The effect of personality on academic performance: evidence from two university majors

CONTENTS An Empi ical S udy o Emo ional In elligence and S ess in College S uden s 1 Sco E. B yan & Timo hy I. Malone The E ec o Pe sonali y on Academic Pe o mance: E idence om Two Uni e si y Majo s 13 And ás Is án Kun, Ma ie a Kiss & Anna Kapi ány Associa ion o Ad ance Collegia e Schools o Business Acc edi a ion: A Long-Te m Pe spec i e 25 Yu Peng Lin The Impo ance o an Ad anced Deg ee o Nu ses in Heal h Ca e 33 Susan J. Kowalewski & Ca oline J. Michalik Success ul Implemen a ion o W i en Communica ion ac oss an Accoun ing Deg ee P og am 43 Mohammed Hossain, Tyge Kumme & Cono O’Lea y The Impac o E hical Wo k Clima es and Na ional Cul u e on Academic Eli es: A C oss- Cul u al Compa ison o Business School Facul y 57 Ge ald Venezia, Oheneba Ama N i-Osei & Chiulien C. Venezia The E ec i eness o Mobile Based Lea ning Technology e sus Face- o- ace Lea ning o Accoun ing In o ma ion Sys ems 67 Diah Ha i Su yaning um, Eni Wu yani & In an Yunia Pu basa i Compe ency Based Educa ion and Technology in Teaching S a is ics 77 Juan Rosi as-Ma ínez & Joel Mendoza-Gómez S a egic Ne wo ks o Highe Educa ion Ins i u ions: E idence om Eu ope 87 Juha Ke unen An Explo a i e S udy o Vi ual T ading Games: A Means-end Chain App oach 97 Yu-Ling Lin VOLUME 7 NUMBER 1 2015 Business Educa ion & Acc edi a ion B E A Business Educa ion & Acc edi a ion William Bealing Shippensbu g Uni e si y Pe e Geczy Na ional Ins i u e o Ad anced Indus ial Science and Technology (AIST) Ka he ine Kinkela Iona College And ás Kun Uni e si y o Deb ecen Vic o Lewis Na ional Uni e si y Deneb Elí Magaña Medina Uni e sidad Juá ez Au ónoma de Tabasco Manuel Medina Uni e sidad Au ónoma de Coahuila Linda Naimi Pu due Uni e si y Paul Pallab Uni e si y o Den e F ancis Pe i Fo dham Uni e si y Siu Kay Pun Nanyang Technological Uni e si y, Singapo e Juan Rosi as-Ma inez Uni e sidad Au ónoma de Nue o León A up Sen D’You ille College Edi o ial Boa d Edi o in Chie Te ance Jalbe Managing Edi o Me cedes Jalbe Business Educa ion & Acc edi a ion, ISSN: 1944-5903 (p in ) and ISSN: 2157-0809 (online) publishes high-quali y a icles in all a eas o business educa ion, acc edi a ion and ela ed ields. Theo e ical, empi ical and applied manusc ip s a e welcome o publica ion conside a ion. The Jou nal is published wice pe yea by he Ins i u e o Business and Finance Resea ch, LLC. All pape s submi ed o he Jou nal a e blind e iewed. The Jou nal is lis ed in Cabell’s di ec o y and Ul ich’s Pe iodicals Di ec o y. The Jou nal is dis ibu ed in p in and h ough EBSCOHos , P oQues ABI/In o m, SSRN and RePEc. The iews p esen ed in he Jou nal ep esen opinions o he espec i e au ho s. The iews p esen ed do no necessa ily elec he opinion o he edi o s, edi o ial boa d o s a o he Ins i u e o Business and Finance Resea ch, LLC. The Ins i u e ac i ely e iews a icles submi ed o possible publica ion. Howe e , he Ins i u e does no wa an he co ec ness o in o ma ion p o ided in he a icles o sui abili y o in o ma ion in he a icles o any pu pose. This Jou nal is he esul o he collec i e wo k o many indi iduals. The Edi o s hank he membe s o he Edi o ial Boa d, ad-hoc e iewe s and indi iduals ha ha e submi ed hei esea ch o he Jou nal o publica ion conside a ion. ISSN : 1944-5903 (p in ) and ISSN: 2157-0809 (online) All Righ s Rese ed . The Ins i u e o Business and Finance Resea ch, LLC Business Educa ion & Acc edi a ion Vol. 7, No. 1, 2015, pp. 13-24 ISSN: 1944-5903 (p in ) ISSN: 2157-0809 (online) www. heIBFR.com THE EFFECT OF PERSONALITY ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE: EVIDENCE FROM TWO UNIVERSITY MAJORS And ás Is án Kun, Uni e si y o Deb ecen Ma ie a Kiss, Uni e si y o Deb ecen Anna Kapi ány, Uni e si y o Deb ecen ABSTRACT Ou s udy ocuses on he e ec o pe sonali y ype and pe sonali y p e e ences measu ed by he Mye s– B iggs ypology, on highe educa ion s uden s’ choice o p o ession and on hei academic pe o mance. We s a is ically analyzed a sample om wo sligh ly simila bachelo majo s s udied a he Uni e si y o Deb ecen, Hunga y, o e eal bo h he gene al and majo -speci ic e ec s o pe sonali y. We ha e ound ha he mos equen ypes in bo h majo s we e ENFJ and ESFJ; howe e , di e ences we e e ealed in he ela i e equencies in he ESTJ, ISTJ and ENFJ ypes. We iden i ied signi ican di e ences be ween he majo s in he a e age p e e ences along he in o e sion-ex a e sion scale and in he sensing- in ui ion dicho omies ( he la e was signi ican only o emale s uden s). We also ound di e ences in he explana o y powe o pe sonali y o he wo majo s and also in he ypes and p e e ences which con ibu e posi i ely o nega i ely o academic success. JEL: A22, A23, I21 KEYWORDS: Business Educa ion, Highe Educa ion, Ca ee , Pe sonali y Type, MBTI INTRODUCTION he social sciences ha e long been in e es ed in he ela ionship be ween pe sonali y and ca ee . Howe e , we can examine he e ec o pe sonali y on he success o an indi idual in a leas 5 phases o his/he ca ee : (1) pe o mance in public educa ion, (2) choice o p o ession, (3) pe o mance in oca ional, p o essional o highe educa ion, (4) choice o job, and (5) success in he gi en job, e.g. wo k pe o mance, income, ad ancemen , and job sa is ac ion. The ea lie phases a e likely o ha e a signi ican e ec on he la e ones as hey g ound he la e phases. Empi ical s udies con i m ha pe sonali y con ibu es o pe sonal achie emen o a leas some deg ee in public educa ion (e.g. Neuenschwande e al., 2013, Laid a e al., 2007), o decisions abou he choice o academic majo and p o ession (e.g. Bo ges and Gibson, 2005, Cano and Ga on, 1994, Ha ung e al., 2005, Dunning, 2001, Hin on and S ockbu ge , 1991, Sea s e al., 1997, Di ibe io and Hamme , 1993, Bo ges and Sa ickas, 2002), o pe o mance in oca ional, p o essional and highe educa ion (e.g. Bo g and Shapi o, 1996, Bo g and S anahan, 2002a, Bo g and S anahan, 2002b, Ziege , 2000, Di ibe io and Hamme , 1993), o he choice o job (e.g. Law ence, 1986, Kei sey and Ba es, 1984, p. 155-166, Kennedy 2002), and o success in he labo ma ke , whe he his is in e ms o job pe o mance (e.g. Ba ick e al., 2001, Judge and Bono, 2001), wages and ad ancemen (e.g. And isani, 1977, 1981, Cobb-Cla k and Tan, 2009), o job sa is ac ion (e.g. Ayan and Kocacik, 2010, Judge e al., 2000, Judge and Bono, 2001, Judge e al., 2005). Ou s udy con ibu es o a be e unde s anding o he ela ionship be ween pe sonali y and ca ee by T 13 A. I. Kun e al | BEA Vol. 7 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2015 answe ing h ee esea ch ques ions. Fi s , i compa es he wo academic majo s in ou sample (BA in ‘Business Adminis a ion and Managemen ’ (BAM) and BSc in ‘Business In o ma ics’ (BI)) by he pe sonali y ypes o hei s uden s, and examines whe he he e a e any signi ican di e ences be ween hem, i.e. i sea ches o esul s o he second phase. I builds he examina ion on he Mye s–B iggs pe sonali y ypology (B iggs-Mye s e al., 1998). The second esea ch ques ion explo es he e ec o pe sonali y ype as an independen a iable on academic success in he wo selec ed majo s. The hi d esea ch ques ion ocuses on he same ole o he ou pe