The application of Holland's vocational model to the strong vocational interest blank for women

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2,479-493 (1972)

The Application of Holland’s Vocational Model to the Strong Vocational Interest Blank for Women JO-IDA C. HANSEN University of Minnesota

CHARLES B. JOHANSSONl Macalester College

To pattern recent research on the Men’s form of the Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB), six scales were developed for the Women’s form that mapped the vocational model of Holland’s interest theory. The scales were free of item overlap, and within each scale, the items intercorrelated highly positive and represented a wide range of popularity. Concurrent validity for the scales consisted of rank order mean scores for 91 female groups, primarily occupational samples used in construction of the occupational scales on the SVIB. The groups were arranged in a meaningful and common sense order on each of the six scales. These data were consistent with the correlations of the Holland-based scales with the basic interest scales and occupational scales now in existence.

The Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB) is one research and counseling instrument that has been used extensively for the examination of the interests of men and women. However, even the SVIB has suffered a lag in research on the Women’s form of the test. The most recent research for the Men’s form of the SVIB (Campbell & Holland, 1973) involved the develop ment of scales to measure six vocational types proposed by Holland (1966) in his theory of vocational types: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. In the study by Campbell and Holland, 202 male occupational samples were scored on each of the six Holland-based scales. The occupations were distributed over a wide range of scores; those with the highest mean scores on each scale belonged to the appropriate Holland category. For example, machinists were the highest scoring group on the Realistic scale; physicists highest on Investigative; actors highest on Artistic; YMCA staff highest on IReprints may be obtained from Charles B. Johansson, Office of Educational Research, Macalester College, Saint Paul, Minn. 55101.

479 Copyright 01972 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

480

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON

Social; salesmenhighest on Enterprising; and bankers highest on Conventional. The above data suggest that Holland’s vocational model is useful for organizing Strong’s data. Thus, this study was initiated to again turn research attention to the interest patterns of women. The construction and validation of Holland-basedscalesfor the Women’sform of the SVIB will be presented. METHOD Before items were selected for the SVIB-Holland scales,working definitions of the six Holland types were gleaned from his previous articles (1966, 1970a, 1970b). Holland stated that each type may be defined by a cluster of personality attributes that create predispositions for a particular class of vocations and constitute potentials for special achievementsand aspirations. A cursory description depicts the Realistic person as one who avoids abstract thought; has mechanical and psychomotor skills, and prefers agricultural, technical, or skilled trades occupations. The Investigative person is analytical, imaginative, and achieving, manipulates words, ideas and symbols, and prefers academic and scientific vocations. The Artistic personis asocial, introspective, and sensitive; has exceptional perceptual and motor skills, and prefers musical, artistic, literary, and dramatic areas of interests. The Social person seekslove and recognition, and relies on emotions and feelings, leaning toward educational, therapeutic, and religious occupations. The Enterprising person is persuasive,verbal, extroverted, and self-confident; and is drawn to the ranks of sales, supervisory personnel, and leadership occupations. The Conventional person is conservative, dominant, rigid, and stable; and prefers computational and structured vocations. Using the definitions provided by Holland’s works, items were selected from the women’s SVIB (Form TW398) to representthe six vocational types. The following considerations were adhered to for consistency with the male-SVIBHolland scales. 1. The items were related to only one of the Holland types to eliminate item overlap among the scales. 2. The items within each scalecorrelated highly positive with each other to produce moderately homogeneous scales. Item intercorrelations were computed on the responsesof the current SVIB Women-InGeneral sample (N=lOOO); correlations of .25 and greater were defined as highly positive based on previous work by Campbell, Borgen, Eastes, Johannson, & Peterson (1968). A complete description of the Women-In-General(WIG) sample is given by Campbell (1971). 3. The items represented a wide range of popularity. The response percentagesfor the WIG sample were examined, and items endorsed

