Person. indicrd. Drfl Vol. 9, No. I, pp. 7-13, 1988 Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved

0191-8869 88 S3.130 -0.00 Copyright c 1988 Pergamon Journals Ltd

SEX AND PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES IN OCCUPATIONAL

INTERESTS

BRUCE KIRKCALDY

Psychosomatic Department, University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strdsse 9,500O Cologne 41. F.R.G

(Receked 21 October 1986)

Summary-Females differed significantly compared to males along several interest dimensions-they displayed less interest in technical trades and technical-scientific occupations, and were more inclined to select design-oriented and social-educational occupations. High trait neurotics were inclined to choose social+ducational interests-as did extraverts. Extraversion was negatively correlated with the higher order ‘task-related’ interest factor, and positively corre!ated with ‘person- and nature-related’ interests (factor III). Psychoticism was negatively correlated with interest in commercial and administrative jobs (both loaded on the ‘task related’ factor). Ss characterized as dissimulants (L+) showed a greater affinity towards nutritional trades and administrative organisations.

INTRODUCTION

Individual differences in personality and sex appear implicated in occupational choice. Males and females frequently respond differently on interest inventories. Campbell (1971) surveyed base rate popularity of occupational items between sexes; amongst the most favoured vocations for males were those of inventor, aeroplane pilot, college professor, architect, and rancher, whereas the five highest ranked female occupations included interior decorator, artist, musician, costume designer and novelist. Tyler (1965) reported that females placed high values on aesthetic (beauty and art), religious (mystical experience), and social (assisting others) dimensions, whilst males were inclined towards theoretical and political values. In a study implementing the General Interest Survey (Kuder, 1975), sex differences were displayed on all 10 scales, being particularly pronounced on the mechanical (boys scoring higher) and social service scales (girls demonstrating a marked preference for such interests). Consistent with these findings, Irle and Allehoff (1986) found females preferred design-oriented and social-educational occupations, in contrast to males who selected technical trades and technical-scientific professions.

Individuals seem to select interests congruent with specific personality attributes. For instance, extraversion is characterized by sociable, assertive and carefree behaviour, traits which may well be beneficial in professsions requiring numerous contacts, social interaction, ease of expression and cooperation with others. Johansson (1970) contrasted item responses on the Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB) for a group of extraverts and introverts. Extraverts were inclined to select items associated with dealing with persons and social situations, whereas introverted Ss chose items reflecting a sense of being alone. Construct validity of the occupational introversion-extraversion scale involved scoring over one hundred male occupational samples along this scale. The ranking of occupations revealed a dimension of interpersonal contact, at one extreme of which was the extraverted pole corresponding to such occupations as sales’ groups, governors, and chamber of commerce executives, and the other associated with introversion (farmers, astronomers and physicists).

Costa, McCrae and Holland (1984) examined the relationship between Holland’s vocational typology and the neuroticism-extraversion-openness model of personality amongst 217 male and 144 female Ss (aged between 21-87 yr). The correlations between self-directed search and NE0 inventory scores revealed a strong association between artistic and investigative interests, and openness to experience, as well as between social and enterprising interests and extraversion. Individuals who expressed interests primarily in conventional occupations were characterized by being closed to experience. Johnson, Flammer and Nelson (1975) investigated the construct validity of the SVIB occupational scales. Of the five personality factors derived from the California Personality Inventory, extraversion, emotional sensitivity, and independent thought were the three

7

8 BRIXE KIRKCALDY

yielding the highest correlations with the vocational interest scales (adjustment and conventionality produced negligible associations with SVIB scales). Extraverted Ss preferred such occupations as those of social worker, school superintendent, and personnel director. whereas introverts selected dentist, chemist, farmer, engineer, etc.

Two personality variables which have recently witnessed a lot of attention are those of psychoticism (high scoring Ss are typically quarrelsome, antisocial, impersonal and irresponsible), and social desirability (conformist, orthodox, agreeable, etc.), the latter involving attributes which are almost the obverse of psychoticism. Kirkcaldy (1986) had found that clinical Ss scoring high on the P(sychoticism) dimension (independent, non-conforming, sensation-seeking, etc.) were less likely to select administrative jobs. Furthermore, the Lie scale, itself a substantive personality dimension (agreeable, closed to expression and conscientious) was related to “. . . preference for those vocations connected with administrative organization and commerce (both scales highly interrelated and significantly loaded on a higher-order factor involving interpersonal skills), and negatively correlated with interest in occupations associated with nutrition, literature, as well as the humanities.”

