16.30 martini

BRIEF ITALIAN RIASEC SCALE: BRIEF ITALIAN RIASEC SCALE: PRELIMINARY RESULTSPRELIMINARY RESULTS

WORKSHOP WORKSHOP

““SCIENCE EDUCATION AND GUIDANCE IN SCHOOL: THE WAY FORWARDSCIENCE EDUCATION AND GUIDANCE IN SCHOOL: THE WAY FORWARD””

Florence, Auditorium SantFlorence, Auditorium Sant’’Apollonia Apollonia

2121--22 22 OctoberOctober, 2013, 2013

Mara Martini, Paola Gatti, & Chiara Ghislieri

University of TurinDepartment of Psychology

Introduction

Professional interests are a central topic in career guidance research and practice, in particular for adolescents. One of the most important theories was proposed by Holland (1959) who identifies

six kinds of interests and organize them

in the RIASEC (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional) model. To measure the interests defined by Holland’s theory in career counseling projects, were developed complex instruments such as the Self-Directed Search (SDS; Holland, Fritzsche, Powell, 1997), extensively used also in Italy in the Poláček’s

(2003)

version. A shorter free domain instrument was recently proposed by Armstrong, Allison and Rounds (2008).

2

Theoretical backgroundTheoretical background Research and methodResearch and method Results and conclusionsResults and conclusions

1. Holland’s model of interests

3

The six interestThe six interest--based categoriesbased categories proposed by Holland (1959; 1997) to describe individuals and occupations are:

By matching an individual’s interests to occupational characteristics by Holland category, it is possible to identify potential career choices useful for career counseling programs (McDaniel, Snell, 1999; Armstrong et al., 2008).


RRealisticealistic Investigativenvestigative

Conventionalonventional AArtisticrtistic

Enterprisingnterprising SSocial ocial

1. Advantages and limitations of Holland’s model

As Guichard

and Huteau

(2003), among the others, put in evidence, the widely used Holland’s model shows some advantages but also some limitations:Advantages:Advantages:

-

it is immediately usable in the career counseling practice: instruments as SDS allow to apply directly the model in guidance projects

-

it shows an acceptable validity: several studies put in evidence a substantial coherence between the Holland’s typology and the

educational/occupational choices

-

it is in a halfway point between diagnostic and educative guidance approaches.

Limitations:Limitations:-

it reduces the whole range of professions to six categories-

it does not evidence relations of the six types of interests to parental education and to aspects as sex or social prestige

-

some studies question the six-vertexes structure of the model: C and E types seem quite near, so we can imagine a pentagon more than an

hexagon (Vrignaud, Bernaud, 1994).

4


2. Aim of the study

The present work is aimed to propose preliminary analyses preliminary analyses on an Italian adaptationon an Italian adaptation of Armstrong and colleagues’

(2008) public domain scales, which are not yet available in Italian.

As Armstrong and colleagues (2008) put in evidence, a shorter free domain scale to measure occupational interests can be particularly useful in research projectsuseful in research projects:

-

where the length of current RIASEC measures may hinder certain types of research

-

where the copyright restrictions used by test publishers may limit the types of research questions that you can ask above all

in not funded projects (see also Goldberg, 1999).

5


1. Participants and procedure

Respondents in this study consisted of 407 students in the North-West of Italy.

Among the 407 respondents, 33

filled in also the SDS scale in the Poláček’s

version.

6

407respondents

SexFemale:

57.9%

Male:

42.1%

Year of high school4th:

28%

5th: 72%

City/townAsti: 64.1%Cuneo: 24.8%Turin: 11.1%

Type of high schoolScience: 47.7%Artistic:

23.1%

Humanities: 10.1% Socio-pedagogical: 9.8%Technical: 9.3%

Research and methodResearch and methodTheoretical backgroundTheoretical background Results and conclusionsResults and conclusions

2. Measures

7


The brief free domain RIASEC scale was

developed by

Armstrong and colleagues (2008) in two versions, selecting 8+8 items for each RIASEC type from the Interest Profiler (Lewis, Rivkin, 1999) and the O’NET occupations. Each version of the scale is made up of 48 items on a five-point Likert-type response format (1 strongly dislike - 5 strongly like).For the present work, Set A and Set B of interest profile items were translated in Italian and checked by the method of back translation. We will show just the results obtained on Set A,

because the sample for Set B is being collected.

