This study examines the validity of the three-factor model of person–environment (P-E) fit perceptions in a sample of German university students (N = 326) and examines the connection between these fit types, the Big Five personality traits, and markers of academic success, namely, academic satisfaction, academic performance, and major change intention. Building upon previous research, a three-factor model of P-E fit perceptions with complex loadings was hypothesized differentiating between interest-major (I-M) fit, needs-supplies (N-S) fit, and demands-abilities (D-A) fit. Results from confirmatory factor analyses supported the suggested three-factor solution. Zero-order correlations, multiple regression analyses, and relative weight analyses identified perceived I-M fit as the key predictor of academic satisfaction and major change intention. D-A fit was the strongest predictor of academic performance. Finally, a hierarchical regression approach revealed that personality traits did not improve the prediction of any outcome over perceived P-E fit.
AsendorpfJ. B.van AkenM. A. G. (2003). Personality relationship transaction in adolescence: Core versus surface personality characteristics. Journal of Personality, 71, 629–662. doi:10.1111/1467 6494.7104005
2.
BarrickM. R.MountM. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.1991.tb00688.x
3.
BrislinR. (1993). Understanding culture’s influence on behavior. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College.
4.
CableD. M.DeRueD. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subject fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 875–884. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.87.5.875
5.
CableD. M.JudgeT. A. (1996). Person–organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 294–311. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0081
6.
CampbellJ. D.TrapnellP. D.HeineS. J.KatzI. M.LavalleeL. F.LehmanD. R. (1996). Self concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 141–156. doi:10.1037/0022 3514.70.1.141
7.
ChatmanJ. A. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459–484. doi:10.2307/2393204
8.
CostaP. T.McCraeR. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO FFI). Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
9.
DawisR. V. (1991). Vocational interests, values, and preferences. In DunnetteM. D.HoughL. M. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organisational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 833–871). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
10.
DawisR. V.LofquistL. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
11.
DittonH. (1998). Studieninteresse, kognitive Fähigkeiten und Studienerfolg [Interests, cognitive abilities, and academic success]. In AbelJ.TarnaiC. (Eds.), Pädagogisch psychologische Interessenforschung in Studium und Beruf (pp. 45–61). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
12.
EdwardsJ. R. (1991). Person–job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. In CooperC. L.RobertsonI. T. (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 283–357). Chichester, England: John Wiley.
13.
EdwardsJ. R.CaplanR. D.HarrisonR. V. (1998). Person environment fit theory: Conceptual foundations, empirical evidence, and directions for future research. In CooperC. L. (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 28–67). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
14.
EdwardsJ. R.ShippA. J. (2007). The relationship between person environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. In OstroffC.JudgeT. A. (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 209–258). San Francicso, CA: Jossey Bass.
15.
HeubleinU.RichterJ.SchmelzerR.SommerD. (2012). Die Entwicklung der Schwund und Studienabbruchquoten an den deutschen Hochschulen. Statistische Berechnungen auf der Basis des Absolventenjahrgangs 2010 [The development of college drop outs in German universities. Statistical evaluation based on the graduate year 2010]. Hannover: HIS Hochschul Informations System GmbH. Retrieved fromhttp://www.his.de/pdf/pub_fh/fh201203.pdf
16.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
17.
JohnsonJ. W. (2000). A heuristic method for estimating the relative weight of predictor variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35, 1–19. doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3501_1
18.
JudgeT. A.HellerD.MountM. K. (2002). Five factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–541. doi:10.1037/0021 9010.87.3.530
19.
KristofA. L. (1996). Person–organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurements, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1–49. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.1996.tb01790.x
20.
Kristof BrownA. L.ZimmermanR. D.JohnsonE. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta analysis of person job, person organization, person group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.2005.00672.x
21.
KrahaA.TurnerH.NimonK.ZientekL. R.HensonR. K. (2012). Tools to support interpreting multiple regression in the face of multicollinearity. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–16. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00044
22.
LangF. R.LüdtkeO.AsendorpfJ. B. (2001). Testgüte und psychometrische Äquivalenz der deutschen version des Big Five Inventory (BFI) bei jungen, mittelalten und alten Erwachsenen [Validity and psychometric equivalence of the German Version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI) in young, average and old adults]. Diagnostica, 47, 111–121. doi:10.1026//0012 1924.47.3.111
23.
LiY.YaoX.ChenK.WangY. (2013). Different fit perceptions in an academic environment: Attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Career Assessment, 21, 163–174. doi:10.1177/1069072712466713
24.
