Future temporal focus (Shipp et al., 2009) refers to an individual’s preference for future time orientation in their thinking and behavior. Numerous studies have found support for its positive guiding role in the psychology and behavior of individuals (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Barber et al., 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010). For instance, researchers have found that individuals with a future temporal focus tend to have a healthy lifestyle (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010), including less smoking behavior and a lower body mass index (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010). In addition, future temporal focus has been found to be negatively related to substance abuse (Wills et al., 2001), and positively related to student academic performance (Barber et al., 2009). However, the influence of future temporal focus on individuals’ career development has not yet been researched. Career development is a vital part of individuals’ life-long development (Jiang et al., 2019). In addition, career exploration lays the foundation for an individual’s career development (Jiang et al., 2019). Therefore, we investigated the influence of individual future temporal focus on career exploration.

 

Individuals with a future temporal focus tend to think about and plan for the future, and are more likely to set goals and act proactively to pursue them (Shipp et al., 2009). As for career development, individuals with a future temporal focus hold more positive expectations regarding their career exploration (Betz & Voyten, 1997; Pena et al., 2022), and thus engage in more explorative behavior (Jiang et al., 2019). Thus, we proposed that future temporal focus would promote more career exploration via career outcome expectations. We combined trait activation theory and the concept of future temporal focus to test if relevant situations could activate an individual’s internal future temporal focus traits (Tett & Burnett, 2003; Tett et al., 2021). Career guidance, which refers to the process of providing individuals with information, advice, and support to assist them in making informed decisions about their education, training, and career paths, plays a vital role in individuals’ career development (Dietrich & Kracke, 2009; Guan et al., 2015). Thus, we proposed that career guidance would strengthen the relationship between future temporal focus and career exploration behavior, developing the moderated mediation model shown in Figure 1.

Trait activation theory (Tett & Burnett, 2003) describes how relevant situations activate individuals’ internal traits, and how the activation process triggers the expression of implicit traits as explicit behaviors. When an individual is in an environment that is congruent with their personality traits, those traits will be activated and influence their behavior. For example, an individual who scores high on the trait of extraversion will likely behave more sociably and assertively in a social setting than in a solitary setting.

Future temporal focus has been linked to a number of positive outcomes (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Barber et al., 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010), such as increased well-being and better performance (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Barber et al., 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010). Additionally, research has shown that individuals with a future temporal focus tend to be more proactive in their behavior, set more goals, and engage in more goal-directed behaviors (Shipp et al., 2009). Further, they tend to have greater self-regulatory abilities, which allow them to set and pursue long-term goals (Adams & Nettle, 2009); this, in turn, is associated with more positive career outcome expectations (Lent et al., 2017). Individuals with a future temporal focus tend to believe that their efforts will lead to desired career outcomes (Shipp et al., 2009).

 

Career outcome expectations refer to an individual’s beliefs and perceptions about the outcomes of their career efforts (Pena et al., 2022). Career outcome expectations include beliefs about one’s ability to achieve career goals, the value and importance of one’s career, and the potential outcomes of career-related actions (Betz & Voyten, 1997). Individuals with higher career outcome expectations tend to engage in more career exploration, as they believe that their efforts will lead to desired career outcomes (Pena et al., 2022). Career outcome expectations can play a significant role in shaping an individual’s career development, as well as their engagement and persistence in pursuing career goals (Pena et al., 2022).

 

Career exploration refers to actively seeking out and gathering information about different career options (Jiang et al., 2019; Stumpf et al., 1983). The goal of career exploration is to gain a better sense of one’s interests, skills, and values, and how they align with different career paths (Stumpf et al., 1983). It is an essential step in the career development process, as it allows individuals to gain a deeper understanding of the different career options available to them, and make more informed decisions about their future careers (Jiang et al., 2019).

 

In summary, we expected future temporal focus to promote career outcome expectations, which, in turn, would promote career exploration. Individuals with a strong future temporal focus may believe that their efforts will lead to desired career outcomes, making them more likely to engage in career exploration. Thus, we proposed the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Career outcome expectations will mediate the positive relationship between future temporal focus and career exploration.

Trait activation theory (Tett & Burnett, 2003) suggests that the activation of traits is a dynamic process that is influenced by the situational context, and the behavior that results is a function of the interaction between the individual’s traits and the situation. Thus, we anticipated that the relationship between future temporal focus and career exploration behavior via career outcome expectations would be contingent on the external environment.

 

Career guidance refers to the information, support, and assistance individuals receive in making informed decisions about their educational and career goals (Guan et al., 2015). This includes assessing an individual’s interests, abilities, values, and skills, as well as providing information about different career options, the job market, and the skills and qualifications required for different careers (Guan et al., 2015). Career guidance also involves helping individuals to develop a plan for achieving their career goals and providing support and resources for career development and transition (Dietrich & Kracke, 2009). In sum, career guidance creates favorable external conditions for individual career development.

