| Literature DB >> 27247679 |
Diego Boerchi1, Paola Magnano2.
Abstract
Interests have been a central focus of counselling psychology (and vocational psychology in particular) for over 100 years. The awareness of professional interests increases self-knowledge and provides occupational information. In career counselling, vocational interests are assessed more frequently than any other vocational construct, though early evaluations (before 13 years old) of professional interests are very rare. The aim of this research is to examine the 3IP construct (Iconographic Professional Interests Inventory; an inventory composed of 65 stylised pictures that represent people in the act of performing a job) in depth, testing more models in addition to the 19 vocational areas proposed in the 3IP manual. Results show that most of the vocational areas can be grouped into 4 second-level areas ("things", "people", "leisure", and "culture"). Moreover, Holland's RIASEC model is tested; an accurate selection of items reveals that this model works well using 24 specific jobs. The research concludes that the inventory has good psychometric qualities which can grow further by mean of the increasing, in a targeted way, of the number of jobs.Entities:
Keywords: Holland’s model; children; psychometrics; vocational interests assessment; vocational interests development
Year: 2015 PMID: 27247679 PMCID: PMC4873077 DOI: 10.5964/ejop.v11i4.927
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Psychol ISSN: 1841-0413
Figure 1Examples of items.
Areas and Professions
| Area | Professions |
|---|---|
| Farmer; Breeder; Florist; Gardener | |
| Waiter; Barman; Cook; Receptionist | |
| Sculptor; Designer; Painter; Graphic designer; Ceramist | |
| Tyre repairer; Coachbuilder; Mechanic | |
| Historical; Geographer; Archaeologist | |
| Bank clerk; Business consultant | |
| Architect; Surveyor | |
| Hairdresser; Model; Stylist; Tailor; Cosmetician | |
| Lawyer; Judge | |
| Computer programmer; Computer technician | |
| Writer; Journalist; Interpreter; Translator | |
| Policeman; Sheriff; Military; Airplane pilot | |
| Singer; Musician; Composer; Orchestra conductor | |
| Physician; Ophthalmologist; Otorhinolaryngologist; Dentist; Nurse | |
| Scientist; Chemical; Biologist | |
| Educator; Social Worker; Psychologist | |
| Carpenter; Smith; Repair Technician; Electrician | |
| Trucker; Driver; Taxi Driver | |
| Tourist Guide; Travel Agent; Hostess |
Internal Consistency: Cronbach’s α Index
| Area | N° items | Original | Sperman-Brown corrected (4 items’ scale) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Primary ( | Secondary ( | Total | Primary ( | Secondary ( | ||
| .73 | .70 | .79 | .73 | .70 | .79 | ||
| .70 | .70 | .75 | .70 | .70 | .75 | ||
| .80 | .78 | .83 | .76 | .74 | .80 | ||
| .85 | .83 | .87 | .88 | .87 | .90 | ||
| .73 | .76 | .76 | .78 | .81 | .81 | ||
| .73 | .70 | .77 | |||||
| .73 | .80 | .77 | .84 | ||||
| .87 | .88 | .87 | .84 | .85 | .84 | ||
| .71 | .74 | .83 | .79 | .85 | |||
| .70 | .75 | .82 | .80 | .86 | |||
| .70 | .71 | .73 | .70 | .71 | .73 | ||
| .80 | .82 | .80 | .82 | ||||
| .78 | .78 | .81 | .78 | .78 | .81 | ||
| .75 | .82 | .71 | .78 | ||||
| .79 | .80 | .84 | .83 | .84 | .88 | ||
| .70 | .76 | ||||||
| .80 | .74 | .86 | .80 | .74 | .86 | ||
| .79 | .73 | .85 | .83 | .78 | .88 | ||
| .70 | .70 | .75 | .76 | .76 | .80 | ||
Note. Boldface indicates indexes lower than .70.
Gender Mean Differences and Effect Sizes
| Area | Male ( | Female ( | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohen's | Difference | ||||||
| 1.99 | 0.91 | 1.15 | 0.39 | 1.31 | 0.85 | .000 | |
| 1.92 | 0.76 | 1.23 | 0.40 | 1.20 | 0.69 | .000 | |
| 2.45 | 0.91 | 1.65 | 0.73 | 0.97 | 0.80 | .000 | |
| 1.76 | 0.81 | 1.19 | 0.39 | 0.95 | 0.57 | .000 | |
| 2.39 | 0.99 | 1.77 | 0.82 | 0.69 | 0.62 | .000 | |
| 2.13 | 0.97 | 1.83 | 0.83 | 0.33 | 0.30 | .000 | |
| 1.96 | 0.85 | 1.69 | 0.75 | 0.33 | 0.26 | .000 | |
| 2.21 | 0.92 | 1.93 | 0.92 | 0.31 | 0.29 | .000 | |
| 1.74 | 0.73 | 1.60 | 0.62 | 0.21 | 0.14 | .000 | |
| 2.05 | 0.86 | 1.91 | 0.82 | 0.16 | 0.13 | .008 | |
| 2.08 | 0.93 | 2.00 | 0.91 | 0.09 | 0.08 | .127 | |
| 1.74 | 0.65 | 1.86 | 0.65 | 0.19 | -0.13 | .001 | |
| 2.11 | 0.74 | 2.26 | 0.73 | 0.20 | -0.15 | .001 | |
| 1.84 | 0.71 | 2.13 | 0.81 | 0.38 | -0.28 | .000 | |
| 1.71 | 0.65 | 2.00 | 0.76 | 0.41 | -0.29 | .000 | |
| 1.56 | 0.59 | 1.86 | 0.71 | 0.46 | -0.30 | .000 | |
| 1.73 | 0.79 | 2.15 | 0.80 | 0.53 | -0.42 | .000 | |
| 1.79 | 0.74 | 2.24 | 0.85 | 0.57 | -0.45 | .000 | |
| 1.45 | 0.51 | 2.74 | 0.82 | 1.94 | -1.29 | .000 | |
Concurrent Validity with PSP/3
| SPS/3 | 3IP | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agriculture | Hoteliers | Arts | Automotive | Literature | Economy | Building | Aesthetics | Forensic | Computer | Linguistic | Military | Music | Health | Science | Social | Technology | Transport | Tourism | |
| .74 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .65 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .66 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .69 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .79 | .82 | .62 | |||||||||||||||||
| .74 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .67 | .59 | ||||||||||||||||||
| .73 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .83 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .81 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .70 | .62 | ||||||||||||||||||
| .82 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .66 | .61 | ||||||||||||||||||
| .70 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .73 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .63 | .70 | .71 | |||||||||||||||||
| .69 | .65 | .73 | .72 | ||||||||||||||||
| .70 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .61 | |||||||||||||||||||
| .77 | |||||||||||||||||||
Note. Only correlations which explain more than 33% of variance in the relationship between the two variables are reported.
