What Matters When? Social and Dimensional Comparisons in the Context of University Major Choice

Abstract

Students 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 STV in 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.