Swatko (198 I) examined job aspiration, personality, and non-traditional attitudes of women (258 paying- and receiving-tellers) in a single work environment. Non-traditionality was operationalized by the desire to use the title “MS” when offered the opportunity to do so. Non-traditional (high trait P?) Ss revealed high scores on the investigative and enterprising scales of the Vocational Preference Inventory, and were also inclined to aspire for occupations in which males were prevalent, but no reliable differences were observed in the prestige level of future aspirations.

Several questions emerge in this study’s attempt to focus on the relationship between personality and occupational interests. What evidence is there that primary interest scales coalesce into higher-order interest factors, and to what degree is predictive validity between individual differences and occupational interest accentuated by consideration of such second-order interest dimensions? Do male and female participants differ in their selection of occupational preferences? Do major personality variables, such as extraversion or psychoticism, determine the choice of vocational interests?

METHOD

The original sample pool comprised 76 Ss (37 females and 39 males), ranging between 19-60 yr (mean age of 33 yr) from diverse occupational backgrounds in the area of Duesseldorf, F.R.G. Thirty-six per cent of Ss were engaged in a social+ducational employment, 34% worked in commercial or administrative jobs, 22% were involved in technical trades or technical-scientific professions, and the remainder were employed in less clearly definable job categories, e.g. artistic, literary and design-related. One of the Ss was unemployed at the time of test-taking.

They were required to complete the Irle and Allehoff revised Occupational Interest Test (“Berufs-Interessen-Test”), comprising 81 items (9 items covering each of nine vocational interest domains), using a l-5 response format; they were requested to respond on a 5 point rating scale expressing the degree of interest or disinterest they felt towards a particular job. The entries ranged from ‘5’, corresponding to ‘enjoy very much’, through ‘indifferent’ (3), to ‘strong dislike’ (I). Ss were cautioned not to consider aspects of differential salaries, nor emphasize aspects of social prestige associated with a position, and educational attainments or professional training required for particular occupations. In addition, they were administered the revised German version of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R: Eysenck, Eysenck and Barrett, 198.5) which included all IO1 original items of the EPQ together with 27 new psychoticism items. The mean and standard deviation scores along the four personality dimensions were consistent with those reported by Ruth (I 986) in a recent large scale West German study.

RESULTS

Correlational and factorial analysis

The forced-choice method implies that the selection of interests will not be independent of each other. The ipsative method of assessing interests, produce bipolar higher-order factors of

Sex and personality differences in occupational interests 9

occupational preferences derived on the basis of orthogonal factor analysis. In contrast. the free-choice (5 point rating) inventory, enables Ss to respond positively to a variety of occupations, hence the intercorrelation matrix is characterized by a series of positive correlations. There is a fairly substantial degree of interrelatedness between scales-the magnitude of the correlation coefficients range from -0.02 (relationship between social educational and technical trade) to +0.59 (administrative and commercial occupational interests).

Principal component factor analysis of the occupational interest scales revealed that three factors had eigenvalues exceeding the conventional cut-off > 1.0. These factors accounted for over 50% of the variance. By rotating several components of the orthogonal simple structure (varimax) a more psychologically coherent three dimensional factor pattern was obtained. The first factor exhibited substantial loadings on the scales, technical trade (0.73), technical-scientific (0.70) commercial trades (0.64). and administrative trades (0.59); it appears to focus on ‘task-oriented’ elements, in contrast for example, to the second factor (17.01% variance), labelled most appropriately, ‘creative-expressive’, and exhibiting the highest loadings on the scales design- oriented (0.77), and literary and social scientific (0.68) occupations. Finally, the third factor extracted (13.95% variance), showed particularly high loadings on nutritional trades (0.50), agricultural (0.72) and social educational occupations (0.56), and may be considered a ‘nature- or person-related’ interest dimension.

Occupational interest profiles between sexes

Table 2 reveals that sex differences existed on four of the BIT scales (males yielding significantly higher interest scores on the scales, technical trades, and technical-scientific occupations, in contrast to females who displayed significantly higher scores on the design-related and social- educational occupations). The values of Wilks lambda (0.68), the canonical correlation (0.56), and the group centroids, reveal that the sexes can be relatively effectively separated on the basis of the discriminant function (hi-squared(df 9) = 25.30, P < 0.003), resulting in a high overall hit in terms of rate of correct classifications (75% of the individuals were correctly allocated to their respective criterion, ‘sex’ group).