sonali y p e e ences unde lying he Mye s– B iggs ypology. In he case o he i s esea ch ques ion we ha e he oppo uni y o compa e ou indings o p e ious esea ch esul s ound in he li e a u e. Howe e , we do no ha e any in o ma ion abou any examina ions simila o ou second and hi d analyses. The second sec ion o he s udy b ie ly in oduces he pe sonali y ypology used in he esea ch and he esul s o a ious s udies om he li e a u e dealing wi h simila esea ch ques ions. The da a collec ion me hod and he in oduc ion o he sample a e included in he hi d sec ion. The ou h demons a es he s a is ical analysis and he esul s. In he i h sec ion he conclusions d awn om he empi ical indings a e p esen ed. LITERATURE REVIEW He e we will in oduce he Mye s–B iggs pe sonali y ypology used in he esea ch only o he ex en necessa y o an unde s anding o he esea ch esul s. De ailed desc ip ions a e a ailable in se e al ex books and s udies (e.g. Quenk, 2009, B iggs-Mye s e al., 1998, Kei sey and Ba es, 1984, Bayne, 1997). The ypology o he 16 pe sonali y ypes used in ou examina ion was c ea ed by K. C. B iggs and I. B iggs-Mye s based on, and complemen ing, he pe sonali y heo y o C. G. Jung (Quenk, 2009, p. 1- 3). The 16 pe sonali y ypes a e de ined along 4 p e e ence pai s (called dicho omies): (E) ex a e sion and (I) in o e sion, (S) sensing and (N) in ui ion, (T) hinking and (F) eeling, (J) judging and (P) pe cei ing. The names o he pe sonali y ypes a e adi ionally o med by he le e combina ions o he p e e ed ‘poles’ o each pai s, in he abo e o de (i.e. ESTJ, ISTJ e c.). The concep o pe sonali y p e e ence has no o mal de ini ion bu can be desc ibed as ‘ eeling mos na u al and com o able wi h’ (Bayne, 1997, p. 4). Acco ding o Bayne, p e e ences ha e a s ong in luence on, bu a e no iden ical o, beha io , because beha io is usually a ec ed by many o he ac o s simul aneously. All he eigh p e e ence-poles a e used a leas some o he ime by all indi iduals, al hough he p e e ed ones end o be used mo e equen ly. The o icial ins umen used o measu e he p e e ences – and hence ypes – was also de eloped; his is he Mye s–B iggs Type Indica o ® (MBTI®) (Quenk, 2009, p. 1-3). Howe e , many o he assessmen ins umen s exis ha a e capable o ca ego izing people in o he 16 Mye s–B iggs pe sonali y ypes (e.g. Hogan and Champagne, 1980, Kei sey, 1998); some imes no only he ins umen bu also he unde lying heo y is misleadingly e e ed o as MBTI. The i s dicho omy, e med ‘ he opposi e a i udes o ene gy’ (Quenk, 2009, p. 8), is ex a e sion e sus in o e sion. In Jungian e minology ex a e sion means ou wa d- u ning, while in o e sion means inwa d- u ning. The ex a e ed a i ude di ec s psychic ene gy o, and ecei es ene gy om, he ou e wo ld o people, hings, and ac ion. People wi h an ex a e ed p e e ence like ac i ely engaging o he s, acqui ing expe iences h ough a ial-and-e o app oach and hey hink mo e e ec i ely when in e ac ing wi h o he s. The in o e sion a i ude is he opposi e. I di ec s psychic ene gy o he inne wo ld o ideas and e lec ion, and i acqui es ene gy om ope a ing he e. In o e ed people end o hink in e nally and hey can wo k alone e ec i ely. The second dicho omy is ‘ he opposi e unc ions o pe cep ion’: sensing and in ui ion (Quenk, 2009, p. 6). A pe son who p e e s ‘sensing pe cep ion’ ocuses on conc e e eali y, ga he ing ac s and de ails o he p esen by using he i e senses. A sensing pe son ends o be less in e es ed in hypo heses and u u e 14 BUSINESS EDUCATION & ACCREDITATION ♦ Volume 7 ♦ Numbe 1 ♦ 2015 possibili ies. In ui ion deals wi h he pa e ns, concep s, ideas, heo