HOLLAND'SMODELANDTHESVIB

481

by 85% or more, or 5% or less,were eliminated. 4. The items fit the “Like-Indifferent-Dislike” responseformat. Therefore, the forced-choice items of the SVIB were not considered. 5. The items were selected to construct two sets of scales.Each of the six scales contained 14 items that appeared on both the old (Form W) and revised form (TW398) of the Women’s SVIB, permitting all forms of the test to be scored; these 14item scaleswere labeled Set I scales. A second set of six scaleswas also constructed; each of the Set II scales contained the original 14 items of Set I and six additional items that usually appearedexclusively on the revised form of the SVIB. The Set II scalesare preferred becausethey are longer; however, they can only be used with Form TW398. RESULTS The scale items are listed in Table 1. The first 14 items for each scale comprised the Set I scales.The Set II scalescontained the first 14 items plus the six items indicated by asterisks. Once the scales had been constructed, the intercorrelations among the scaleswere computed and appear in Table 2. The correlations above the main diagonal were based on Set II scales; those below the main diagonal were based on Set II scales.The scale intercorrelations were low, indicating the relative independenceof the six types. The correlations along the main diagonal were between the same-named Set I and Set II scales, e.g., between Realistic I and Realistic II. These correlations were all in the high .90 range, suggestingthat if a sample was used as a reference point for both sets of scales,then either version of the scale could be used with only minimal score differences between the two sets of scales. This permitted the analysis of archival data of various female occupational samplesregardlessof the form of the SVIB used. To provide a reference point for each of the scales, the Women-InGeneral (WIG) sample was scored, and the means and standard deviations (Table 3) were used to convert raw scoresto standard scores. This procedure arbitrarily faed the standard score mean of the WIG sample at 50 and the standard deviation at 10. (The old SVIBs, Form W, were scored on Set I scales and the conversion to standard scores used the Set I means and standard deviations in Table 3; the same procedure was used for new SVIBs, Form TW398, scored on the Set II scales.)All further data is converted to standard scoresand is relative to the WIG sample. To determine the concurrent validity of the female Holland-SVIB scales, scores from 92 female sampleswere analyzed (median sample size of 200 individuals). Most of the groups were occupational samplesthat had been

482

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON TABLE 1 Item Composition of the Women’s Holland Scales

Scale

Item compositiona

Realistic

Airplane pilot; farmer; laboratory technician; mechanical engineer; secret service woman; camping out; golf; solving mechanical puzzles; raising flowers and vegetables; operating machinery; physical education director vs magazine writer; have mechanical ingenuity; mechanical drawing; physical education; electronics technician*; policewoman*; veterinarian for small animals*; popular mechanics magazines*; military men*; enjoy tinkering with small hand tool* Investigative Architect; author of technical book; chemist; college professor; inventor; pharmacist; physician; scientific research worker; doing research work; botany; calculus; chemistry; physics; psychology; psychologist*; surgeon*; chess*; outstanding scientists*; nature study*; physiology* Artistic Actress; artist; author of novel; cartoonist; draftsman; interior decorator; musician; poet; sculptor; art galleries; symphony concerts; poetry; art; dramatics; art museum director*; sketching pictures of wild animals*; magazines about art and music*; writing a one-act play*; musical geniuses*; literature* Social Employment manager; playground director; social worker; YWCA secretary; giving “fustaid” assistance; interviewing men for a job; organizing a play; teaching children; teaching adults; taking responsibility; adjusting difficulties of others; contributing to charities; public speaking; sociology; athletic director*; school principal*; leading a girl scout troop*; church young people’s groups*; going to church*; babies* Enterprising Advertiser; buyer of merchandise; hotel manager; life insurance saleswoman; manager, women’s style shop; real estate saleswomen; retailer; specialty saleswoman; expressing opinions publicly; making a speech; starting a conversation with a stranger; continually changing activities; people who have made fortunes in business; usually start activities of my group; travel bureau manager* ; electioneering for office*; being head of a civic improvement program*; meeting and directing people*; displaying merchandise in a store* ; work in an import-export business* Conventional Bank teller; cashier in bank; city or state employee; office manager; private secretary; typist; regular hours for work; saving money; thrifty people; plan my work in detail; arithmetic; bookkeeping; economics; spelling; income tax accountant*; statistician*; business teacher*; business methods magazines; making statistical charts; people who insist on having everything in its proper place* aAsterisked items appear only on Set II.

used in the development of the occupational scalesfor the SVIB. In general, the individuals in the occupational groups were between 25 and 55 years old, had been in their occupation for at least 3 yr, and expressedsatisfaction with their work. A complete description of each group is given by Campbell (1971).