The Self-Directed Search (Holland et al., 1997; Poláček, 2003) is made up of 228 items, including activities, competency statements occupations, and self-ratings of abilities, with 38 items used to measure each type.

3. Analyses

We used the software SPSS 20 for the analyses:After descriptive analysis of each item (M, SD, Asymmetry,

Kurtosis), we calculated Exploratory Factor Analysis and Cronbach’s

alpha for each factor

Correlations among the factors and analysis of variance have been then investigated

Using the subsample of 33 respondents, correlations between the two instruments were finally analysed.

8


1. EFA (a)

9

Results and conclusionsResults and conclusionsTheoretical backgroundTheoretical background Research and methodResearch and method

Items Loading

ENGLISH ITEMS ITALIAN TRANSLATION

R

Fix a broken faucet 6. Aggiustare un rubinetto rotto .82

Operate a grinding machine in a factory 5 Far funzionare una macchina in una fabbrica .76

Assemble products in a factory 7. Assemblare pezzi in fabbrica .75

Install flooring in houses 8. Installare il parquet nelle case .71

Lay brick or tile 2. Mettere mattoni o tegole .70

Assemble electronic parts 4. Assemblare pezzi elettronici .66

Work on an offshore oil-drilling rig 3. Lavorare su una piattaforma petrolifera .60

Test the quality of parts before shipment 1. Verificare la qualità

dei pezzi prima della

spedizione

.34

Conduct biological research 5. Condurre una ricerca biologica .94

I

Do research on plants or animals 3. Fare ricerca su piante o animali .84

Work in a biology lab 7. Lavorare in un laboratorio di biologia .83

Develop a new medical treatment or procedure 4. Sviluppare nuove cure o procedure mediche .78

Study animal behavior 2. Studiare il comportamento degli animali .69

Study the structure of the human body 1. Studiare la struttura del corpo umano .65

Make a map of the bottom of an ocean 8. Tracciare una mappa del fondale di un oceano .64

Study whales and other types of marine life 6. Studiare le balene o altre tipologie di vita marina .63

Factorial solution: 6 Factors,

51.43% Explained variance; GLS method, Promax

rotation.

1. EFA (b)

10


Items Loading


A

Write a song 4. Scrivere una canzone .81

Direct a play 2. Dirigere un’opera teatrale .79

Play a musical instrument 6. Suonare uno strumento musicale .76

Conduct a musical choir 1. Condurre un coro musicale .73

Write books or plays 5. Scrivere un libro o un’opera teatrale .72

Design sets for plays 8. Disegnare la scenografia per opere teatrali .44

Design artwork for magazines 3. Disegnare illustrazioni per i giornali .36

Perform stunts for a movie or television show 7. Eseguire acrobazie in un film o in uno spettacolo televisivo

.25

Help people with family-related problems 5. Aiutare le persone con problemi in famiglia .90

S

Help people who have problems with drugs oralcohol

3. Aiutare persone con problemi di droga o alcool .84

Supervise the activities of children at a camp 6. Supervisionare le attività

di bambini in campeggio .76

Teach children how to read 7. Insegnare a leggere ai bambini .72

Help elderly people with their daily activities 8. Aiutare le persone anziane nelle loro attività

quotidiane

.72

Do volunteer work at a non-profit organization 2. Fare il volontario in un’organizzazione non profit .66

Give career guidance to people 1. Dare consigli sulla loro carriera alle persone .48

Teach an individual an exercise routine 4. Insegnare a un individuo esercizi da svolgere quotidianamente

.40



rotation.