ies, and connec ions among di e se pieces o in o ma ion. I is ha de o an in ui i e pe son o emembe and use ac s and da a wi hou a meaning ul con ex . The hi d pai o opposi e ca ego ies is ‘ he opposi e unc ions o judgmen ’: hinking and eeling (Quenk, 2009, p. 6-7). ‘Thinke s’ apply speci ic c i e ia and p inciples in a linea , logical and impe sonal analysis o in o ma ion o ge as close o he objec i e u h as i is possible. Feeling-based judgmen ends o apply pe sonally held alues o assess he ela i e impo ance o he in o ma ion a hand. When a pe son who p e e s eeling makes a decision, his o he p ima y conce n is he consequences o he decision as hey a ec indi iduals o g oups. The las dicho omy is ‘ he opposi e a i udes owa d he ou side wo ld’: judging and pe cei ing (Quenk, 2009, p. 8-9). Those who p e e a judging a i ude a e o ganized, s uc u ed, wo k e ec i ely wi hin schedules, and wish o each a conclusion o make a decision quickly. ‘Pe cei ing’ decision make s like o collec as much in o ma ion as possible be o e coming o a conclusion. They a e lexible, adap able, and spon aneous when wo king in he ou side wo ld. I is possible o d aw conclusions ega ding someone’s pe sonali y di ec ly om hei p e e ences (e.g. Hogan and Champagne, 1980), oo, and no only om he ypes. Ou s udy will do he same in he Resul s and Discussion chap e . Mo eo e , some au ho s ha e in oduced al e na i e combina ions o p e e ences a a iance wi h he o iginal six een ypes sys em, such as he ou empe amen s o Kei sey and Ba es (1984). Many p e ious s udies ha e examined he ela ionship be ween highe educa ion s uden s’ Mye s–B iggs pe sonali y ypes and hei pe o mance in a ious ields o college o uni e si y s udies. We will b ie ly summa ize he indings o hose closes o ou esea ch ques ions. Bo g and Shapi o (1996) ound ha o s uden s on P inciples o Mac oeconomics cou ses pe sonali y p e e ences measu ed by MBTI had a signi ican in luence on academic success. Bo g and Shapi o (1996) es ed h ee models on 119 s uden s who comple ed he abo e named cou se in 1990 a he Uni e si y o No h Flo ida (UNF). Fi s , hey measu ed he e ec o he ype, and ound ha ENTP, ESTP and ENFP s uden s did signi ican ly wo se han he ISTJs (which was he mos equen ly occu ing pe sonali y among he s uden s). The independen e ec o he ou MBTI p e e ences on g ades was also examined, demons a ing ha being an in o e had a signi ican posi i e e ec on he chance o ge ing a good g ade. On he same sample Bo g and S anahan (2002a) la e p o ided suppo o he hypo hesis ha ace and gende combined wi h pe sonali y empe amen o m mo e sub le, in e ac i e e ec s on a s uden ’s pe o mance in P inciples o Mac oeconomics. Ziege (2000) eplica ed Bo g and Saphi o’s wo k ci ed abo e wi h a la ge sample (617 s uden s) om Miami Uni e si y. The cou se examined was Mic oeconomics P inciples. She also ex ended he examina ion, in oducing he p e-cou se and pos -cou se TUCE (Tes o Unde s anding College Economics) sco es as an al e na i e p oxy o lea ning pe o mance, wi h 400 and 300 s uden s. The TUCE is conside ed o be a mo e p ecise and consis en measu e o s uden pe o mance han cou se g ades, because i a oids ins uc o -speci ic e alua ion di e ences. The au ho inds ha he ENTP, ESFJ, INFP and ENTJ pe sonali y ypes pe o m signi ican ly wo se in e ms o g ades han he ISTJ ype. Wi h he pos -TUCE sco e as a dependen a iable, he analysis showed he ISTJ ype s uden s achie ed signi ican ly highe pe o mances han ESFP, ENFP, INFJ, ENFJ, ESFJ, INFP, ISFJ and ESTJ s uden s, while INTJ s uden s signi ican ly ou pe o med hem. Ziege