The process of career decision-making, involving the selection of an educational or vocational path, stands as a pivotal task for young individuals. It constitutes a significant focus within Vocational Psychology and counseling (Gati et al., 2010; Gati & Levin, 2014; Levin et al., 2020; Lipshits-Braziler et al., 2016; Udayar et al., 2020). The resulting decisions can have profound impacts on both personal and professional spheres. Formulating such decisions represents a developmental task that necessitates not only knowledge and skills but also maturity, courage, and determination.
The task of making these decisions presents a challenge that is increasingly complicated by the uncertainties and fluctuations within the labor market (Di Maggio et al., 2020; Wawrzonek, 2020). The information crucial for young individuals to support their career choices often remains unclear or becomes unavailable when most needed. Therefore, a critical competence in career planning and execution involves the adept handling of ambiguity (Xu & Tracey, 2014).
According to the "Młodzi Polacy na Rynku Pracy" report (Young Poles on the Labor Market, 2022), a substantial 74.1% of surveyed young Poles currently prioritize employment stability over the risk of self-employment. Many express apprehension about preparing career plans due to concerns regarding the pandemic, challenging economic and political conditions, as well as migration crises. In the face of such perceived threats, possessing courage emerges as advantageous, serving as a resource that fosters rational action and facilitates more effective career decision-making. Therefore, courage can be viewed as a psychological asset and a defensive mechanism that activates when confronted with difficulties and crises amid uncertainty and apprehensions about the future (Hannah et al., 2007).
Tolerance of ambiguity when making career decisions
To foster career maturity, individuals require the capacity to navigate decision-making amid uncertain circumstances, a trait bolstered by ambiguity tolerance. This term finds its origins in American organizational sociology, particularly within the works of March (as cited in Gati et al., 2010; Gati & Levin, 2014; Levin et al., 2020; Lipshits-Braziler et al., 2016; Udayar et al., 2020). Additionally, Hofstede (2000, p.177) incorporates the synonymous term "uncertainty avoidance," defining it as "managing uncertain situations in the workplace."
Ambiguity or uncertainty tolerance is both subjective and can be ingrained within a cultural heritage, transmitted and reinforced by fundamental social institutions such as family, school, and state. It serves as a factor that shapes the values and behaviors of a culture. Moreover, ambiguity tolerance is regarded as a dimension of individual differences within an accepted value hierarchy or as a cognitive motivation (You et al., 2011).
Defined within this context, ambiguity tolerance is the perceptual and responsive approach towards ambiguous situations or stimuli characterized by unfamiliar, intricate, or inconsistent cues (Budner, 1962; Furnham & Ribchester, 1995). This construct exhibits a bipolar nature: at one end are individuals inclined toward embracing new and surprising experiences, while at the other are those who tend to avoid them. Individuals with low ambiguity tolerance often experience heightened stress in response to ambiguous stimuli, leading them to react prematurely to avoid such situations. Conversely, those with high ambiguity tolerance tend to perceive unusual stimuli as desirable and engaging (Furnham & Ribchester, 1995).
Ambiguity tolerance seems connected to the concept of the need for cognitive closure (Kruglanski, 1990). Like a preference, this "need" pertains to a relatively fixed inclination rather than a state arising from a specific deficit. Individuals with low ambiguity tolerance seek information to diminish subjectively-perceived uncertainty, striving for cognitive closure (Webster & Kruglanski, 1994; Jaworski, 1998).
An affirmative relationship is anticipated between ambiguity tolerance and career maturity domains, such as concern, control, curiosity, and certainty, as outlined by Savickas and Portfeli (2012). This anticipation is supported by studies conducted by Xu and Tracey (2014, 2015a), who found ambiguity tolerance to predict general indecisiveness, dysfunctional beliefs, inadequate information retrieval skills among job candidates, and all dimensions of career adaptability. Furthermore, it was observed to moderate the relationship between exploring the professional environment and acquiring inconsistent information.
Subsequent studies (Xu et al., 2016; Xu & Tracey, 2017a, 2017b) delineated a four-element structure of ambiguity tolerance comprising preference, tolerance, confidence, and aversion. Preference reflects an individual's inclination towards ambiguity in career decision-making, while tolerance signifies the acceptance and competence in managing ambiguity. Confidence predominantly relates to an individual's sense of agency, while aversion describes the inclination to perceive and avoid ambiguity in vocational decision-making.