483

HOLLAND’S MODEL AND THE SVIB TABLE 2

Intercorrelations of Female Holland-SVIB Scales on Mixed-Sex Sample (N=lSO)Q Scales Realistic Investigative Artistic Social Enterprising Conventional

R

I

A

S

E

C

.91 .50 .14 .08 .20 .34

.49 .98 .22 .05 -.Ol .05

.12 .27 .98 .36 .lO -.Ol

.21 .ll .36 .96 .51 .25

.23 -.04 .12 .55 .97 .39

.44 .14 -.03 .31 .44 .95

QCorrelations above the main diagonal are based on Set II scales; correlations below the main diagonal are based on Set I scales; correlations along the main diagonal are on same-named Set I and Set II scales.

TABLE 3 Raw Score Means and Standard Deviations of Women-In-General (WIG) Used for Conversion to Standard Score&b Set I

Set II

Scale

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

Realistic Investigative Artistic Social Enterprising Conventional

- .31 1.18 4.39 3.18 - .12 1.10

5.53 6.09 6.10 5.02 5.20 5.56

-1.49 2.72 6.09 4.18 .20 -1.05

1.63 8.07 8.49 6.93 1.39 1.57

QConversion formula:

SSi = RSi - Meani X 10 + 50. SD1 bKey: SSi = Standard Score on Scale i RSi = Raw Score on Scale i Meani = Mean of WIG on Scale i SDi = Standard deviation of WIG on Scale i.

The 92 female sampleswere scored on each of the six scales;their mean standard scores are reported in Tables 4-9. If the scalesare valid discriminators of occupational types, the groups should be distributed over a wide range of scores; if the scales do not differentiate among occupations, all of the mean scoreswould be clustered around one or two scores.Inspection of the rank-ordered mean score tables indicated that the occupations were arranged in a common sense and meaningful sequence over a range of about two standard deviations.

484

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON TABLE 4 Mean Scores of Female Samples on the Realistic Scale

Mean Samples 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43

Engineers Phys Ed Teachers, HS; Physical Therapists; Phys Ed Teachers, Coll; Navy Enlisted Laboratory Techs; Occupational Therapists; Medical Techs; Phys Ed Teachers, HS ‘67 Army Enlisted; Radiological Techs Dentists; Math-Sci Teachers; Nurses, Licensed Practical; Assemblers; Occupational Therapists ‘66; Computer Programmers; Physical Therapists ‘66 Nurses; Dietitians; Telephone Operators; Army Officers; Math-Sci Teachers ‘67; Recreation Leaders Home Econ Teachers; Nurses, Visiting; Dental Assistants; Chemists; Executive Housekeepers Sales, Ready-to-Wear; Physicians; Office Workers; Airline Stewardesses; Navy Officers; Sewing Machine Operators; Physicians ‘67 Physicians, Western Reserve; Nun-Teachers; WIG; Psychologists; Bus Ed Teachers; Beauticians; YWCA Staff; Nurses, BA; Home Econ Teachers ‘67 WIG ‘67; Nurses, Public Health; Stenographers; YWCA Secretaries; Housewives; Elementary Teachers; Salesladies; Dietitians ‘67; Art Teachers; Accountants Social Science Teachers; Buyers; Lawyers; Mathematicians; Secretaries; Bus Ed Teachers ‘67; Bankwomen Wives, farmers; Artists; Social Workers; Wives, social workers; Wives, animal husbandry; Guidance Counselors English Teachers; Librarians; Sales, Life; Music Teachers; Music Performers; Photographers; Dhector, Christ Educ; Social Science Teachers ‘67; Extension Agents Speech Pathologists; Psychologists ‘67; Sales, Lie ‘67; Entertainers; Interpreters; Librarians, ‘67 Models; Interior Decorators; Wives, physicists; Newswomen; Lawyers ‘67; English Teachers ‘67; Language Teachers Authors; Artists, ‘67

