable for the planned factor-analytic procedures. Most participants were university students or graduates. At the time of the study, 64% were professionally active and had previous work experience, 24% were not currently employed but had worked previously, 6% had no professional experience, and 6% were in their first job. Recruitment and data collection were conducted entirely online using a secure platform designed for psychological research. Participation was voluntary. Participants received an incentive and an individualized psychological report after completing the study. The online platform required responses to all questionnaire items; consequently, the dataset contained no missing item-level data. Measures: Career Decision Ambiguity Tolerance Scale (CDAT-R), Need for Cognitive Closure Scale (NCCS), Promotion and Prevention Self-Regulation Scale (SSPP), Social Participation Questionnaire (SPQ-2), Stimulating-Instrumental Risk Inventory, Courage Measure, Reduced Version