Model Matrix of Explorative Factorial Analysis
| Area | Things | Leisure | Culture | People |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Automotive | -.170 | .061 | .024 | |
| Technology | -.079 | -.140 | -.042 | |
| Transport | .068 | .095 | .087 | |
| Agriculture | .330 | -.152 | -.271 | |
| Military | -.122 | -.221 | .261 | |
| Aesthetics | -.255 | .147 | -.007 | |
| Hoteliers | .332 | .163 | .128 | |
| Tourism | .027 | .031 | .319 | |
| Music | -.049 | -.289 | -.013 | |
| Arts | .056 | -.162 | ||
| Literature | .019 | -.033 | .069 | |
| Science | .001 | -.076 | .088 | |
| Buildings | .134 | .031 | .218 | |
| Forensic | -.032 | -.033 | -.195 | |
| Economy | .150 | .181 | -.018 | |
| Social | -.027 | .360 | -.194 | .369 |
Note. Loadings higher than .40 are highlighted, and areas are ordered by factor.
Four-Factor Fit Indexes for CFA Models Tested with Maximum Likelihood (N = 1117)
| Factor | χ2 | RMSEA | CFI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 402.057*** | 72 | .064 (.058 – .070) | .955 | |
| 566.061*** | 85 | .071 (.066 – .077) | .915 | |
| 74.553*** | 17 | .055 (.043 – .068) | .980 | |
| 44.110*** | 11 | .052 (.036 – .068) | .977 |
***p < .001.
Figure 2Standardised estimates for the things factor.
Figure 3Standardised estimates for the leisure factor.
Figure 4Standardised estimates for the culture factor.
Figure 5Standardised estimates for the people factor.
Model Matrix of Explorative Factorial Analysis
| Area | Social | Realistic | Investigative | Artistic | Conventional | Enterprising |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social | -.031 | .000 | .071 | .073 | -.063 | |
| Health | -.055 | -.102 | .061 | .049 | .027 | |
| Forensic | .043 | -.028 | -.164 | -.260 | .033 | |
| Technology | .012 | -.041 | .063 | -.150 | .126 | |
| Automotive | -.005 | .077 | -.080 | -.112 | .093 | |
| Transport | .012 | .016 | -.110 | .005 | -.182 | |
| Agriculture | -.001 | -.063 | .317 | .168 | -.042 | |
| Military | .174 | -.221 | -.183 | -.102 | -.048 | |
| Literature | .017 | .002 | .031 | .005 | -.075 | |
| Science | .126 | -.010 | .042 | -.060 | .055 | |
| Arts | .013 | -.032 | -.141 | -.211 | -.030 | |
| Aesthetics | .217 | .211 | .319 | .113 | -.328 | |
| Music | .131 | .061 | -.121 | -.009 | -.236 | |
| Buildings | .050 | -.019 | -.132 | .241 | .087 | |
| Computer | -.068 | -.198 | -.147 | -.022 | -.128 | |
| Economy | .284 | -.074 | .141 | -.087 | -.232 | |
| Tourism | .047 | .062 | -.081 | -.026 | -.020 | |
| Hoteliers | -.004 | -.288 | .129 | .175 | -.034 | |
| Linguistic | .274 | .162 | -.278 | .107 | -.098 | -.360 |
Note. Loadings higher than .40 are highlighted, and areas are ordered by factor.
RIASEC Six-Factor Fit Indexes for CFA Models Tested with Maximum Likelihood (N = 1117)
| χ2 (p) | RMSEA | CFI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2070.655*** | 137 | .112 (.108 – .117) | .757 | |
| 979.845*** | 237 | .053 (.050 – .056) | .920 |
***p < .001.
Figure 6Standardised estimates for the RIASEC model.
Pearson Correlations Matrix Between the Six RIASEC Factors
| Factor | Realistic | Investigative | Artistic | Social | Enterprising | Conventional |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| .188** | ||||||
| .102** | .325** | |||||
| .023 | .276** | .240** | ||||
| .030 | .130** | .281** | .372** | |||
| .388** | .325** | .172** | .176** | .182** |
Note. In the diagonal Cronbach alpha. In brackets indexes corrected with Sperman-Brown prophecy formula assuming all the scales were composed by 5 items.
**p < .01.