HOLLAND’S MODEL AND THE SVIB

485

TABLE 5 Mean Scores of Female Samples on the Investigative Scale Mean 65 64 63 62 61 60

59 58 51 56

55 54 53 52 51

50

49 48

41 46 45 44 43 42 41 40

39 38

Samples Chemists

Psychologists; Engineers; Medical Techs Physicians, Western Reserve; Laboratory Techs; Physicians; Psychologists ‘67; Physicians ‘67 Math-Sci Teachers; Mathematicians Dentists; Computer Programmers Physical Therapists; Phys Ed Teachers, Coll; Interpreters; Physical Therapists ‘66; Math-&i Teachers ‘67 Dietitians; Radiological Techs Home Fcon Teachers; Speech Pathologists; Nurses, Visiting; Nurses, Licensed Practical; Occupational Therapists ‘66; Dietitians ‘67 Nurses; Occupational Therapists; Phys Ed Teachers, HS; Nurses, BA WIG; Lawyers; Wives physicists Nurses, Public Health; Nun-Teachers; Social Science Teachers; English Teachers; Librarians; YWCA Secretaries; Social Workers; Dental Assistants; Army Officers; Librarians ‘67; Art Teachers; Phys Ed Teachers, HS ‘67; Guidance Counselors WIG ‘67; Artists; Airline Stewardesses; Photographers; Wives, animal husbandry; Army Enlisted; Navy Officers; Executive Housekeepers; Lawyers ‘67; Home Econ Teachers ‘67; Accountants; Recreation Leaders Bus Ed Teachers; Wives, social workers; YWCA Staff; Navy Enlisted; Artists ‘67; Extension Agents Sales, Ready-to-Wear; Authors; Sales, Life; Office Workers; Music Performers; Elementary Teachers; Entertainers; Director, Christ Educ; Social Science Teachers ‘67; English Teachers ‘67; Language Teachers Stenographers; Music Teachers; Housewives; Interior Decorators; Newswomen Buyers; Salesladies; Telephone Operators; Assemblers; Sales, Life ‘67; Bus Ed Teachers ‘67; Bankwomen Models; Secretaries Sewing Machine Operators Beauticians

Wives, farmers

486

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON TABLE 6 Mean Scores of Female Samples on the Artistic Scale

Mean Samples 59 58 51 56 55 54 53 52 51

49 48

41 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38

Art Teachers Artists ‘67 Artists; Interior Decorators Psychologists ‘67; Wives, physicists; Entertainers Authors; Music Performers; Models; Occupational Therapists ‘66; Photographers; Newswomen; Interpreters; English Teachers ‘67 English Teachers; Occupational Therapists; Music Teachers; Airline Stewardesses; Librarians ‘67; Social Science Teachers ‘67; Recreation Leaders Nurses; YWCA Secretaries; Phys Ed Teachers, Coll; Speech Pathologists; Wives, social workers; YWCA Staff; Army Officers; Director, Christ Educ; Language Teachers; Extension Agents Physicians, Western Reserve; Psychologists; Librarians; Stenographers; Social Workers; Elementary Teachers; Wives, animal husbandry; Sales, Life ‘67; Physicians ‘67; Guidance Counselors WIG ‘67; Nun-Teachers; Sales, Ready-to-Wear; WIG; Social Science Teachers; Lawyers; Phys Ed Teachers, HS; Engineers; Physical Therapists; Nurses, Visiting; Chemists; Computer Programmers; Navy Officers; Lawyers ‘67 Nurses, Public Health; Dentists; Home Econ Teachers; Physicians; Sales, Life; Housewives; Physical Therapists ‘66; Nurses, BA; Home Econ Teachers ‘67 Buyers; Laboratory Techs; Math-Sci Teachers; Office Workers; Nurses, Licensed Practical; Mathematicians; Sales, Life ‘67; Executive Housekeepers; Medical Techs; Dietitians ‘67 Dietitians; Bus Ed Teachers; Salesladies; Army Enlisted; Radiological Techs; Accountants Dental Assistants; Navy Enlisted; Phys Ed Teachers, HS ‘67 Telephone Operators; Math-&i Teachers; Bus Ed Teachers ‘67; Bankwomen Beauticians Assemblers Sewing Machine Operators Wives, farmers

