The COVID-19 pandemic delivered a fundamental shock that significantly impacted individual working conditions and increased job insecurity across numerous occupations and industries. Against this background, this study analyzes how two basic motivational systems, the behavioral activation system (BAS) and behavioral inhibition system (BIS), which shape human responses to (perceived) threats, influence the formation of job-attribute preferences. BIS and BAS have been shown to impact human decision-making and behavior in many different domains pervasively. However, despite their fundamental nature, they have remained understudied as possible deep-level influences on the formation of occupational preferences of young people about to choose a job to embark on. We address this research gap by applying an adaptive choice-based conjoint experiment based on a sample of 1,005 young adults. Results show that the perceived relative importance of significant job attributes in a crisis-ridden environment is related to the sensitivity of specific BIS and BAS subscales.
AkkermansJ.RichardsonJ.KraimerM. L. (2020). The Covid-19 crisis as a career shock: Implications for careers and vocational behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 103434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103434
2.
Akosah-TwumasiP.EmetoT. I.LindsayD.TseyK.Malau-AduliB. S. (2018). A systematic review of factors that influence youths career choices—the role of culture. Frontiers in Education, 3(58), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00058
3.
BaumM.KabstR. (2013). Conjoint implications on job preferences: The moderating role of involvement. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(7), 1393–1417. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.712542
4.
BeckerK. L. (2022). We want connection and we do not mean wi-fi: examining the impacts of Covid-19 on Gen Z’s work and employment outcomes. Management Research Review, 45(5), 684–699. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-01-2021-0052
5.
BernerthJ. B.AguinisH. (2016). A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 229–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103
6.
BinkleyM.ErstadO.HermanJ.RaizenS.RipleyM.Miller-RicciM.RumbleM. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
7.
CarverC. S.WhiteT. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319
8.
ChapmanC. N.AlfordJ. L.JohnsonC.WeidemannR.LahavM. (2009). CBC vs. ACBC: Comparing results with real product selection. In 2009 Sawtooth software conference proceedings (pp. 25–27). Sawtooth Software.
9.
CorrP. J.MutinelliS. (2017). Motivation and young people’s career planning: A perspective from the reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 126–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.043
10.
DawisR. V.LofquistL. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment: An individual-differences model and its applications. University of Minnesota Press.
11.
EvertzL.SüßS. (2017). The importance of individual differences for applicant attraction: A literature review and avenues for future research. Management Review Quarterly, 67(3), 141–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-017-0126-2
12.
FranchinaV.KlacklJ.JonasE. (2023). The reinforcement sensitivity theory affects questionnaire (RST-AQ). A validation study of a new scale targeting affects related to anxiety, approach motivation and fear. Current Psychology, 43(6), 5193–5205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04623-z
13.
FreyC. B.OsborneM. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019
14.
FurnhamA.JacksonC. (2008). Reinforcement sensitivity in the workplace: BIS/BAS in business. In CorrP. (Ed.), The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality (pp. 431–452). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819384.016
15.
GeenenN. Y.UrbigD.MuehlfeldK.van WitteloostuijnA.GargalianouV. (2016). BIS and BAS: Biobehaviorally rooted drivers of entrepreneurial intent. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 204–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.023
16.
GerlitzJ. Y.SchuppJ. (2005). Zur Erhebung der big-five-basierten persönlichkeitsmerkmale im SOEP. DIW Research Notes, 4(10.1016). DIW Berlin.
17.
GilliK.NippaM.KnappsteinM. (2022). Leadership competencies for digital transformation: An exploratory content analysis of job advertisements. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 37(1), 50–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/23970022221087252
18.
GottfredsonL. S.BeckerH. J. (1981). A challenge to vocational psychology: How important are aspirations in determining male career development?Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(81)90001-4
GrayJ. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford University Press.
21.
GrayJ. A.McNaughtonN. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
22.
GrayJ. D.HannaD.GillenA.RusheT. (2016). A closer look at Carver and White’s BIS/BAS scales: Factor analysis and age group differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.022
23.
HackmanJ. R.OldhamG. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076546
24.
HeymN.FergusonE.LawrenceC. (2008). An evaluation of the relationship between Gray’s revised RST and Eysenck’s PEN: Distinguishing BIS and FFFS in Carver and White’s BIS/BAS scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(8), 709–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.013
25.