Recent research by these authors has focused on the relationship between career adaptability and personal attributes, exploring its influence on labor market coping. Utilizing a tool developed by Xu and Tracey (2015b), Park and colleagues (Park et al., 2019; Park et al., 2020) discovered that tolerance of ambiguity in work decision-making situations positively predicts feelings of well-being.
Courage
Courage has conventionally been portrayed as an inherent trait or fixed disposition within an individual. However, more contemporary perspectives define it primarily as a specific form of action. Norton and Weiss (2009) articulated courage as a personal attribute enabling particular behavior despite experiencing fear. Rate et al. (2007) delineated the four fundamental attributes of courageous behavior: (1) intentionality; (2) prudence; (3) managing threats, risks, or obstacles; and (4) pursuing a noble or worthwhile goal.
In contrast to courage perceived as a state, courage enacted through behavior - construed as a trait - is variable and contingent upon other personality dimensions. Hannah et al. (2007) proposed that courageous behavior is influenced by an array of individual strengths and resources, such as resilience, optimism, hope, and openness to experience, along with diverse norms, personal values, and beliefs (e.g., loyalty or bravery), which mitigate perceived fear or encourage courageous behavior despite it.
Recent investigations have delved into the role of courage in psychological aspects related to career development (Ginevra et al., 2020). Their findings suggest that courageous behavior positively impacts job quality, a sense of professional identity, and prosocial behavior (Howard et al., 2017; Koerner, 2014). Moreover, adolescents exhibiting higher levels of courage are more motivated to pursue life plans, employ diverse solutions to attain them, and experience lower anxiety levels (Ginevra & Capozza, 2015; Magnano et al., 2017). Among young individuals, courage mediates between career adaptability and life satisfaction (Ginevra et al., 2018), as well as satisfaction within their chosen field of study (Platania et al., 2023). Additionally, courage was observed to mediate the relationship between career readiness, adaptability, and indicators of well-being (Magnano et al., 2021). Youth concerned about their future careers, perceiving themselves as responsible for their development, and possessing self-confidence are more inclined to exhibit courage in pursuing future goals despite perceived obstacles. Consequently, they are more likely to perceive their quality of life positively.
Life orientation as a moderator
Current research primarily focuses on analyzing the relationship between ambiguity tolerance and subjective characteristics in young adults, typically students (Xu & Tracey, 2017b, 2017a). However, these studies have often overlooked various developmental characteristics deemed pivotal in preparing individuals for the responsibilities of adulthood.
Studies conducted in numerous countries (Brzezinska et al., 2012; Buhl & Lanz, 2007; Lanz & Tagliabue, 2007; Macek et al., 2007; Rękosiewicz, 2013b; Sirsch et al., 2009) indicate that young people delay assuming adult tasks and roles. In psychology, this phenomenon is referred to as a prolonged moratorium and has recently been acknowledged as normative, culminating in the proposal of a new developmental phase termed "emerging adulthood" by Arnett (2000).
German researchers (Reinders & Butz, 2001) propose that during this phase, young individuals exhibit two general types of personal life orientations: moratory and transitive. The former entails capitalizing on the opportunities linked to youth, while the latter involves engaging in activities that equip young individuals with the skills necessary for adult life. Although the authors of this concept (Reinders, 2006; Reinders et al., 2001) do not consider any combination of the two life orientations as optimal, Rękosiewicz (2013b) suggests that a blend of high transitive and low moratory orientation could be developmentally beneficial. This proposition is corroborated by Turska and Stasila-Sieradzka (2016), based on Reinders' concept, which emphasizes that attitudes toward transitioning into the labor market are significantly influenced by the development of both positive (transitive) and negative (moratory) life orientations.
Therefore, the present research encompasses two primary aims: (1) determining the level of uncertainty tolerance among young adults making career decisions, describing the variables associated with life orientation, and gauging the associated level of courage, and (2) verifying the relationship between courage and the four components of ambiguity tolerance - Preference, Confidence, Tolerance, and Aversion - concerning career decisions, while considering the moderating impact of life orientation. Three hypotheses were formulated in relation to the latter objective:
Hypothesis 1
A positive correlation is hypothesized between courage and preference, trust, and tolerance of ambiguity in career decision-making, while a negative correlation is expected between courage and aversion toward ambiguity.
Hypothesis 2
Courage is anticipated to have a positive association with transitive orientation and a negative association with moratory orientation.
Hypothesis 3
Both types of life orientation are predicted to moderate the relationship between the components of ambiguity tolerance and courage. Specifically, transitive orientation is expected to enhance this relationship, while moratory orientation is anticipated to diminish it.