1 / 18

What I want to do when I grow up?

What I want to do when I grow up?. How does someone choose a career path or career transition? Interests? Skills and talents? Personality? Many tests exist to measure these and more (confidence in one’s skills, perception of career barriers, dysfunctional career thoughts, etc.)

Leo
Download Presentation

What I want to do when I grow up?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What I want to do when I grow up? • How does someone choose a career path or career transition? • Interests? • Skills and talents? • Personality? • Many tests exist to measure these and more (confidence in one’s skills, perception of career barriers, dysfunctional career thoughts, etc.) INTERESTS = fairly stable over time (solidified at age 15)

  2. Help selecting a job • Interests are characteristics of personality • Interest inventories • 1st: Carnegie Interest Inventory • 2 big names: • Edward K. Strong Jr. • G. Fredric Kuder Most widely used: • Strong Vocational Interest Blank (1927) • Now Campbell Interest and Skill Survey = currently most widely used in research and practice • Kuder Preference Survey (1939)

  3. Genealogy STRONG • 1927:Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB)-Men • 1933: Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB)-Women • 1974, 1981: Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory (SCII) • 1985:Strong Interest Inventory (SII) Form T325 • 1994:Strong Interest Inventory (SII) Form T317 KUDER • 1934:Kuder Preference Record-Vocational • 1963:Kuder General Interest Survey (KGIS), Form E • 1966:Kuder Occupational Interest Survey (KOIS),Form D • 1985:Kuder Occupational Interest Survey (KOIS),Form DD • 1999: Kuder Career Search with Person Match (KCS)

  4. Traditional Approaches Originally, these 2 tests of vocational interest differ in 2 main ways: • Origin of scaled scores: • Empirical (Criterion-group) vs deductive (broad areas) • Item format: Absolute (likert – like, dislike, indifferent) vs relative

  5. Strong: SVIB (early versions) • 400 items, likes of dislikes related to occupations and leisure activities. • Items weighted on frequency in particular occupation relative to general population • # occupations: Men: 54; Women: 32 • N = ~300 per occupation • Mean = 50; SD = 10

  6. Strong: SVIB (early versions) • Reliability: .80s to .90s (split half and short test-retest) • Long term test-retest .60 • Pattern of interest remains stable over 22 years • Validity: good prediction of job satisfaction • Criticisms: Gender bias and atheoretical

  7. Strong: SCII • Addressed gender bias (single form) • Theoretical: Holland’s 6 personality factors based on interests

  8. Holland’s RIASEC (1959, 1966, 1997)

  9. Strong: SCII • 325 items • 7 types: • Occupations • school subjects • Activities • Amusements • types of people • preference between two activities • your characteristics

  10. Strong: SCII • Scores: • Section 1: General Occupational Themes (Holland) • Section 2: admin (to avoid test admin,or scoring errors) • Section 3: Summary of basic interests (e.g., science, athletics, sales) relative to overall population • T-scores (M=50, SD=10) • Section 4: scores relative to each occupation and to 6 general themes (overall pop) • From very dissimilar to very similar • New 1994: personal style scale: work style, leadership style, learning env., risk taking.

  11. Strong: SII • Norms: 109 occupations (some divided by sex) • Recruitment? • 25yo, >3yrs, satisfied, typical tasks • Reliability: • Internal consistency: .80s-.90s • Test-retest: .80s-.90s *However, no reliability data for the admin.scores • Validity: • Predictive versus concurrent • Good evidence (half cases followed for 3-18yrs end up in consistent field) • But what about the other half? • Several studies based on previous versions

  12. Kuder:KOIS • 100 triads of alternative activities • Pick the most preferred and least preferred • 30 minutes • Data on 10 general occupation interests • Current version is also criterion-based • Occupation: • Criteria: employed in the area for 3yrs min and be satisfied • 109 occupational groups (33 men+women, 32 men only, 11 female only--- covers 76 occupations) • College major: • Criteria: college seniors satisfied with major • 26 college major groups (14 men+women, 8 men only, 4 female only--- covers 40 majors)

  13. Kuder: KOIS • Scores/Report: • contrast to all different occupations and majors • 6 sections (Example p464): • Dependability of the results (statement) • Vocational Interest Estimates: Rank order (%ile) interest patterns relative to norms of men and women separately • Outdoor, mechanical, computational, scientific, persuasive, artistic, literary, musical, social service, clerical • OCCUPATIONS***: rank order of occupational groups with most similar pattern of interests • COLLEGE MAJOR • Experimental scale (includes “Fake good” used for dependability) • RIASEC codes

  14. Kuder: KOIS • Norms: • groups formed from 1960s to 1990s • Attempted to get n=200 for each group (but 20 occ.and some majors <200) • Reliability: • Internal consistency (KR-20): .47 to .85 • Test-retest (short): .80-.95 • Stable over 30yrs • Validity • Predictive: 50% worked in suggested field (test taking in high school) • Closer correspondence interests-field in College graduate HOWEVER: most studies from the 1970s

  15. Last points on interest tests • Generalizations about interest measures • Interest pattern quite reliable (stable), but not perfect • Respectable degree of validity (although overlap between group is not addressed, only differences) • Old-fashioned psychometrically (item response theory, etc.) • Users are satisfied, even if serious flaws are pointed out! (not high-stakes) • Gender bias: direct individuals in gender-typed careers

  16. Last points on interest tests • Vocational interest is not success • Only compares to people satisfied • Only measure of success = not fired after 3 yrs • Must consider other factors, such as match of skills to job and ability • Jagger et al. 1992: • Good match between aptitude in high school and current job = good evaluation by employer 8yrs later • Interest in high school did not predict job satisfaction or performance 8yrs later • Add confidence, self-efficacy, personnality measures…

  17. The human side of science: what is the archetypal researcher personality? (just for fun!) http://www.labonline.com.au/science/feature_article/item_032005b.asp Science Advisory Board (international community of more than 23,000 life science and medical professionals). Question: Are there some personalities that are better suited than others to a scientific career in life science? • Adapted the methodologies of various personality tests and used a detailed questionnaire specifically designed to reflect the unique aspects of scientists' interests, values, motives and opinions. • 76 questions, describe their behaviour when making a decision, searching for information, reacting to change and interacting with others.

  18. The human side of science: what is the archetypal researcher personality? (just for fun!)

More Related