 

By combining trait activation theory (Tett et al., 2021) with future temporal focus (Shipp et al., 2009), we proposed that received career guidance would activate the influencing process of future temporal focus. Specifically, when empowered by career guidance, individuals with a future temporal focus will hold more favorable expectations toward their career outcomes, which, in turn, will promote more career exploration behavior (Dietrich & Kracke, 2009). Thus, we proposed the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 2: Career guidance will moderate the positive relationship between future temporal focus and career outcome expectations, such that this relationship will be stronger when career guidance is high (vs. low).

Hypothesis 3: Career guidance will moderate the indirect positive relationship between future temporal focus and career exploration via career outcome expectations, such that this relationship will be stronger when career guidance is high (vs. low).

We collected data from medical student interns working in Chinese public hospitals, issuing 800 surveys and obtaining 643 (80.4%) valid responses through www.wjx.com. Among our final valid sample, 340 (52.90%) respondents were men and 303 (47.10%) were women, with a mean age of 20.33 years (SD = 1.91). Regarding location, 517 (80.40%) respondents lived in urban areas and 126 (19.60%) lived in rural areas.

To reduce common method bias, we collected data at three time points, with a 2-week interval between Times 1 and 2 and another 2-week interval between Times 2 and 3. At Time 1 the respondents reported their basic demographic information (i.e., age, gender, and location of residence) and evaluated their future temporal focus and received career guidance. At Time 2 they reported their career exploration expectations. Last, at Time 3 they reported their career exploration behavior.

All items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (completely). We followed Brislin’s (1980) back-translation procedure to convert the English scales into Chinese versions.

 

We measured future temporal focus with four items from Shipp et al. (2009). A sample item is “I focus on my future.” Cronbach’s alpha was .91, indicating the scale is reliable.

 

We measured career guidance with five items developed by Dietrich and Kracke (2009). A sample item is “My parents talk to me about my vocational interests and abilities.” Cronbach’s alpha was .94, indicating the scale is reliable.

 

We measured career outcome expectations with four items developed by Betz and Voyten (1997). A sample item is “If I spend enough time gathering information about careers, I can learn what I need to know to make a good decision.” Cronbach’s alpha was .95, indicating the scale is reliable.

 

We measured career exploration with five items developed by Stumpf et al. (1983). A sample item is “I try to understand a new relevance of past behavior for my future career.” Cronbach’s alpha was .94, indicating the scale is reliable.

The hypothesized four-factor model fitted the data well and was significantly better than alternative models (see Table 1), showing good discriminant validity.

Table 2 presents the descriptive analysis results of all variables. The positive relationships among the key variables provided support for Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3.

We analyzed the data with Mplus 7.4 to obtain the 95% confidence intervals of the estimates. Mediation testing indicated that career outcome expectations mediated the relationship between future temporal focus and career exploration, estimate = 0.23, SE = 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.19, 0.28], thus supporting Hypothesis 1.

 

As shown in Table 3, career guidance significantly moderated the relationship between future temporal focus and career outcome expectations, thus supporting Hypothesis 2.

As shown in Figure 2, the relationship between future temporal focus and career outcome expectations was stronger when career guidance was high (M + 1 SD), b = 0.39, t = 6.67, p < .001, than when it was low (M − 1 SD), b = 0.18, t = 2.96, p = .003.

Further, the overall moderated mediation test indicated that career guidance significantly moderated the indirect influence of future temporal focus on career exploration via career outcome expectations, thus supporting Hypothesis 3. Specifically, the indirect positive influence was stronger when career guidance was high (M + 1 SD), effect = 0.48, SE = 0.11, 95% CI [0.27, 0.69], than when it was low (M − 1 SD), effect = 0.37, SE = 0.08, 95% CI [0.22, 0.52]; estimated difference = 0.11, SE = 0.03, 95% CI [0.04, 0.17].

The study findings have several theoretical implications. First, we have extended understanding of the outcomes of future temporal focus (Shipp et al., 2009). Previous studies on future temporal focus mainly focused on its influence on individuals’ healthy behaviors and academic performance (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Barber et al., 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010). Our study enriches knowledge of the influence of future temporal focus on individuals’ career development. Specifically, we found that future temporal focus played a role in facilitating career exploration behavior via career outcome expectations. Second, we have provided evidence for future temporal focus as an antecedent of career exploration behavior; thus, our results supported those of Jiang et al. (2019). Career exploration behavior is essential (Guan et al., 2015) and revealing its antecedents can help deepen understanding of this concept. Third, we revealed the underlying mechanism of future temporal focus, thus supporting the findings of Shipp et al. (2009). Specifically, future temporal focus promoted career exploration behavior via enhancing career outcome expectations. Fourth, we revealed the boundary condition of future temporal focus. Specifically, career guidance can help strengthen the positive effects of future temporal focus; thus, our findings supported those of Guan et al. (2015). Finally, we have contributed to the application of trait activation theory in management research, and our findings are consistent with those of Tett et al. (2021). The study results extend trait activation theory in elaborating on how the environment and individual personality jointly shape individual career behaviors. This supported the personality–situation interaction model in relation to individuals’ attitudes and behaviors.