HoppeD.KellerH.HorstmannF. (2021). Got employer image? How applicants choose their employer. Corporate Reputation Review, 25(2), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41299-021-00119-3
26.
JacksonC. J.HobmanE. V.JimmiesonN. L.MartinR. (2009). Comparing different approach and avoidance models of learning and personality in the prediction of work, university, and leadership outcomes. British Journal of Psychology, 100(Pt 2), 283–312. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712608X322900
27.
JohnO. P.DonahueE. M.KentleR. L. (1991). Big Five Inventory (BFI). APA PsycTests.
28.
LentR. W.BrownS. D.HackettG. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027
29.
LentR. W.HackettG. (1987). Career self-efficacy: Empirical status and future directions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30(3), 347–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(87)90010-8
30.
LiY.GuanY.WangF.ZhouX.GuoK.JiangP.MoZ.LiY.FangZ. (2015). Big-five personality and BIS/BAS traits as predictors of career exploration: The mediation role of career adaptability. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 89, 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.04.006
31.
MorarC.TibaA.BasarinB.VujičićM.ValjarevićA.NiemetsL.GessertA.JovanovicT.DrugasM.GramaV.StupariuM.StoicaA.LukićT. (2021). Predictors of changes in travel behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of tourists’ personalities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(21), 11169. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111169
32.
NonA.RohdeI.de GripA.DohmenT. (2022). Mission of the company, prosocial attitudes and job preferences: A discrete choice experiment. Labour Economics, 74, 102087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2021.102087
33.
OrmeB. K. (2010). Getting started with conjoint analysis: Strategies for product design and pricing research (3rd ed.). Research Publishers.
34.
ParolaA. (2020). Novel coronavirus outbreak and career development: A narrative approach into the meaning for Italian university graduates. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2255. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02255
35.
PetryT.TreischC.BullingerB. (2020). The logic of attraction: Exploring the institutional complexity of job preferences. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(6), 1465–1485. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-09-2019-0373
36.
PetryT.TreischC.PetersM. (2022). Designing job ads to stimulate the decision to apply: A discrete choice experiment with business students. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(15), 3019–3055. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1891112
37.
RadermacherK.SchneiderM. R.IsekeA.TebbeT. (2017). Signalling to young knowledge workers through architecture? A conjoint analysis. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002216676038
38.
RennR. W.SteinbauerR.FennerG. (2014). Employee behavioral activation and behavioral inhibition systems, manager ratings of employee job performance, and employee withdrawal. Human Performance, 27(4), 347–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2014.929694
39.
RondaL.AbrilC.ValorC. (2020). Job choice decisions: Understanding the role of nonnegotiable attributes and trade-offs in effective segmentation. Management Decision, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1546–1561. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2019-1472
40.
RudolphC. W.ZacherH. (2020). COVID-19 and careers: On the futility of generational explanations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 103433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103433
SchwarzerR.JerusalemM. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In WeinmanJ.WrightS.JohnstonM. (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s Portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). NFER-NELSON.
43.
SegarraP.PoyR.LópezR.MoltóJ. (2014). Characterizing carver and white’s BIS/BAS subscales using the five factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 61-62, 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.12.027
44.
StrobelA.BeauducelA.DebenerS.BrockeB. (2001). Eine deutschsprachige Version des BIS/BAS-Fragebogens von Carver und White. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 22(3), 216–227. https://doi.org/10.1024//0170-1789.22.3.216
45.
SwiderB. W.ZimmermanR. D.CharlierS. D.PierottiA. J. (2015). Deep-level and surface-level individual differences and applicant attraction to organizations: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88, 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.01.005
46.
TurbanD. B.EyringA. R.CampionJ. E. (1993). Job attributes: Preferences compared with reasons given for accepting and rejecting job offers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1993.tb00517.x
47.
Van den BulteC.LilienG. L. (2001). Medical innovation revisited: Social contagion versus marketing effort. American Journal of Sociology, 106(5), 1409–1435. https://doi.org/10.1086/320819
48.
van der LindenD.TarisT. W.BeckersD. G.KindtK. B. (2007). Reinforcement sensitivity theory and occupational health: BAS and BIS on the job. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(6), 1127–1138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.07.029
49.
XuH.FloresL. Y. (2023). A process model of career decision-making and adaptation under uncertainty: Expanding the dual-process theory of career decision-making. Journal of Career Assessment, 31(4), 773–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/10690727231161378