Factor scores were calculated (on the basis of varimax rotation) for Ss on each of the three higher-order occupational factors. Biserial correlations were computed between these scores and

Table I. Intercorrelations between occupational interest scales

l-f GT TS NT AW CT A0 LS SE

l-f 0.10 0.52*** 0.38.‘. 0.30” 0.40*** 0.38*** 0.01 -0.02

GT 0.07 0.54*** 0.18 0.46*** 0.25. 0.54*** 0.24’

TS 0.18 0.04 0.42*** 0.34.. 0.19 -0.21

NT 0.40*** 0.45*** 0.44*** 0.27’ 0.31**

AW 0.26’ 0.1 I 0.13 0.31’.

CT 0.59.” 0.37”’ 0.13

A0 0.10 -0.01

LS 0.19

SE

l P < 0.05, l *P < 0.01. and l **P < 0.001 (n = 76).

(TT, technical trades; GT, gestalt trades; TS, technical scientific: NT, nutritional trades; AW.

agricultural work; CT, commercial trades; AO, administrative work; LS, literary and

social-scientific, and SE, social~ucational).

Table 2. A comparison of the means and standard deviations between males and

females on the occupational interest scales

l-f GT TS NT AW CT A0 LS SE

males

mean 21.46 27.26 24.49 24.54 28.18 25.03 19.15 25.18 27.95

SD 6.15 7.54 8.57 5.86 5.97 7.31 7.07 8.34 7.27 females

mean 16.68 31.12 19.74 25.82 27.65 23.65 18.15 27.65 31.94

SD 6.04 4.18 6.5 I 5.32 4.13 6.31 7.32 5.46 7.27

f-test II.18 7.02 6.95 0.95 0.19 0.73 0.36 2.16 4.97

P 0.002 0.01 0.02 NS NS NS NS NS 0.03

(l-f, technical trades; GT. design-related; TS, technical-scientific; NT, nutritional

trades; AW, agricultural work; CT, commercial trades; AO, administrative work;

LS. literary and social-scientific, and SE, social-zducational occupations).

10 BRUCE KIRKCALDY

sex (1 and 2, for males and females respectively); females revealed a marked tendency to avoid task-oriented (factor 1) jobs (r = -0.39, P < 0.01) and showed a strong preference for the creatively expressive (factor 2) category of interest (r = 0.40, P < 0.001). The correlation between sex and factor 3 (person- or nature-related) was not statistically significant (r = 0.09, P > 0.05).

Personality traits and occupational interests-bivariate correlations

Pearson product-moment correlations were performed between the nine BIT primary scales and the four personality dimensions (Table 3). The correlations ranged between -0.31 (psychoticism and administrative organization) to t-O.38 (extraversion and social educational; social desirability and administrative organization).

BIT projiles-quasi-neurotics and stables

Two groups were formed based on those I1 Ss with the highest and lowest neuroticism scores (corresponding to scores beyond about 1 SD either side of the sample mean). This decision to generate extreme groups serves to enhance effects of a trait which may not immediately be apparent using bivariate correlations. Such a procedure, which effectively eliminates the mid-range N- scorers, treat a continuous variable, e.g. neuroticism, as if it represented a dichotomous concept. The difference in N-scores between groups is per definition, highly significant (N+ 19.64 SD 2.29, N- 4.00 SD 1.26; t = 24.35, P < 0.001). Of the nine univariate comparisons, only one

(Social-educational) reached statistical significance (N+ 33.64 SD 6.30, N- 28.18 SD 7.97, P < 0.04).