also calcula ed he pos -TUCE minus p e- TUCE sco es, o measu e he knowledge inc ease du ing he cou se. Wi h he la e as a dependen a iable, ESFP, ENFP, ENFJ, INTJ, ESFJ, INFP, ISFJ and ESTJ s uden s di e ed signi ican ly om he ISTJ s uden s. INTJs pe o med be e han hem, he o he s we e wo se. Ziege also examined he e ec o he ou pe sonali y p e e ence scales and ound ha he sensing and he hinking p e e ences 15 A. I. Kun e al | BEA Vol. 7 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2015 con ibu ed posi i ely o g ades, while o he pos -TUCE sco e only he judging p e e ence was insigni ican , and while he sensing p e e ence modi ied he pos -TUCE pe o mance nega i ely. Only he hinking dimension had signi ican , posi i e e ec s on he knowledge inc ease du ing he semes e (pos - TUCE minus p e-TUCE). Bo g and S anahan (2002b) con inued Bo g, Shapi o and Ziege ’s line o esea ch and in es iga ed he pe sonali y e ec s on a sample o 166 UNF s uden s om h ee ad anced-le el economics cou ses. They ound only he e ec o he in o e sion ype signi ican (in hei model he ou dicho omies we e ep esen ed by dummy a iables); his had a posi i e e ec . They did no measu e he e ec o he 16 ypes. The abo e ci ed s udies ocused on he connec ion be ween pe sonali y and academic success in one cou se (Bo g and Shapi o, 1996, Ziege , 2000), o in only a small numbe o simila cou ses (Bo g and S anahan, 2002b). Howe e , he s uden s’ mos impo an decisions a e made when hey choose a p o ession, a majo , a specializa ion o an educa ional ins i u ion, and in doing his, a gi en combina ion o he e ogeneous cou ses, and no when hey choose an indi idual cou se. Fo his eason he au ho s o he cu en s udy aimed o use a modi ied e sion o he abo e ci ed esea ch on wo majo s which a e di e en bu o e lap o some ex en , he eby emphasizing he ole o measu able pe sonali y elemen s in making a be e ca ee choice a he highe educa ion le el. DATA AND METHODOLOGY Ou da a on pe sonali y and academic achie emen was based on ou p ima y ques ionnai e su ey a he Facul y o Economics and Business Adminis a ion a he Uni e si y o Deb ecen, Hunga y. The su ey was implemen ed in Oc obe and No embe 2011, in classes whe e a endance was obliga o y. BA in Business Adminis a ion and Managemen (BAM) and BSc in Business In o ma ics (BI) s uden s in hei second and hi d yea made up ou sample. The o al numbe o he sample was 354, wi h 102 second and 122 hi d yea BAM s uden s (224 in o al) and 79 second and 51 hi d yea BI s uden s (130 in o al). The Business Adminis a ion and Managemen majo is un by he Facul y o Economics and Business Adminis a ion (FEBA) and ocuses mos ly on managemen , and pa ly on economics s udies, whils he o he majo combines in o ma ics wi h managemen cou ses, and is pa o he Facul y o In o ma ics (FI), and he FEBA only eaches hese s uden s managemen s udies. Thus, accep ing ha di e en pe sonali ies i di e en p o essions, i seems easonable o expec di e ences in pe sonali y ypes and p e e ence dis ibu ions be ween s uden s on he wo majo s; mo eo e we can expec o ind ha ypes and p e e ences a e connec ed in di e en ways o hei academic success. To measu e he pe sonali y p e e ences we used a ques ionnai e con aining 72 o ced choice ques ions. We also asked he esponden s o gi e hei sex and yea o bi h, whe he hey had wo ked be o e, whe he hey a e s udying on mo e han one majo simul aneously, whe he hei pe manen abode was in he same ci y as he uni e si y, and i no , how much ime hey spen a elling be ween hei home and he uni e si y (in minu es). Table 1 includes he explana ion o he