HOLLAND’S MODEL AND THE SVIB

487

TABLE 7 Mean Scores of Female Samples on the Social Scale Mean Samples 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54

53

52

51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39

Director, Christ Educ YWCA Secretaries Guidance Counselors Phys Ed Teachers, HS Social Workers; Fhys Ed Teachers, HS ‘67 Executive Housekeepers; Extension Agents Psychologists; Music Teachers; Fhys Ed Teachers, Coll; Speech Pathologists; Nurses, Visiting; Aiiline Stewardesses; Elementary Teachers; Occupational Therapists ‘66; Nurses, BA Nurses, Public Health; Nun-Teachers; Social Science Teachers; Bus Ed Teachers; F’hysical Therapists; Nurses, Licensed Practical; Wives, social workers; Physical Therapists ‘66; Social Science Teachers ‘67; Home Econ Teachers ‘67 Sales, Ready-to-Wear; Nurses; Home Econ Teachers; Lawyers; Occupational Therapists; Sales, Life; Dental Assistants; Salesladies; Army Enlisted; Army Officers; Bus Ed Teachers ‘67; English Teachers ‘67 WIG; English Teachers; Dietitians; Music Performers; Telephone Operators; Sales, Life ‘67; Secretaries; Accountants; Language Teachers WIG ‘67; Buyers; Math-Sci Teachers; Housewives; Wives, animal husbandry; YWCA Staff; Radiological Techs; Dietitians ‘67; Art Teachers Physicians; Stenographers; Engineers; Beauticians; Math-Sci Teachers ‘67; Bankwomen Physicians, Western Reserve; Office Workers; Assemblers; Psychologists ‘67; Navy Enlisted; Sewing Machine Operators; Librarian ‘67; Medical Techs Models; Wives, physicists; Navy Officers; physicians ‘67; Lawyers ‘67 Dentists; Entertainers Laboratory Techs; Librarians; Chemists; Computer Programmers; Newswomen Authors; Interior Decorators; Interpreters Mathematicians Wives, farmers; Artists Photographers Artists ‘67

488

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON TABLE 8 Mean Scores of Female Samples on the Enterprising Scale

Mean Samples 60

59 58 57 56

55 54 53 52 51 50

49 48 41 46 45 44 43 42 41 40

39

Sales, Life ‘67 Airline Stewardesses Sales, Ready-to-Wear; Sales, Life; Salesladies; Recreation Leaders Buyers; YWCA Staff; Extension Agents Interior Decorators Models; Home Econ Teachers ‘67; Bus Ed Teachers ‘67 Army Enlisted; Army Officers; Executive Housekeepers; Social Science Teachers ‘67; Guidance Counselors; Bankwomen Home Econ Teachers; Phys Ed Teachers, HS; Bus Ed Teachers; Lawyers ‘67; Art Teachers; Secretaries; English Teachers ‘67 Music Teachers; Beauticians; Occupational Therapists ‘66; Navy Officers; New% women; Director, Christ Educ; Dietitians ‘67; Language Teachers; Accountants WIG ‘67; Lawyers; Dleticians; Stenographers; Office Workers; YWCA Secretaries; Housewives; Speech Pathologists; Nurses, Visiting; Dental Assistants; Elementary Teachers; Telephone Operators; Wives, social workers; Entertainers; Wives, animal husbandry Occupational Therapists; Engineers; Music Performers; Assemblers; Physical Therapists ‘66; Librarians ‘67; Nurses, BA; Phys Ed Teachers, HS ‘67 Nurses, Public Health; WIG; Social Science Teachers; Physical Therapists; Social Workers Nurses, Licensed Practical; Psychologists ‘67; Computer Programmers; Navy Enlisted; Sewing Machine Operators; Radiological Techs; Math-&i Teachers ‘67 Nurses; English Teachers; Psychologists; Phys Ed Teachers, Coll; Wives, physicists; Interpreters Nun-Teachers; Dentists; Math-Sci Teachers; Physicians ‘67; Medical Techs Physicians, Western Reserve; Wives, farmers; Authors; Laboratory Techs; Librarians; Photographers Physicians; Chemists Artists; Artists ‘67 Mathematicians