This research has several practical implications. Our findings highlight the guiding effects of future temporal focus (Adams & Nettle, 2009; Barber et al., 2009; Daugherty & Brase, 2010) in helping individuals to plan and set goals for the future (Shipp et al., 2009). This supports the findings of Jiang et al. (2019) and highlights how to promote individual career exploration behavior. Career exploration behavior lays the foundation for individuals’ long-term career development, and efforts should be made to stimulate individuals’ career exploration behavior (Jiang et al., 2019). Career exploration can be enhanced by focusing on the future and shaping individuals’ positive career outcome expectations (Betz & Voyten, 1997). Individuals should maintain positive expectations and strive to move toward their career goals. In addition, our study may inspire in parents greater understanding of the importance of career guidance, in line with Guan et al. (2015). Parents should create good conditions for their children and provide support and help to promote individual career exploration behavior. Trait activation theory (Tett et al., 2021) reveals that both internal qualities and the external environment influence individuals’ behavior, which is consistent with our findings. Therefore, both internal and external factors relating to the individual’s development should be considered.

This research has several limitations. First, we used only single-source data from medical student interns. Future studies could use a multisource design to reduce common method bias. Second, future research could combine more research designs to enhance internal and external validity, such as longitudinal studies. There are also several research directions worthy of further investigation. For instance, researchers could incorporate more forms of temporal focus (Shipp et al., 2009), including present and past foci. Different temporal focus types can lead individuals to adopt different behavior orientations (Shipp et al., 2009), which may exert a great impact on their career development.

Applying trait activation theory, we examined how and when future temporal focus facilitates individual career exploration behavior. Through a multiwave survey study with Chinese medical student interns, we found that future temporal focus promoted career outcome expectations, which, in turn, promoted individual career exploration behavior. In addition, this process was strengthened by external career guidance.

Adams, J., & Nettle, D. (2009). Time perspective, personality and smoking, body mass, and physical activity: An empirical study. British Journal of Health Psychology, 14(1), 83–105. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910708X299664

 

Barber, L. K., Munz, D. C., Bagsby, P. G., & Grawitch, M. J. (2009). When does time perspective matter? Self-control as a moderator between time perspective and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(2), 250–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.007

 

Betz, N. E., & Voyten, K. K. (1997). Efficacy and outcome expectations influence career exploration and decidedness. The Career Development Quarterly, 46(2), 179–189. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.1997.tb01004.x

 

Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 389–444). Allyn & Bacon.

 

Daugherty, J. R., & Brase, G. L. (2010). Taking time to be healthy: Predicting health behaviors with delay discounting and time perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(2), 202–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.10.007

 

Dietrich, J., & Kracke, B. (2009). Career-specific parental behaviors in adolescents’ development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.03.005

 

Guan, Y., Wang, F., Liu, H., Ji, Y., Jia, X., Fang, Z., Li, Y., Hua, H., & Li, C. (2015). Career-specific parental behaviors, career exploration and career adaptability: A three-wave investigation among Chinese undergraduates. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 86, 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.10.007

 

Jiang, Z., Newman, A., Le, H., Presbitero, A., & Zheng, C. (2019). Career exploration: A review and future research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110(Part B), 338–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.08.008

 

Lent, R. W., Ireland, G. W., Penn, L. T., Morris, T. R., & Sappington, R. (2017). Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations for career exploration and decision-making: A test of the social cognitive model of career self-management. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 99, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.01.002

 

Pena, L., Curado, C., & Oliveira, M. (2022). The contribution of LinkedIn use to career outcome expectations. Journal of Business Research, 144, 788–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.047

 

Shipp, A. J., Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.001

 

Stumpf, S. A., Colarelli, S. M., & Hartman, K. (1983). Development of the Career Exploration Survey (CES). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22(2), 191–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(83)90028-3

 

Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500

 

Tett, R. P., Toich, M. J., & Ozkum, S. B. (2021). Trait activation theory: A review of the literature and applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8(1), 199–233. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-062228

 

Wills, T. A., Sandy, J. M., & Yaeger, A. M. (2001). Time perspective and early-onset substance use: A model based on stress-coping theory. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15(2), 118–125. https://doi.org/10.1037//0893-164x.15.2.118