BIT profiles-introcerts and extraverts

The same procedure was used to generate groups of introverts and extraverts allowing for group comparisons in occupational profile. A series of univariate F-ratios were computed to compare between group differences on the primary interest scales. Introverts were less inclined to select social-educational occupations compared to extraverts (E - 26.73 SD 6.24, E + 34.34 SD 6.69; F(I, 42) = 13.38, P < O.OOl), and were somewhat more interested in technical trades (E- 22.07 SD 7.79, E+ 18.55 SD 5.54; F = 3.00, P < 0.09). A profile comparison was then performed using linear discrimination analysis. There was evidence of heterogeneity of covariance dispersion matrices (Boxs M = 92.08, approx. F = 1.48, P < 0.03), but the multivariate statistic is relatively robust to violations of homogeneity. Despite only minor differences at the univariate level of analysis (TN and SE), the interest profile of extraverts and introverts do appear dissimilar [Rc = 0.60, LI = 0.64, x; = 16.52, P < 0.05(7)]. The standardized canonical discriminant coefficients were estimated in order to assess the relative importance of the interest variables. The major contribution was provided by the following four scales, social-educational (0.91), technical trades (-0.59). administrative organization (-0.51), and design-related interests (0.42).

BIT profiles-quasipsychotics and trait P - Ss

Ss exhibiting psychoticism scores 1 SD above the sample mean were assigned to the P+ group (n = 15), whilst scores below 1 SD (n = 16) were labelled as P- Ss. This cut-off criterion (+/- l SD) corresponds to eliminating about 60% of the total sample. The canonical discriminant function was not statistically significant (Rc = 0.45, /i = 0.80, xi = 5.55, P > 0.05); single uni- variate F-ratio comparisons across all interest scales, revealed that P+ and P- Ss were inclined to differ along the administrative organization dimension (P+ 17.47 SD 7.72, P- 21.69 SD5.68;

Table 3. Pearson product-moment correlations between the four personality dimensions, P(sychoticism).

E(xtravcrsion), N(euroticism), and L(Social Desirability), and the nine occupational interest scales

T-f GT TS NT AW CT A0 LS SE

P -0.19 -0.08 -0.08 -0.14 -0.16 -0.26’ -0.31** 0.07 0.09

E -0.15 0.08 -0.11 0.03 0.09 -0.06 -0.17 0.12 0.38’.

N -0.05 -0.03 -0.18 0.11 -0.00 -0.06 0.06 0.01 0.21

L 0.22 0.16 0.22 0.30.. 0.12 0.16 0.38** 0.08 -0.01

l F < 0.05, l *P -z 0.01, and l **P < 0.001.

(TT. technical trades; GT, design-related; TS, technical-scientific; NT, nutritional trades; AW. agricultural

work; CT, commercial trades; AO, administrative work; LS. literary and social-scientific, and SE.

social+ducational occupations).

Sex and personality differences in occupational interests II

F( 1,29) = 3.04, P < 0.10). Commercial trades, which had shown a positive correlation with P-

scores, did not differ significantly for high and low trait P Ss (P+ 23.27 SD 6.84; F(1. 29) = 1.28. P < 0.05).

Dissimulators and non-dissimulators

A group of dissimulators (L+ 16.89 SD 1.83, n = 9) and non-dissimulators (L - 2.38 SD 0.92. n = 8) were generated (2 = 20.99, P c 0.001); multivariate profile analysis revealed that the difference between interest profiles did approach statistical significance (T-squared = 53.78. F(9,7) = 2.97, P < 0.10). The test for difference in profile variance was, however. significant (F(64.72) = 1.72, P < 0.02). Univariate independent-groups t-tests showed that although socially conforming Ss (L+) did tend to exhibit greater interest in commercial occupations, the difference did not reach statistical significance (t = 2.07, df 15, P < 0.10). The only scale on which these groups differed was the administrative one; L - Ss were disinclined to select such occupations (L + 23.00 SD 3.96, L- 13.50 SD 3.96; F( 1, 15) = 24.09, P < 0.001). Several comparisons approached statistical significance, however, such as commercial trades (L + 26.78 SD 5.67, L - 20.50 SD 6.80; F = 4.31), technical-scientific (L+ 24.33 SD 9.03, L- 16.75 SD 6.25; F = 3.95), and nutritional trades (L+ 29.67 SD 4.06, L- 24.25 SD 7.74; F = 3.38).

Bicariate correlations-personality traits and higher-order BIT factor scores

Individual factor scores (derived from principal factor analysis) were correlated with the personality variables. Extraversion was negatively correlated with factor 1, task-oriented interests (r = -0.25. P < 0.05). Neuroticism was unrelated to this factor (r = -0.11, P > 0.05). Psycho- ticism was also negatively (r = -0.28, P c 0.05), whilst Social Desirability (Lie-score) was significantly positively correlated to task-related interests (r = 0.31, P < 0.01). None of the personality traits correlated with factor 2 (creative-expressive). Furthermore, there was some indication that extraverts preferred those occupations of a person-oriented kind (factor 3) the correlation coefficient approaching statistical significance (r = 0.21).