independen and dependen a iables we used in he s udy, while Table 2 summa izes he equency, mean and s anda d de ia ion da a o he independen and dependen a iables g ouped by majo s and uni e si y yea s. 16 BUSINESS EDUCATION & ACCREDITATION ♦ Volume 7 ♦ Numbe 1 ♦ 2015 Table 1: Explana ion o Va iables Va iable Name Explana ion SEX 1 i he s uden is emale, 0 i male. AGE Age o he s uden in yea s. This was calcula ed as he di e ence be ween he da e he ques ionnai e was illed in and he yea o bi h ( he assumed bi hday was 1s July). LOCAL 1 i he s uden is a local esiden , 0 o he wise. DISTANCE T a eling ime be ween he s uden ’s home and he uni e si y in minu es. PLUSMAJOR 1 i he s uden has mo e han one majo , 0 i no . WORK 1 i he s uden has any wo k expe ience (pas o p esen ), 0 i no . MBTI TYPE Dummy a iables indica ing he 16 Mye s–B iggs pe sonali y ypes. 1 i he s uden belongs o he gi en ype, 0 o he wise. MBTI PREFERENCE S eng h o a s uden ’s p e e ence in each o he 4 Mye s–B iggs dicho omies, measu ed in pe cen ages. I a p e e ence is p, he opposi e p e e ence o he dicho omy is (100 – p). INDEX A e age o a special o m o g ade index o icially e med ‘s ipend index’ o he p e ious wo academic semes e s (1.00 is he minimum, 5.00 is he maximum). The s ipend index is calcula ed as he p oduc o he c edi alues o subjec s g aded as ‘pass’ o highe mul iplied by hei g ades di ided by he o al numbe o c edi s unde aken. STDINDEX INDEX s anda dized by majo s and uni e si y yea s. This able includes he explana ion o he independen and dependen a iables we used in he s udy. Table 2: F equencies, Means and S anda d De ia ions o Va iables by Majo s and Uni e si y Yea s Va iables Business Adminis a ion and Managemen Business In o ma ics To al 2nd Yea 3 d Yea 2nd Yea 3 d Yea N Mean S d. De . N Mean S d. De . N Mean S d. De . N Mean S d. De . N Mean S d. De . SEX 102 0.6765 0.4701 122 0.5574 0.4987 79 0.2025 0.4045 51 0.2549 0.4401 358 0.4689 0.4997 YEAR OF BIRTH 101 1,990.8 0.7755 119 1,989.7 0.8473 79 1,990.4 1.278 51 1,989.0 1.076 354 1,990.1 1.159 AGE 101 20.417 2.183 119 21.212 3.484 79 21.053 1.372 51 22.407 1.076 350 21.123 2.593 LOCAL 99 0.2828 0.4527 120 0.3750 0.4862 78 0.2436 0.4320 48 0.2917 0.4593 348 0.3072 0.4620 DISTANCE 98 69.327 83.939 120 54.517 68.160 77 67.883 73.200 48 59.854 66.464 346 62.496 73.864 PLUSMAJOR 102 0.0392 0.1951 122 0.0410 0.1991 79 0.0000 0.0000 51 0.0196 0.1400 358 0.0282 0.1659 WORK 96 0.4583 0.5009 122 0.6066 0.4905 77 0.6753 0.4713 51 0.5294 0.5041 358 0.5694 0.4959 INDEX 102 3.137 0.5953 122 3.124 0.6521 79 2.722 0.7269 51 2.860 0.6976 358 3.000 0.6810 This able summa izes he equency, mean and s anda d de ia ion (S d. De .) da a o he independen and dependen a iables g ouped by majo s and uni e si y yea s. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION To examine he pe sonali y ype di e ences by majo s, we analyzed he dis ibu ion o he 16 pe sonali y ypes on he wo selec ed majo s, i s independen ly and hen on he combined sample. The uni e si y yea o s uden s was no aken in o conside a ion a his s age, because he dis ibu ion o pe sonali y ypes did no depend on he cou ses s udied in a gi en yea bu on he selec ion o p o ession s uden s had made by choosing a pa icula majo . We p esen ed he indings in Table 3. Types appea in he able in he descending o de o hei equency in he combined sample. Ranks we e also calcula ed om he ela i e equency ( a io) o he ype wi hin he di e en samples. We used ank means, i his a io was he same o mo e han one ype. One can obse e a ious di e ences be ween he majo s. Many pe sonali y