Rehab Measures Database
  1. Rehabilitation Measures Database
  2. Career Factors Inventory

Career Factors Inventory

Last Updated

Purpose

The Career Factors Inventory (CFI) is a 21-item scale designed to measure factors that contribute to career indecision.

Link to Instrument

Original development and validation study

Acronym CFI

Area of Assessment

Activities & Participation
Mental Functions
Occupational Performance

Assessment Type

Performance Measure

Administration Mode

Paper & Pencil

Cost

Free

Populations

Non-Specific Patient Population

Key Descriptions

  • The scale comprises 21 items
  • Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. Response scale for the first 10 item was from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The rest of the 11 items’ response scales use a semantic differential format but also range between 1 and 5 describing polar opposite adjectives
  • The scale measures 4 factors: Information Factors (i.e., Need for Career Information and Need for Self-Knowledge) and Personal-Emotional Factors (i.e., Career Choice Anxiety and Generalized Indecisiveness)
  • Total score is obtained through adding the items’ scores together. Higher scores indicate higher levels of indecisiveness
  • Minimum score is 21; maximum score is 105.

Number of Items

21

Equipment Required

  • Paper and pencil

Time to Administer

5-10 minutes

Time to administer is approximate; completion is not time-limited

Required Training

No Training

Age Ranges

Adolescent

13 - 17

years

Adult

18 - 64

years

Instrument Reviewers

Eunjeong Ko, Doctoral Student in Vocational Rehabilitation, University of Wisconsin-Madison under the direction of Lindsay Clark, PhD, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Medicine

ICF Domain

Activity
Participation

Measurement Domain

Activities of Daily Living
Cognition
Emotion

Considerations

  • The authors recommend plotting scores from the four scales and joining the scores for a clear profile
  • Inventory is well suited for use with individual clients to identify which of the four scales is interfering with career decision-making (Chartrand et al., 1990).
  • The CFI has been developed and mainly tested on samples of university students, so interpretation of the CFI results for other populations has limitations.
  • Suggestions for an alternative way of scoring have been offered by Dickinson and Tokar (2004). Scoring a two-factor model including the Personal-Emotional Dimension and the Informational Dimension to determine whether career indecision is due to a lack of career-related information, career choice-related anxiety, or both.

 

Non-Specific Patient Population

back to Populations

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

College Students: (calculated from Chartrand et al., 1990; n = 331; mean age = 19.90 (4.0) years; 71% female)

  • SEM for Women (n = 253): 5.86
  • SEM for Men (n = 78): 4.66

 

College Students: (calculated from Lewis & Savickas, 1995; n = 214; mean age = 21.2 (range 17-43); 63% female)

  • SEM for Women (n = 135): 4.83
  • SEM for Men (n = 69): 3.79

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

College Students: (calculated from Chartrand et al., 1990)

  • MDC95 for Women (n = 253): 16.234
  • MDC95 for Men (n = 78): 12.92

 

College Students: (calculated from Lewis & Savickas, 1995)

  • MDC95 for Women (n = 135): 13.389
  • MDC95 for Men (n = 69): 10.51

 

Normative Data

College Students: (Lewis & Savickas, 1995)

  • Mean CFI total for Women (n = 135): 53.04 (SD = 17.06)
  • Mean CFI total for Men (n = 69): 49.61 (SD = 13.41)

 

Test/Retest Reliability

College Students: (Chartrand et al., 1990)

  • Acceptable test-retest reliability estimated over a 2-week period: (ICCs: Mean = 0.80; CA = 0.79; GI = 0.84; CI = 0.82; SK = 0.76)

Note: CA = CFI Career Choice Anxiety; GI = CFI Generalized Indecisiveness; CI = CFI Need for Career Information; SK = CFI Need for Self-Knowledge

Internal Consistency

College Students: (Chartrand et al., 1990)

  • Excellent: internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha CFI total = 0.87; CA = 0.86; SK = 0.83) 
  • Adequate: internal consistency(Cronbach’s alpha GI = 0.79; CI = 0.73) 

 

College Students: (Lewis & Savickas, 1995)

  • Excellent internal consistency : (Cronbach’s alpha CFI total = 0.92; CA = 0.91; CI = 0.87; NFSK = 0.86)
  • Adequate: internal consistency(Cronbach’s alpha GI = 0.79) 

 

Italian Students: (Lo Presti et al., 2017; n = 10602,060; mean age = 20.781 (3.173.42) years; 71.1% women and 28.9% men; 44.3% high school students and 55.7% university students; Italian speakers)

  • Excellent internal consistency: (Cronbach’s alpha CFI = 0.84; CA = 0.87; SK = 0.87)
  • Adequate internal consistency:(Cronbach’s alpha GI = 0.79)
  • Poor: internal consistency(Cronbach’s alpha CI = 0.64)

 

Note: CA = CFI Career Choice Anxiety; GI = CFI Generalized Indecisiveness; CI = CFI Need for Career Information; SK = CFI Need for Self-Knowledge

Criterion Validity (Predictive/Concurrent)

Concurrent validity:

College Students: (Lewis & Savickas, 1995)