DISCUSSION

Psychometric qualities of the occupational interest scale (“BIT”)

Almost 60% of the correlation coefficients between interest scales were statistically significant. The magnitudes of these coefficients were particularly high between administrative organization and commercial trades, as well as design-related and literary and social-scientific vocational interests. An examination of the items constituting these scales reveal that administrative items relate to activities such as calculation and assessment, whilst commercial items involve directing, organizing, and advertising. The verbs used in the item-descriptions of design-related interests included decorate, paint, design and forge; its ‘sibling’ scale encompassed duties such as interviewing, authoring, translating and teaching.

Since the primary interest scales are themselves significantly intercorrelated, the reduction of the nine occupational interest scales to a smaller, more manageable set of orthogonal dimensions depicting the essential nature of the interest domain appears justified. This serves both to reduce conceptual complexity and scale redundancy. The higher-order dimensions which emerged were not dissimilar from other studies, thus lending credence to the stability of a two or three factor model of occupational interest, incorporating task-related (technical trades, technical-scientific, commer- cial and administrative occupations), creative-expression (design-oriented, literary and social- scientific), and person- and nature-related (nutritional, agricultural and social-educational inter- ests) dimensions. For instance, Irle and Allehoff (1986) had demonstrated that two major occupational interest factors can be extracted using factor analysis of the primary scales for the revised free-choice, multi-item rating scale of the BIT; one is loaded on technical trades, and technical-scientific occupations-as well as commercial and organizational interest in females- and the other, with common loadings on literary and social-scientific, nutritional trades, design-related, and social-educational interests.

It contrasts somewhat from a previous study by Kirkcaldy (1986), who found that of those four higher-order interest factors extracted from the Irle’s Occupational Interest Test with latent roots

12 BRUCE KIRICALDY

greater than one, the first two corresponded to a business-oriented dimension (loaded positively on commercial and administrative interests, and negatively on nutritional trades, agriculture. and design-related vocations), encompassing “. . . a dimension ranging from more isolated interests with minimal opportunity for communication to those enterprising, social interactive tasks,” and an investigativeecreative factor (positively loaded on technical trades, nutritional, and technical-scientific occupations). On that occasion howevet, forced choice items (ipsative) were implemented, which involves scores being expressed as deviations from an individual’s own mean.

Se.u di&erences in occupational interests

An affirmative response must be given to the second question. Do sexes differ in their preference for occupational interests? The occupational interest profiles do appear to discriminate validly

between males and females. Males were inclined to select interests connected with technical trades (repair of a diesel motor, or assemblage of industrial machines), and of a technical-scientific nature, e.g. measure electrical voltage of lightning flashes and develop novel synthetic products. Females were likely to avoid such occupations, preferring instead, occupations related to design, such as jewellery enamelling, and furniture design, as well as social-eduational vocations (including helping professions, assisting ex-prisoners in finding employment, arranging recuperation or convalescence programmes for sick people). At the higher-order interest level of analysis, females emerged as less likely to choose the task-oriented jobs-which included not only the primary scales related to manipulation of tools, ‘TT’ and ‘TN’, but the manipulation of other objects and persons, ‘AO’ and ‘CT’. In addition, they were more inclined to select creatively expressive occupations, indicating a preference for more permissive, less structured work environments, allowing for artistic, emotional and introspective forms of expression. Despite the strong preference for social and humanistic occupations entailing social support functions (‘SE’) in which the personal attributes of sociability, understanding, and empathy are valued, the females did not seem to show high scores on the third second-order factor. This may be due to the other scales, agricultural and nutritional interests, which, combined with social*ducational occupations, form the composite ‘person- and

nature-related’.

Personality cariables and selectivity of vocational interests

Psychoticism was negatively correlated with commercial trades (lead an auction, design

newspaper advertisements for toothpaste, provision of good customer sales’ services, etc.), and administrative organization (deal with administrative documents, complete warehouse inventory, assessment of tax returns, etc.). This is compatible with previous findings (Kirkcaldy, 1986) in which P+ Ss have been demonstrated to avoid enterprising, business type occupations requiring the attributes of negotiation, sociability, and cooperation. As already mentioned, the two scales, administrative organization, and commercial trades share almost 36% common variance, and comparison of the nature of the items bears this similarity (item homogeneity) out. There were no striking differences, however, in the interest profile of extreme high and low P- scoring Ss.