HOLLAND’S MODEL AND THE SVIB

489

TABLE 9 Mean Scores of Female Samples on the Conventional Scale Mean

Samples

67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60

59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51

Bus Ed Teachers '67

Bus Ed Teachers Bankwomen Office Workers; Accountants Salesladies; Telephone Operators; Sewing Machine Operators Executive Housekeepers; Math-Sci Teachers ‘67; Secretaries Wives, farmers; Stenographers; Math-Sci Teachers; Housewives; Dental Assistants; Army Enlisted Nurses, Licensed Practical; Assemblers Sales, Ready-to-Wear; Buyers; Home Econ Teachers; Dietitians; Elementary Teachers; Computer Programmers Nun-Teachers; Social Science Teachers; Nurses; Lawyers; YWCA Secretaries; Navy Enlisted; Guidance Counselors WIG; Laboratory Techs; Sales, Life; Phys Ed Teachers, HS; Nurses, Visiting; Wives, animal husbandry; Army Officers; Dietitians ‘67; Home Econ Teachers ‘67 Dentists; Beauticians; Sales, Life ‘67; Radiological Techs; Medical Techs; Lawyers ‘67

50

49

48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40

39

WIG ‘67; English Teachers; Occupational Therapists; Engineers; Music Teachers; Physical Therapists; Extension Agents; Physical Therapists ‘66; Director, Christ Educ; Social Science Teachers ‘67; Recreation Leaders Nurses, Public Health; Psychologists; Librarians; Social Workers; Phys Ed Teachers, Coll; Airline Stewardesses; YWCA Staff; Navy Officers; Librarians ‘67; Phys Ed Teachers, HS ‘67; English Teachers ‘67; Language Teachers Physicians; Music Performers; Mathematicians; Chemists; Nurses, BA Physicians, Western Reserve; Occupational Therapists ‘66; Wives, physicists Physicians ‘67 Speech Pathologists; Interior Decorators; Psychologists ‘67; Interpreters; Art Teachers Entertainers Authors; Artists; Models Newswomen Photographers; Artists ‘67

490

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON TABLE 10 Intercorrelations of the Female Basic Scales (Set II) and Holland Scales (Set II)

Basic scales

Real

Inves

Art

sot

Public Speaking Law/Politics Merchandising Office Practices Numbers Physical Science Mechanical Outdoors Biological Science Medical Service Teaching Social Service Sports Homemaking Religious Activities Music Art Performing Arts Writing

.19 .20 .15 .32 .34 .60 .85 .62 .35 .50 .19 .24 .64 .lO .25 .13 .15 .12 .09

.23 .25 -.09 -.Ol Sl .89 .54 .36 .78 .66 .17 .12 .23 .Ol .06 .29 .22 .26 .22

.31 .09 .09 -.Ol -.03 .15 .ll .40 .21 .25 .43 .36 .17 .35 .20 .68 .89 .84 .76

.60 .40 .44 .25 -.06 -.04 .oo .24 .13 .36 .81 .80 .52 .43 .60 .30 .31 .37 .38

Enter -___ .sl .49 .86 .40 -.06 -.12 .09 .Ol .02 .23 .38 .41 .33 .30 .20 .06 .21 .22 .22

