1. A Comparison of Educationally Advantaged and Disadvantaged College Students: Academic Goal Engagement and Psychological Well-Being Presented by Daniel K. Park Undergraduate Research Symposium University of California, Irvine Saturday, May 14, 2005

2. Why is Education Important? Education plays an important role in the future plans of adolescents. Past research has shown that higher levels of education are associated with: Higher income Lower unemployment General well-being (Garb et al., 2002)

3. Past Research Research consistently shows that educational achievement is highly correlated with social class (Ballantine, 2001). Research consistently shows that educational achievement is highly correlated with social class (Ballantine, 2001). Previous research has found that mother’s and father’s SES, education, and family background influences one’s educational and career attainment (e.g., Beeghley, 1996) Previous research has found that mother’s and father’s SES, education, and family background influences one’s educational and career attainment (e.g., Beeghley, 1996)

4. Why Look at Psychological Well-Being? Performing beyond normative expectations by outperforming their parents educationally can lead to: Performing beyond normative expectations by outperforming their parents educationally can lead to: Fear of failure Fear of failure Lack of parental guidance Lack of parental guidance  Vulnerability to more depressive symptoms and less life satisfaction

5. The Life-Span Theory of Control Addresses engagement with and disengagement from life goals during the life course. Addresses engagement with and disengagement from life goals during the life course. Primary control: Behavior directed at producing effects in the environment and “attempts to change the world to fit the needs and desires of the individual” (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) Primary control: Behavior directed at producing effects in the environment and “attempts to change the world to fit the needs and desires of the individual” (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) Secondary control: Addresses internal processes related to one’s motivation and emotion. Secondary control: Addresses internal processes related to one’s motivation and emotion.

6. The Present Study This study examines college students with parents from high vs. low educational backgrounds and students’ utilization of control strategies  psychological well- being (e.g., satisfaction with life, CES-D). This study examines college students with parents from high vs. low educational backgrounds and students’ utilization of control strategies  psychological well- being (e.g., satisfaction with life, CES-D). Parents with high educational (HE) attainment = Parents with high educational (HE) attainment = Bachelor’s degree (B.A., B.S.) and beyond Parents with low educational (LE) attainment = Parents with low educational (LE) attainment = Associate’s degree (A.A., A.S.) or less

7. Hypothesis One H 1 : College students with parents from LE backgrounds will report higher scores of depression and be less satisfied with life in comparison to students from HE backgrounds. H 1 : College students with parents from LE backgrounds will report higher scores of depression and be less satisfied with life in comparison to students from HE backgrounds.

8. Hypothesis Two H 2 : College students with parents from LE backgrounds are more likely to use secondary control strategies in order to overcome disadvantage: H 2 : College students with parents from LE backgrounds are more likely to use secondary control strategies in order to overcome disadvantage: Self-protection Self-protection Goal engagement Goal engagement Goal disengagement Goal disengagement

9. Hypothesis Three H 3 : Use of control strategies (primary, secondary) make a greater difference for predicting psychological well-being in students from low educational backgrounds than for students from high educational backgrounds. H 3 : Use of control strategies (primary, secondary) make a greater difference for predicting psychological well-being in students from low educational backgrounds than for students from high educational backgrounds.

10. Research Methodology/Design Surveys were distributed in four Social Ecology courses during the first and second summer sessions in 2004. Surveys were distributed in four Social Ecology courses during the first and second summer sessions in 2004. Participants were asked to complete a survey at home that consisted of the following: Participants were asked to complete a survey at home that consisted of the following: Demographic section (including parents’ level of education) Demographic section (including parents’ level of education) Primary and secondary control strivings scale – General OPS scale (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) Primary and secondary control strivings scale – General OPS scale (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) Academic OPS scale– OPS domain-specific academic achievement scale (Heckhausen, 2004) Academic OPS scale– OPS domain-specific academic achievement scale (Heckhausen, 2004) Satisfaction with life scale (Diener et al., 1985) Satisfaction with life scale (Diener et al., 1985) CES-D 10-item version scale (Radloff, 1977) CES-D 10-item version scale (Radloff, 1977)