ypes a e anked di e en ly on he wo majo s. The g ea es di e ences can be ound in he ollowing cases ( he absolu e alue o he di e ence be ween anks on he wo majo s a e in pa en heses): he Business Adminis a ion and Managemen (BAM) majo has highe anks o ypes INTJ (2.5), ESTJ (2), ENTP (2), and lowe o ISTJ (4) and INFJ (3) han he Business In o ma ics (BI) majo . The ela i e equencies o ISTJ (0.0800), ISFJ (0.0400), INFJ (0.0300), ENFP (0.0200) and ISTP (0.0100) ypes we e g ea e in he BAM majo , and he ESTJ (0.1000), ENFJ (0.0600), ESFJ (0.0100) and ENTP (0.0100) ypes in he BI majo ( he absolu e alues o he di e ence be ween ela i e equencies a e in pa en heses). In Table 3 i alic 17 A. I. Kun e al | BEA Vol. 7 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2015 on s show hose ypes ha ha e a equency g ea enough o use s a is ical measu es on hem o compa e he wo majo s by he dis ibu ion o pe sonali y ypes. Tables 4, 5 and 6 p esen he measu es compu ed. Table 3: Dis ibu ion o Pe sonali y Types in Majo s (F equencies, Ra ios, Ranking O de s) Type Business Adminis a ion and Managemen Business In o ma ics To al F equency Ra io Rank F equency Ra io Rank F equency Ra io Rank ESFJ 46 0.2100 1 30 0.2200 1 76 0.2100 1 ENFJ 32 0.1400 2 27 0.2000 2 59 0.1600 2 ESTJ 21 0.0900 5 26 0.1900 3 47 0.1300 3 ENTJ 22 0.1000 4 13 0.1000 4 35 0.1000 4 ISTJ 27 0.1200 3 6 0.0400 7 33 0.0900 5 ISFJ 20 0.0900 6 7 0.0500 5.5 27 0.0800 6 INTJ 12 0.0500 8 7 0.0500 5.5 19 0.0500 7 ENFP 12 0.0500 8 4 0.0300 9 16 0.0400 8 INFJ 12 0.0500 8 3 0.0200 11 15 0.0400 9 ESFP 7 0.0300 10 4 0.0300 9 11 0.0300 10 ENTP 5 0.0200 11 4 0.0300 9 9 0.0300 11 ESTP 3 0.0100 12 2 0.0100 12 5 0.0100 12 INTP 2 0.0100 13.5 1 0.0100 13 3 0.0100 13 ISTP 2 0.0100 13.5 0 0.0000 15 2 0.0100 14 INFP 1 0.0000 15 0 0.0000 15 1 0.0000 15 ISFP 0 0.0000 16 0 0.0000 15 0 0.0000 16 To al 224 1.000 134 1.000 358 1.000 This able p esen s he equencies, ela i e equencies (named Ra io) and anking o pe sonali y ypes in he wo majo s and in he combined sample (To al). I alic on s show hose ypes ha ha e a equency g ea enough o use s a is ical measu es on hem o compa e he wo majo s by he dis ibu ion o pe sonali y ypes. The measu es in Tables 4, 5 and 6 calcula ed o he g oup o ESFJ, ENFJ, ESTJ, ENTJ, ISTJ, ISFJ, INTJ, ENFP and INFJ ype s uden s in BAM and BI majo s suppo he idea ha s uden s on he 2nd and 3 d yea o BAM end o be di e en in hei pe sonali y ypes om hei BI coun e pa s. This di e ence is signi ican by mos measu es ( he only excep ion was he lambda) a he 0.05 le el. Howe e , he associa ion is weak ( he alue o symme ic measu es a e be ween 0.23 and 0.24). Table 4: Chi Squa e Tes s Measu e Value DF Asym. Sig. (2-Sided) Pea son Chi-Squa e 18.018 8 0.0211 Likelihood Ra io 18.698 8 0.0166 N o Valid Cases 327 This able p esen s he alues, deg ees o eedom, and asymp o ic signi icance le els o he Pe son Chi squa e es and he Likelihood a io. 0 cells ha e expec ed coun less han 5. The minimum expec ed coun is 5.642. Table 5: Symme ic Measu es Measu e Value App ox. Sig. Phi 0.2347 0.0211 C ame ’s V 0.2347 0.0211 Con ingency Coe icien 0.2285 0.0211 N o Valid Cases 327 This able p esen s he alues and app oxima e signi icance le els o he Phi, C ame ’s V and Con ingency coe icien measu es. We also es ed whe he he a e age p e e ences di e signi ican ly o he wo majo s. Table 7 includes he p e e ence means and s anda d de ia ions by majo and sex. Wi h an independen samples - es we analyzed he exis ence o signi ican di e ences be ween emales and males on he wo majo s by he 4 dicho omies. BAM male s uden s we e