  • Adequate correlation between CCSI and CI (r = -0.48)
  • Adequate correlation between CCSI and CA (r = -0.44)
  • Adequate correlation between CCSI and SK (r = -0.32)
  • Poor correlation between CCSI and GI (r = -0.28)
  • Excellent correlation between VIS and CFI total (r = -0.65)
  • Excellent correlation between VIS and CA (r = -0.60)
  • Adequate correlation between VIS and GI (r = -0.45)
  • Adequate correlation between VIS and CI (r = -0.53)
  • Adequate correlation between VIS and SK (r = -0.46)
  • Adequate correlation between CDI-A CRY and CFI total (r = 0.41)
  • Adequate correlation between CDI-A SPEC and CFI total (r = 0.39)
  • Poor correlation between CDI-A IMPL and CFI total (r = 0.23)
  • Poor correlation between CDI-A STAB and CFI total (r = 0.20)
  • Poor correlations between CDI-A subscales and CFI CA (r = 0.19 to 0.28)
  • Poor correlations between CDI-A subscales and CFI GI (r  = 0.16 with CDI-A CRY and r = 0.17 with CDI-A SPEC)
  • Poor to Adequate correlations between CDI-A subscales and CFI CI (r = 0.21 to 0.46)
  • Poor to Adequate correlations between CDI-A subscales and CFI SK (r = 0.32 with CDI-A CRY and r = 0.26 with CDI-A SPEC)

Note: CCSI = Career Choice Status Inventory; VIS = Vocational Identity Scale; CA = CFI Career Choice Anxiety; GI = CFI Generalized Indecisiveness; CI = CFI Need for Career Information; SK = CFI Need for Self-Knowledge, CDI-A = Career Development Inventory – Adult Form II; CRY = CDI-A Crystallization; SPEC = CDI-A Specification; IMPL = CDI-A Implementation; STAB = CDI-A Stabilization

Construct Validity

Convergent validity:

College Students: (Chartrand et al., 1990)

  • Adequate correlation between CA and STAI-T (r = 0.32)
  • Poor correlation between CA and GIS (r = -0.29)
  • Adequate correlation between CA and VIS (r = -0.40)
  • Adequate correlation between CA and SE (r = 0.31)
  • Adequate correlation between GI and STAI-T (r = 0.31)
  • Adequate correlation between GI and GIS (r = -0.43)
  • Adequate correlation between GI and VIS (r = -0.33)
  • Adequate correlation between GI and SE (r = 0.43)
  • Adequate correlation between CI and VIS (r = -0.35)
  • Poor correlation between SK and STAI-T (r = 0.27)
  • Poor correlation between SK and GIS (r = -0.29)
  • Adequate correlation between SK and VIS (r = -0.40)
  • Poor correlation between SK and SE (r = 0.26)

Italian Students: (Lo Presti et al., 2017)

  • Adequate correlations between CA and STAI-T (r = 0.49)
  • Adequate correlations between CA and Indecisiveness (r = -0.48)
  • Poor correlations between CA and Lack of information about occupations (r = 0.27)
  • Adequate correlations between CA and Lack of Information about myself (r = 0.33)
  • Adequate correlations between GI and STAI-T (r = 0.55)
  • Excellent correlations between GI and Indecisiveness (r = -0.69)
  • Poor correlations between  GI and Lack of Information about occupations (r = 0.25)
  • Adequate correlations between GI and Lack of information about myself (r = 0.39)
  • Poor correlations between CI and Indecisiveness (r = -0.10)
  • Poor correlations between CI and Lack of information about myself (r = 0.06)
  • Poor correlations between SK and Trait anxiety (r = 0.24)
  • Poor correlations between SK and Indecisiveness (r = -0.20)
  • Poor correlations between SK and Lack of information about occupation (r = 0.07)
  • Poor correlations between SK and Lack of information about myself (r = 0.11)

Note: CA = CFI Career Choice Anxiety; GI = CFI Generalized Indecisiveness; CI = CFI Need for Career Information; SK = CFI Need for Self-Knowledge; STAI-T = Trait Anxiety subscale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; GIS = Goal Instability Scale; VIS = Vocational Identity scale; SE = Rosenberg's Self-Esteem Scale; Indecisiveness is a scale of 22 item with higher scores indicating high decision-making skills and low indecisiveness; Lack of Information about occupations and Lack of information about self are subscales of the Italian adaptation of the Career Decision-Making Difficulties Questionnaire

 

Discriminant validity:

Undergraduate Students: (Dickinson, 2004; n = 350; mean age = 22.7 (6.0))

  • Poor correlations between Impression Management subscale of BIDR and CFI subscales (r = -0.21 to -0.10)
  • Poor correlations between CFI Informational Indecision subscales (CI and SK) and Self-Deception subscale of BIDR (r = -0.14 and -0.16)
  • Adequate  correlations between CFI Personal-Emotional subscales (CI and GI) and the Self-Deception subscale of BIDR (r = -0.37 and -0.45)

Note: BIDR = Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding;  CA = CFI Career Choice Anxiety; GI = CFI Generalized Indecisiveness; CI = CFI Need for Career Information; SK = CFI Need for Self-Knowledge

Face Validity

Lewis and Savickas (1995) concluded that the Generalized Indecisiveness items lack face validity as indicators of indecisiveness. They suggested the items are more about measuring decision-making difficulty rather than decision-making inability.

Bibliography

Chartrand, J. M., Robbins, S. B., Morrill, W. H., & Boggs, K. (1990). Development and validation of the Career Factors Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(4), 491-501. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.37.4.491

Dickinson, J., & Tokar, D. M. (2004). Structural and discriminant validity of the career factors inventory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(2), 239–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2003.07.002

Lewis, D. M., & Savickas, M. L. (1995). Validity of the Career Factors Inventory. Journal of Career Assessment, 3(1), 44-56.  https://doi.org/10.1177/106907279500300104

Lo Presti, A., Pace, F., Cascio, V. L., & Capuano, M. (2017). The Italian Version of the Career Factors Inventory. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(2), 326-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072714565857

rehabilitation measures

More Instruments Like This

We have reviewed more than 500 instruments for use with a number of diagnoses including stroke, spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury among several others.

updated May 10, 2025

Physical Activity Enjoymen...

read more

updated Apr 24, 2025

Rapid Assessment of Physic...

read more

updated Feb 27, 2025

Psychosocial Impact of Ass...

read more