Majoring in Selection, and Minoring in Socialization: The Role of the College Experience in Goal Change Post–High School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though it is frequently assumed that the college experience can influence our life goals, this claim has been relatively understudied. The current study examined the role of goals in college major selection, as well as whether major selection influences later goal change. In addition, we examined whether a person's perceptions of his or her peers' goals influence goal setting. Using a sample of German students (Mage = 19 years; n = 3,023 at Wave 1), we assessed life goal levels and changes from high school into college across three assessment occasions. Participants reported their current aspirations, along with the perceived goals of their peers during the college assessments. Using latent growth curve models, findings suggest that life goals upon entering college significantly predict the majors students select. However, this major selection had limited influence on later changes in life goals. Stronger effects were found with respect to perceptions of peers' goals, with students tending to change their goals to better align with their peers. The current study provides evidence that life goals are relatively stable and yet can change during the emerging adult years, in ways that demonstrate the potential influence of the college experience.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".