LubinskiD.BenbowC. P. (2000). States of excellence. American Psychologist, 55, 137–150. doi:10.1037/0003 066X.55.1.137
25.
LüdtkeO.TrautweinU.NagyG.KöllerO. (2004). Eine Validierungsstudie zum NEO FFI in einer Stichprobe junger Erwachsener: Effekte des Itemformats, faktorielle Validität und Zusammenhänge mit Schulleistungsindikatoren [Validation of the NEO FFI in a young adult sample: Effects of item format, factorial validity and relationships with indicators of school performance]. Diagnostica, 50, 134–144. doi:10.1026/0012 1924.50.3.134
26.
NagyG. (2006). Berufliche Interessen, kognitive und fachgebundene Kompetenzen: Ihre Bedeutung für die Studienfachwahl und die Bewährung im Studium [Vocational interests, cognitive and scholastic abilities: Their role in choice of major and success at university](Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved fromhttp://www.diss.fuberlin.de/2007/109/.
27.
MarshH. W.HauK. T.WenZ. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralising Hu & Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2
28.
MarshH. W.LüdtkeO.AsparouhovT.MorinA. J. S.TrautweinU.NagengastB. (2010). A new look at the big five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471–491. doi:10.1037/a0019227
29.
MarshH. W.MuthénB.AsparouhovT.LüdtkeO.RobitzschA.MorinA. J. S.TrautweinU. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Application to students’ evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 439–476. doi:10.1080/10705510903008220
30.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (1987). Validation of the five factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90. doi:10.1037/0022 3514.52.1.81
31.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed). Los Angeles. CA: Author.
32.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method bias in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021 9010.88.5.879
33.
PoropatA. E. (2009). A meta analysis of the five factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338. doi:10.1037/a0014996
34.
RammstedtB. (1997). Die deutsche version des Big Five Inventory (BFI): Übersetzung und Validierung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung des Fünf Faktoren Modells der Persönlichkeit [German version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI): Translation and validation of a questionnaire to measure the Five Factor Model of personality](Unpublished diploma thesis). University of Bielefeld, Germany.
35.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514. doi:10.1007/BF02296192
36.
SchmittN.OswaldF. L.FriedeA.ImusA.MerrittS. (2008). Perceived fit with an academic environment: Attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 317–335. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.007
37.
SchneiderB. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.1987.tb00609.x
38.
TokarD. M.SubichL. M. (1997). Relative contributions of congruence and personality dimensions to job satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 482–491. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1996.1546
39.
TonidandelS.LeBretonJ. M.JohnsonJ. W. (2009). Determining the statistical significance of relative weights. Psychological Methods, 14, 387–399. doi:10.1037/a0017735
40.
TraceyT. J. G.AllenJ.RobbinsS. B. (2012). Moderation of the relation between person–environment congruence and academic success: Environmental constraint, personal flexibility and method. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 64–89. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.005
41.
TraceyT. J. G.RobbinsS. B. (2006). The interest–major congruence and college success relation: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 64–89. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2005.11.003
42.
TranbergM.SlaneS.EkebergS. E. (1993). The relation between interest congruence and satisfaction: A meta analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 253–264. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1993.1018
43.
TrapmannS.HellB.HirnJ. O. W.SchulerH. (2007). Meta analysis of the relationship between the big five and academic success at university. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 215, 132–151. doi:10.1027/0044 3409.215.2.132
44.
TrautweinU.LüdtkeO.RobertsB. W.SchnyderI.NiggliA. (2009). Different forces, same consequence: Conscientiousness and competence beliefs are independent predictors of academic effort and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1115–1128. doi:10.1037/a0017048
45.
TrossS. A.HarperJ. P.OsherL. W.KneidingerL. M. (2000). Not just the usual cast of characters: Using personality to predict college performance and retention. Journal of College Student Development, 41, 323–334.
46.
WesselJ. L.RyanA. M.OswaldF. L. (2008). The relationship between objective and perceived fit with academic major, adaptability, and major related outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 363–376. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.11.003
47.
WestermannR.HeiseE.SpiesK.TrautweinU. (1996). Identifikation und Erfassung von Komponenten der Studienzufriedenheit [Identification and measurement of components of academic satisfaction]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 43, 1–22.
48.
YuanK.BentlerP. M. (2000). Three likelihood based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30, 165–200. doi:10.1111/0081 1750.00078
49.
ZimmermanR. D. (2008). Understanding the impact of personality traits on individuals’ turnover decisions: A meta analytic path model. Personnel Psychology, 61, 309–348. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.2008.00115.x