Conv .26 .30 Sl .84 .49 .20 .34 .09 .05 .28 .21 .26 .30 .24 .31 .Ol .02 .Ol .04

Reviewing the high scores on each of the scales indicated that the groups most relevant to a particular scale were at the extreme, e.g., engineers on the Realistic scale; chemists distinctively high on the Investigative scale; art teachers, artists, and interior decorators on the Artistic scale; and directors of Christian education, YWCA secretaries,and guidance counselors on the Social scale. High scoring occupations on the Enterprising scalewere the various groups of sales personnel and airline stewardesses,while clerical and offrce practices occupations scoredhighest on the Conventional scale. Further descriptive data on the Holland-basedscalesconsisted of correlations of these experimental scaleswith the existing scaleson the SVIB profile. The correlations, presentedin Tables 10 and 11, are basedon a sampleof 150 subjects; most of them were taking an advanced psychology course at the University of Minnesota and are frequently used to generate intercorrelations for the SVIB scales. Table 10 presents the correlations for the Set II Basic Interest Scales and the Set II Holland-based scales. The high correlations followed a predictable, common sense,and meaningful order. Public speaking correlated highest with the Social and Enterprising scales;music, art, performing arts, and writing scales correlated highly with the Artistic dimension in Holland’s model; teaching and social service correlated .80 with the Social dimension.

491

HOLLAND’S MODEL AND THE SVIB TABLE 11

Correlation of the SVIB Occupational Scales and the Female Set II Holland Scales Occupational scales

Real

Inves

Art

sot

Enter

Conv

Music Teacher Entertainer Music Performer Model Art Teacher

.1.5 -.18

-.16 .07 .07 -.36 .14

-.45 .65

.03 .08

.70 .09

.19 -.17

.78

.24

-38 -03 -.06 .07 .06

.I1 -.41 -.34 -.60 -.35

Artist Interior Decorator Newswoman English Teacher Language Teacher

-.31 -.40 -.45 -.31

.lO

-.56 -.05 -.20 .21

-.I5 -.48 -.65

.39

-.54 -.21 -.12 .46 .30

.lO

-.24

.39

.78

.46 .42 .17 .31

.89

.64 .71 .32

.15 .31 .08

YWCA Staff Member Recreation Leader Director, Christian Educ. Nun-Teacher Guidance Counselor

-.20

-.51 .04

-59 .Ol .25

-.09 .13 -.07

Social Science Teacher Social Worker Speech Pathologist Psychologist Librarian

-.20 -.12 -.21

Translator Physician Dentist Medical Technologist Chemist

-.26 .21 .46

Mathematician Computer Programmer Math-Science Teacher Engineer Army Enlisted

-.05 -.32

51 .31

.lO 50

-.06 -.20 -.13 -.13 -.32 .06 .14

-.Ol .12 .13 -.lO .19

.02 .30 .02 .02 .16

Bankwoman Life Insurance Underwriters Buyer Business Education Teacher Home Economics Teacher

.15 -.19 .oo

.35

-.48 -.50 -.32 -.28 -.44

-.51 -.34 .07 .16 -.Ol

-.17 -.15 -.55 -.14 -.48

-.50 -.33 -.21 -.26 -.13

-.62 -.26 -.15

-.26

-.58 .03 -.40

-.43 .20 -.53

-.13 .39 -.21 -.02 .03

-.19 -.19

.45 .36 -.04 -.14 .24

.59

-.02

-.41 -.33 -.45 .31 -.32

.59

.09

Dietitian Physical Education Teacher

.lO -.12 -.16

.23 -.02 -.42 -.35 -.20

.25 .21

.20 .08

Navy Enlisted Army Officer Navy Officer Lawyer Accountant

-.16 -.22 -.30 -.36 -.12 .52 .22

.lO

.42 .21 -.14 -.31 -.25

.09

.28 .65

.40 .51 .40 .61

-.ll

.23

.30

.I2 .61

.81 .42 .I8

-.ll

.45

.33 .55 .16

.46 .60 .48

.08 .08

.40 .34 .58

.29

.51 .53

-.ll .17

.19 .44 .26 .50

.19 .30 -.21 -.04 .45

-.lO

-.19

-.42

-.36

-.45 -.23 -.41 -.41 .28

.03 .27 -.03 .21 .53

.38 .45 .46 .48

.I7 .12 .44 .69 .32

.18 -.38

.33 .23

.32 .21

.40 .30

.49

492

HANSEN AND JOHANSSON TABLE 11 (Continued)