1. EFA (c)

11


Items Loading


E

Manage a clothing store 5. Gestire un negozio di vestiti .68

Operate a beauty salon or barber shop 4. Gestire un salone di bellezza o un negozio di barbiere

.66

Run a toy store 8. Aprire un negozio di giocattoli .42

Sell merchandise at a department store 3. Vendere merce in un grande magazzino .40

Manage the operations of a hotel 2. Gestire le attività

di un hotel .38

Sell houses 7. Vendere case .36

Sell restaurant franchises to individuals 1. Vendere esercizi commerciali in franchising -

Manage a department within a large company 6. Dirigere un’unità

di lavoro di una grande azienda -

Use a computer program to generate customer bills 3. Utilizzare un programma computerizzato di fatturazione

.85

C

Maintain employee records 4. Aggiornare la documentazione degli impiegati .81

Inventory supplies using a hand-held computer 2. Fare l’inventario dei rifornimenti con un computer .79

Keep shipping and receiving records 8. Occuparsi della spedizione/ricezione di documenti .78

Generate the monthly payroll checks for an office 1. Predisporre i cedolini mensili degli stipendi in un ufficio

.78

Compute and record statistical and other numerical data

5. Elaborare e registrare dati numerici e statistici .77

Handle customers’

bank transactions 7. Gestire le transazioni bancarie dei clienti .76

Operate a calculator 6. Usare un calcolatore .75



rotation.

2. Correlations (a)

12N = 407 * p <.05; ** p <.01


Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. R

2. I .26** -

3. A .13** .28** -

4. S .01 .33** .33** -

5. E .26** .14** .18** .15** -

6. C .26** .01 -.07 -.05 .45** -

Cronbach’s Alpha .85 .91 .83 .88 .76 .92

M 10.33 23.67 22.73 25.48 17.82 11.61

SD 7.10 8.25 9.26 8.36 8.98 6.09

2. Correlations (b)

13

N = 33 * p <.05; ** p <.01


Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. R-

2. I .30 -

3. A -.02 .44** -

4. S -.05 .52** .61** -

5. E .23 .61** .18 .19 -

6. C .10 .01 .09 -.18 .05 -

7. R_sds_activities .70** .16 .04 -.16 .24 .12 -

8. I_sds_activities .17 .72** .32 .29 .37* .05 .25 -

9. A_sds_activities -.20 .37* .71** .55** .04 -.08 -.03 .42* -

10. S_sds_activities -.15 .44 .43* .73** .05 -.34 -.31 .28 .44** -

11. E_sds_activities -.07 .01 -.11 -.17 .16 .22 .24 .21 -.01 -.15 -

12. C_sds_activities .17 -.11 -.31 -.28 .16 .37* .43* .18 -.33 -.31 .50** -

2. Correlations (c)

14N = 33 * p <.05; ** p <.01


Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. R-

2. I .30 -

3. A -.02 .44** -

4. S -.05 .52** .61** -

5. E .23 .61** .18 .19 -

6. C .10 .01 .09 -.18 .05 -

7. R_sds .58** -.15 .04 -.23 .26 .08 -

8. I_sds .20 .75** .25 .18 .43* .07 .26 -

9. A_sds -.13 .30 .71** .56** .01 -.10 -.01 .20 -

10. S_sds -.12 .30 .31 .64** .08 -.37* -.08 .08 .51** -

11. E_sds -.07 -.03 -.20 -.22 .32 .02 .35* .01 -.05 .14 -

12. C_sds .16 -.20 -.14 -.31 .07 .19 .48** .07 -.01 -.08 .63** -

3. Analysis of variance

15


T-test

puts

in evidence

gendergender differences:

-

males

show higher

levels

of

RR

[t(120,08) = -5.25, p < .001] and

CC

[t(314) = -2.42, p < .01

] than

females

-females

show higher

levels

of

SS

[t(174,54) = 5.63, p < .001]

than

males.

