[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-590121-105":59,"doc-detail-590121-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","what-matters-when-social-and-dimensional-comparisons-in-the-context-of-university-major-choice-read-online-free","What Matters When? Social and Dimensional Comparisons in the Context of University Major Choice - read online free","","Examines how social comparisons and dimensional comparisons shape students’ ability self-concept and subjective task value (STV) during secondary school and university major choice. Builds on situated expectancy-value theory, dimensional comparison theory, and the big-fish-little-pond effect literature, using two German longitudinal datasets (Study 1: N=2,207; Study 2: N=1,710). Findings show individual achievement supports ability self-concept and STV in corresponding domains but relates negatively in noncorresponding ones. School-level mean achievement relates negatively in corresponding domains. Dimensional comparisons directly predict major choice, while social comparisons predict it indirectly.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/what-matters-when-social-and-dimensional-comparisons-in-the-context-of-university-major-choice-read-online-free/590121/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/what-matters-when-social-and-dimensional-comparisons-in-the-context-of-university-major-choice-read-online-free/590121.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Adam","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-22","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":19},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What theories does the study integrate to explain university major choice?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study brings together situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT), dimensional comparison theory (DCT), and big-fish-little-pond effect research (BFLPE). It links these with social comparison theory (SCT).","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How do individual achievement and school-level achievement relate to ability self-concept and STV?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Individual achievement is positively related to ability self-concept and STV in the corresponding domain, and negatively related in noncorresponding domains. School-level mean achievement is negatively related to ability self-concept and STV in the corresponding domain.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Which type of comparison predicts university major choice more directly?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Dimensional comparisons directly predict university major choice, while social comparisons relate to major choice only indirectly.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},590121,1792164956,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":19,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":36},1374404737137,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","AERA Open  \nJanuary-December 2021, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1–16 DOI: 10. 1177/23328584211020711  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© The Author(s) 2021. [https://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero](https://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero)  \nWhat Matters When? Social and Dimensional Comparisonsin the Context of University Major Choice  \nLuise von Keyserlingk   \nAnna-Lena Dicke  \nUniversity of California, Irvine  \nMichael Becker  \nTU Dortmund University  \nLeibniz-Institute for Research and Information in Education (DIPF)  \nJacquelynne S. Eccles  \nUniversity of California, Irvine  \nAustralian Catholic University  \nStudents compare their achievement to different standards in order to evaluate their ability. We built on the theoretical frameworks of situated expectancy-value theory, dimensional comparison theory, and the big-fish-little-pond effect literature to examine the role of social and dimensional comparisons for ability self-concept and subjective task value (STV) in secondary school and university major choice. We used two German longitudinal data sets from different cohorts with data collection in 12th grade and 2 years after high school graduation (Study 1: N = 2,207, Study 2: N = 1,710). Dimensional and social comparisons predicted students’ self-concept and domain-specific STV in school: Individual achievement was positively related to ability self-concept and STVin the corresponding domain and negatively related in the noncorresponding domain. School-level mean achievement was negatively related to ability self-concept and STV in the corresponding domain. Dimensional comparisons were directly related to university major choice, social comparisons were only indirectly related.  \nKeywords: dimensional comparisons, academic self-concept, university major choice, big-fish-little-pond effect, situated expectancy-value theory  \nUnderstanding critical educational choices is of major interest to educational psychologists. Most such theorists, who ground their work in rational-choice perspectives, stress the role of ability self-concepts in educational decisions like university major choice. A few prominent selftheories are particularly relevant for understanding developmental influences on both ability self-concepts and major educational choices: situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT; Eccles, 1983; Eccles & Wigfield, 2020), Möller and Marsh’s dimensional comparison theory (DCT; Möller & Marsh, 2013), and research on the big-fish-little-pond effect (BFLPE; Marsh, 1987; Marsh & Hau, 2003), based on social comparison theory (SCT; Festinger, 1954) . This paper sought to bring all of these theories together in predicting university major choice.  \nSEVT predicts that ability self-concepts and subjective task values (STV) are the primary psychological influenceson individual differences in university major choice.  \nEvidence over 40 years has largely supported this hypothesis (Wigfield & Eccles, 2020) . But what influences the formation of these self-concepts and task beliefs? Marsh, Möller, and their research teams have addressed this question in their work on social and dimensional comparison theories (Marsh et al., 2014; Marsh et al., 2018; Möller & Marsh, 2013). Social comparison theorists (SCT; Festinger, 1954) argue that people compare themselves to others in order to get relevant information about themselves, while dimensional comparison theorists (DCT; Möller & Marsh, 2013) argue that people compare their performance in one domain with their performance in another domain.  \nIn recent years, several researchers have broadened the focus of self-concept research by demonstrating the relevance of these comparison processes in other contexts, such as students’ STV and educational choices (Cambria et al., 2017; Dickhäuser et al., 2005; Gaspard et al., 2018; Möller et al., 2016; Umarji et al., 2018) . Given the broad range of  \nCreative Commons N","cbCaisBAliea1ySH","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaisBAliea1ySH","pdf",1334719,16,"English","# Background and theoretical framework\n## Core theories: SEVT, DCT, and BFLPE\n## Comparison mechanisms: social vs. dimensional\n# Data and research design\n## Longitudinal German datasets\n# Findings\n## Effects on self-concept and STV in school\n## Predictions of university major choice\n# Interpretation and implications","[{\"question\":\"What theories does the study integrate to explain university major choice?\",\"answer\":\"The study brings together situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT), dimensional comparison theory (DCT), and big-fish-little-pond effect research (BFLPE). It links these with social comparison theory (SCT).\"},{\"question\":\"How do individual achievement and school-level achievement relate to ability self-concept and STV?\",\"answer\":\"Individual achievement is positively related to ability self-concept and STV in the corresponding domain, and negatively related in noncorresponding domains. School-level mean achievement is negatively related to ability self-concept and STV in the corresponding domain.\"},{\"question\":\"Which type of comparison predicts university major choice more directly?\",\"answer\":\"Dimensional comparisons directly predict university major choice, while social comparisons relate to major choice only indirectly.\"}]","What Matters When? Social and Dimensional Comparisons in the Context of University Major Choice - read online free | PDF",1792068839]