11. Parents’ Educational Attainment N=152

12. Participants by Gender N=152 N=152 51 M (33.6%), 101 F (66.4%) 51 M (33.6%), 101 F (66.4%)

13. Participants by Race/Ethnicity N=152

14. Operationalization of Variables Educationally advantaged vs. disadvantaged students (Independent variable): Educationally advantaged vs. disadvantaged students (Independent variable): Parents’ educational attainment: Parents’ educational attainment: Two-year college degree or less = low educational attainment (LE) Two-year college degree or less = low educational attainment (LE) Four-year college degree and/or beyond = high educational attainment (HE) Four-year college degree and/or beyond = high educational attainment (HE) Control strivings (Independent variable): Control strivings (Independent variable): Primary and secondary control scales – General OPS scale (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) Primary and secondary control scales – General OPS scale (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) Academic OPS scale (Heckhausen, 2004) Academic OPS scale (Heckhausen, 2004) Psychological well-being (Dependent variable): Psychological well-being (Dependent variable): Satisfaction with life scale (Diener et al., 1985) Satisfaction with life scale (Diener et al., 1985) Center for Epidemiological Studies Short Depression scale (Ten-item version; Radloff, 1977) Center for Epidemiological Studies Short Depression scale (Ten-item version; Radloff, 1977)

15. Results

16. H 1: H 1: Psychological Well-Being Lower in LE Compared to HE Students t(146) = 2.046, p<.05

17. H 1: H 1: Psychological Well-Being Lower in LE Compared to HE Students (cont.)

18. H 2: H 2: Secondary Control Strategies Higher in LE than HE Students

19. H 3: Parents’ Education and Use of Control Strategies as Stronger Predictors of Psychological Well-Being for LE Students No interactions were found. No interactions were found.  Hypothesis not confirmed.

20. Additional Findings Predictors of Psychological Well-Being: Predictors of Psychological Well-Being: Utilization of primary control strategies is associated with greater life satisfaction. Utilization of primary control strategies is associated with greater life satisfaction. Secondary control strategy of goal disengagement is associated with greater life satisfaction. Secondary control strategy of goal disengagement is associated with greater life satisfaction.

21. Main Findings College students with parents from LE backgrounds report more depressive symptoms, but are not more likely to be less satisfied with life in comparison to those from HE backgrounds. College students with parents from LE backgrounds report more depressive symptoms, but are not more likely to be less satisfied with life in comparison to those from HE backgrounds. Students from LE backgrounds utilize the secondary control strategy of goal disengagement less than those from HE backgrounds. Students from LE backgrounds utilize the secondary control strategy of goal disengagement less than those from HE backgrounds. Use of primary and secondary control strategies didn’t make a greater difference for predicting LE students’ psychological well- being. Use of primary and secondary control strategies didn’t make a greater difference for predicting LE students’ psychological well- being.

22. Discussion Implications of findings for educationally advantaged and disadvantaged college students: Implications of findings for educationally advantaged and disadvantaged college students: Do depressive symptoms of LE students persist throughout time? Do depressive symptoms of LE students persist throughout time? HE students more aware of their limitations HE students more aware of their limitations LE students more persistent about attaining goals LE students more persistent about attaining goals Perception of impossible goals is subjective. Perception of impossible goals is subjective.

23. Future Directions for Research Future research should consider the following: Future research should consider the following: Longitudinal research Longitudinal research To examine other disadvantaged college students: To examine other disadvantaged college students: Transfer students Transfer students Low-income students Low-income students First-generation college students First-generation college students Nontraditional students (e.g., older students who return to earn their college degrees). Nontraditional students (e.g., older students who return to earn their college degrees).

24. Acknowledgments Professor Jutta Heckhausen, Ph.D. Professor Valerie Jenness, Ph.D. Esther S. Chang, Laura Gil-Trejo, and Sarah Roper-Coleman Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program School of Social Ecology’s Honors Program PSB’s Excellence in Research Program Study participants, Summer Session instructors in Social Ecology

25. Contact Information: Daniel K. Park Department of Psychology and Social Behavior School of Social Ecology University of California, Irvine danielkp@uci.edu