4.2 Article

Emerging Adults' Representations of Work: A Qualitative Research in Seven Countries

期刊

EMERGING ADULTHOOD
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 54-67

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/2167696820963598

关键词

work; representations; career choice; development; employment; transitions to adulthood

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the recent evolution of the labor market, emerging adults without diplomas are at a higher risk of facing unsatisfying jobs and barriers to accessing decent work. This research aims to identify their perceptions of work based on the psychology of emerging adulthood and the psychology of working theory. Differences in these perceptions are expected due to variations in each country's level of development and the work situations experienced by the participants. The findings highlight that these emerging adults associate decent work with the fulfillment of survival needs and positive social relationships in the workplace. This article discusses the similarities and differences in their representations of work and explores the role of work in their identity development.
With the recent evolution of the labor market, emerging adults with no diploma are particularly exposed to unsatisfying jobs and barriers to access decent work. The aim of the research was to identify their representations of work, based on the psychology of emerging adulthood and the psychology of working theory. Differences related to each country's level of development and to the work situations met by the participants were expected. Ten emerging adults aged 20-25 were interviewed in seven countries (N = 70). Data were processed using a thematic content analysis. The results stress that these emerging adults associate decent work with two specific qualities: the extent to which work allows survival needs to be met and the experience of positive social relationships in the workplace. This article discusses the similarities and differences in their representations of work and their role on identity development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据