Anova

puts

in evidence

some differences

among

ttypesypes of high of high

schoolschool:-Humanities and Science show higher

levels

of

II

than

Artistic,

Socio-pedagogical

and Technical

[F(4, 401) = 8.51, p <

.001]

-Socio-pedagogical shows

higher

levels

of

SS

than

Technical,

Artistic, and Science; moreover Humanities and Science

show

higher

levels

of

SS

than

Technical [F(4, 400) = 4.75, p <

.005].

16

The exploratory factor analysis results in a six-factor solution, in line with expectations. Factor loadingsFactor loadings of the items and internal internal consistencyconsistency of the subscales are satisfactory. An exception is the E subscale: factor loadings of items are quite low and two of “E items”

merge into the C subscale, so

they were eliminated.

Consistently with the expectations, then, each subscale of the brief instrument correlatescorrelates with the correspondent activities subscale of the SDS and with the correspondent SDS profile. An exception is, also in this case, the E subscale that does not correlate with the E SDS

activities subscale nor with the E SDS profile. The C brief subscale, then, doesn’t correlate with the C SDS profile.

Our results are quite coherent with Armstrong

and colleagues’

results. Cronbach’s alpha

for

all

the subscales

is

satisfying, ranging

between

.76 and .92. ConvergentConvergent validityvalidity (correlations

of

the brief

scale with

the SDS activities

and SDS profiles), then, is

coherent

with

Armstrong

and colleagues’

results, with

the exception

of

E and C subscales.


4. Discussions and conclusions

4. Conclusions – limitations and further developments

Among the limitations of this study: the dimension of the sub-sample which filled in the SDS so that we

could not deeply test convergent validitythe ongoing administration of Set B so that we could not compare the

two versions of the scale.

Among possible developments of this study:to administer both scales (brief free domain RIASEC scale and SDS) to a

larger sample of participants in order to measure correlations

and to test the brief scale also through a CFA, providing in this way further evidence of the construct validity (Hinkin, 1998)to administer the scale to a wider well-balanced Italian sample in order to

develop norms for this population and use the instrument extensively in career counselingto develop a questionnaire useful for measuring other constructs

in order to test discriminant and criterion related validity of the scale (Hinkin, 1998).

17


4. Conclusions – implications for practice

The results of our study show that the brief RIASEC scale has good

psychometric properties and may be thus useful for research aimsuseful for research aims.

This confirms Armstrong and colleagues’

(2008) considerations.

The scale seems particularly suitable for being used in preliminary

phases of guidance projects which have to deal with cost or time

restrictions. It can be adopted as an exercise and not as a test.

18


ReferencesArmstrong , P. I. Allison , W. Rounds , J. (2008). Development and initial validation of brief public domain RIASEC marker scales. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 287-299

Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Deary, I. Mervielde, F. Ostendorf, & F. De Fruyt

(Eds.). Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg University Press: Tilburg, The Netherlands.Guichard, J., Huteau, M. (2003). Psicologia dell’orientamento professionale. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey

questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104-121.

Holland, J. L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of

Counselling Psychology, 6, 35-45.

Holland, J. L., Powell, A., & Fritzsche, B. (1994). SDS professional user’s guide. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

Lewis, P., & Rivkin, D. (1999). Development of the O*NET interest profiler. Raleigh, NC: National Center

for O*NET Development.

McDaniel, M. A., & Snell, A. F. (1999). Holland’s theory and occupational information. Journal of Vocational Behavior: Special Issue on Holland’s Theory, 55, 74–85.

Polàček, K. (eds.) (2003). Manuale

dell’adattamento

italiano

dell’SDS

Self-

Directed Search di

J.L. Holland, A.B. Powell, B.A. Fritzsche. Firenze: Organizzazioni

Speciali.

Vrignaud, P., & Bernaud, J.L.

(1994). Les intérets des Français soint-ils hexagonaux? 1. Élemént pour la validation du modele des intérets de Holland (RIASEC) en France. In Question d’orientation, 1, 17-39.

19

16.30 martini

Technology

theoretical background research

theoretical background 1

efa research

cronbachs alpha

directed search

promax rotation

gls method

method results