Correlation of the SVIB Occupational Scales and the Female Set II Holland Scales Occupational scales

Real

Inves

Art

sot

Occupational Therapist Physical Therapist Public Health Nurse

.45 .71 -.ll

.46 .72 .02

.73 .07 .21

.57 .35 .67

.24 .14 .20

.07 .36 -.12

Registered Nurse Licensed Practical Nurse Radiological Technologist Dental Assistant Executive Housekeeper

.06 .45 .63 .33 .33

.19 .31 .56 -.Ol -.03

.36 -.02 -.12 -.31 -.02

.66 .40 -.07 .16 .44

.29 .24 -.Ol .33 .53

.06 .60 .32 .66 .75

Instrument Assembler Elementary Teacher Secretary Saleswoman Sewing Machine Operator

.31 .20 -.09 .16 .18

-.13 .03 -.58 -.22 -.26

-.57 .28 -.24 -.lO -.43

-.32 .66 .08 .30 -.15

-.04 .32 .40 .51 .03

.38 .49 .47 .68 .50

Telephone Operator Beautician Airline Stewardess

.25 -.ll .19

-.15 -.61 -.02

-.17 -.47 .32

.20 -.16 .53

.34 .13 .75

.67 .15 .36

Conv

Table 11, which presents the correlations of the Holland scales with the occupational scales,,mirrored the data presented on the mean scores of the various occupations and the correlations with the basic interest scales. Thus, the data presented on the female Holland scales are consistent with a common sense and logical interpretation of what was expected. The groups scoring highest on the scales are the “right” groups and the high correlations, both positive and negative, between the new experimental scales, and the occupational scales and basic interest scaleswere significant and of practical importance. DISCUSSION Holland has suggestedthat his theory might be useful in research of social groups and organizations. The Holland-SVIB scalesprovide the merger of Holland’s theory with the vast amounts of data that have been collected on the occupational world with the SVIB. Johansson(1971) has found that the Holland-SVIB scalescan be useful for measuringchanging patterns of interests among different college samplesacrosstime. One of the outstanding features of the Holland-SVIB scales is they provide a brief summary to the individual’s SVIB responses.Becauseof the

HOLLAND’S MODEL AND THE SVJB

493

short length of the scales, they may be quickly and easily scored. Used in conjunction with empirical SVIB occupational scales, they provide an individual with indices of how his preferencesfit with the occupational world. Holland’s analysis of each occupational model provides surplus meaning, especially for the vocational counselor. Thus, with the addition of the Holland-SVIB scales,three main types of scaleinformation are available on the female SVIB: 1. The six Holland-based scales-Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional-contributing a general description of the individual. 2. The 19 Basic Interest Scales offering more specific information in general areasof interest. 3. The empirical occupational scales providing explicit information about an individual’s interest in particular occupations. REFERENCES Campbell, D. P. Handbook for the Strong Vocational Interest Blank. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 197 1. Campbell, D. P., Borgen, F. H., Eastes, S. H., Johansson, C. B., & Peterson, R. A. A set of basic interest scales for the Strong Vocational Interest Blank for men. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, 2. Campbell, D. P. & Holland, J. L. A merger in vocational interest research: applying Holland’s theory to Strong’s data. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1973 (in press). Holland, J. L. The psychology of vocational choice. Waltham: Blaisdell Publishing, 1966. Holland, J. L. The Self-Directed Search: A guide to educational and vocational planning, Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists, 1970a. Holland, I. L. The occupational finder. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists., 1970b. Johansson, C. B. Cognitive interest styles of students. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 1971, 4, 176-184. Received: December 20, 1971