signi ican ly mo e in o e ed ( = 2.599, d = 162.06) han hei 18 BUSINESS EDUCATION & ACCREDITATION ♦ Volume 7 ♦ Numbe 1 ♦ 2015 BI coun e pa s a he 0.05 le el, and hey we e also mo e in ui i e on a e age ( = 1.709, d = 186.00), a a 0.10 le el o signi icance. Female s uden s we e mo e in ui i e on a e age i hey we e s udying on he BI majo ( = -1.693, d = 164.00). On he combined sample by sex, an a e age BAM s uden was signi ican ly mo e in o e ed a he 0.05 le el ( = 2.532, d = 306.47). Table 6: Di ec ional Measu es Measu e Value Asymp. S d. E o a App ox. Tb App ox. Sig. Lambda (symme ic) 0.0134 0.0182 0.7299 0.4654 Lambda (majo is dependen ) 0.0407 0.0546 0.7299 0.4654 Goodman and K uskal au (majo is dependen ) 0.0551 0.0238 – 0.0215d Unce ain y Coe icien (symme ic) 0.0210 0.0094 2.238 0.0166e Unce ain y Coe icien (majo is dependen ) 0.0432 0.0193 2.238 0.0166e N o Valid Cases 327 This able con ains he alues, asymp o ic s anda d e o s, app oxima e s a is ics, and app oxima e signi icance le els o h ee di ec ional measu es. a. No assuming he null hypo hesis; b. Using he asymp o ic s anda d e o assuming he null hypo hesis; c. Canno be compu ed because he asymp o ic s anda d e o equals ze o; d. Based on chi-squa e app oxima ion; e. Likelihood a io chi-squa e p obabili y. Table 7: A e age Pe sonali y P e e ences by Majo and Sex (Means and S anda d De ia ions) P e e ence Business Adminis a ion and Managemen Business In o ma ics Males N = 87 Females N = 137 Males N = 101 Females N = 29 Mean S d. De . Mean S d. De . Mean S d. De . Mean S d. De . In o e sion 41.897 26.225 38.518 24.370 32.861 20.553 35.655 23.725 In ui ion 53.230 14.759 47.168 16.860 49.703 13.531 52.931 15.588 Thinking 53.333 17.110 41.248 16.110 49.317 16.435 37.931 15.358 Pe cei ing 46.667 17.110 58.752 16.110 50.683 16.435 62.069 15.358 This able p esen s he means and s anda d de ia ions o ou p e e ence-poles, di ided by majo and sex. Beside he examina ion o he pe sonali y ype di e ences by majo s, his pa o he s udy also examines he con ibu ion o he Mye s–B iggs pe sonali y ypes o he s uden s’ academic achie emen in bo h majo s indi idually, and hen compa es he esul s. Ou models ook in o conside a ion he e ec o ce ain demog aphic and backg ound ac o s, hus he ‘s a ing’ equa ion used in he linea eg ession analysis was he ollowing: STDINDEX =�(SEX, AGE, LOCAL, WORK, PLUSMAJOR, MBTI TYPE) (1) The DISTANCE a iable was le ou om he independen a iables in all models, because i had simila con en o he LOCAL a iable, and LOCAL i ed he models be e . The dependen a iable was STDINDEX a he han INDEX, o ocus on he academic success o a s uden compa ed o he a e age o his/he own yea and majo ; his also enabled compa ison be ween he majo s examined. We ha e also used ‘ educed’ models, whe e only hose independen a iables we e in oduced ha we e signi ican a leas a he 0.10 le el. Table 8 epo s he esul s o he linea eg ession analysis o he wo s a ing, and he wo educed, models. The ESFJ dummy a iable was omi ed om he models, because his was he mos equen o all he 16 pe sonali y ypes. In he s a ing model o he BAM majo h ee pe sonali y ypes con ibu ed signi ican ly o he dependen a iable a he 0.10 le el. INFP, ENFJ and ISFJ ype s uden s end o ha e lowe s ipend indices han hose wi h he ESFJ ype. Besides pe sonali y ypes, being emale, being a local esiden and ha ing some wo k expe ience had a signi ican e ec on he dependen a iable a he 0.1 le el: emale s uden s and locals ou pe o med he males and hose li ing in ano he se lemen , bu hose who we e, o had been, employed we e unde pe o me s. 19