Neuroticism revealed non-significant correlations with all primary interest scales. The highest

correlation coefficient was with social-educational occupations, and this effect gained in expression when the extreme group comparison was made; neurotics appear to select items associated with social welfare and education such as aiding delinquent children, counselling suicidal-prone persons and guiding criminal youths. This may represent the desire for (healthy), emotionally sensitive persons to assist other less self-sufficient individuals to cope with their problems. Introverted Ss were somewhat more inclined to choose technical trades, whereas their extraverted counterparts preferred social-educational tasks, requiring skills in counselling, guidance, and education. The generalized multivariate statistic for profile analysis between groups, did indicate that extraverts exhibit significantly different interest profiles (considering all nine scales simultaneously). It does lend partial support to the claim of Morris (1979), who surveyed studies relating extraversion-introversion to occupational interests and concluded that extraverts preferred jobs with minimal structure, emphasizing instead, person-contact and social interaction, in contrast to the introvert’s predeliction to analytical, technical, object-related professions.

Social desirability was significantly positively correlated with the scales, nutritional trades, and administrative organization. Furthermore, high trait L Ss did show a tendency to prefer technical

Sex and personality differences in occupational interests 13

trades, and technical-scientific occupations. The discriminant analysis did not however, emerge as statistically significant, suggesting that the first-order interest profiles are not as dissimilar as they

at first appear. In addition, fairly close relationships were highlighted between all personality variables, with the

exception of neuroticism, and the second-order interest factors. For instance, extraverts did tend to select person-centred occupations and avoid the task-related (technical trade, technical-scientific, commercial and administrative vocations) domains. Psychoticism was nega- tively correlated with factor 1, indicating that high P Ss share with extraverts, this tendency to avoid choosing task-related jobs. Social desirability was positively correlated with such occupations, and this may reflect the conventional aspects of these jobs, that is, a desire to work in well-structured environments with a high degree of predictability or routine involved in the tasks contained therein, e.g. clerical and numerical duties.

The findings do seem to support the claim that sex, and to a lesser extent, personality differences are important determinants of occupational interest; coherent and meaningful interpretations can be proposed when studies are not limited to first-order interest scales. It is evident however, that these relationships are tentative and further studies are required, implementing comparable psychological instruments, extended to wider populations covering diverse occupations, age groups, social classes, etc., in order to evaluate the stability and degree of substantive gener- alizability of these results. Furthermore, a distinction must be drawn between the ‘expressed’ interest, and the actual, overt engagement (‘manifest’ interest) in an occupation (Super and Crites, 1962); not only are people likely to differ with respect to the degree of familiarity of certain items, but knowing their degree of interest in an occupation is no guarantee that they will select work environments congruent with their. personalities (Furnham and Zacherl, 1986; Thomas and Robbins, 1979), and subjects may select identical jobs for quite different reasons (motives).

Acknowledgemenrs--I would like to express my thanks as usual to the Deutscheforschungsgememeinschaft, Bonn. F.R.G.. who kindly sponsored this research (Grant No. Jo 61/2-l).

REFERENCES

Campbell D. P. (1971) Manual for fhe Strong Vocnfional Interesr Blank. Stanford University Press, California. Costa P. T., McCrae R. R. and Holland J. L. (1984) Personality and vocational interests in an adult sample. J. uppl. Psychol.

69, 390-400. Eysenck H. J. and Eysenck S. B. G. (1975) Manual of the Eysenck Personafiry Questionnaire. Hodder and Stoughton,

London. Eysenck S. B. G., Eysenck H. J. and Barrett P. (1985) A revised version of the Psychoticism scale. Person. indirid. D@

6, 21-29. Furnham A. and Zacherl M. (1986) Personality and job satisfaction. Person. indicid. Diff: 7, 453-459. Irle M. and Allehoff W. (1986) Berufs-Interessen-Tesf, 2nd edn. Hogrefe, Goettigen. Johansson C. B. (1970) Strong Vocational Interest Blank introversion-extraversion and occupational membership. J.

Counsel. Psycho!. 17, 45 1455. Johnson R. W., Flammer D. P. and Nelson J. G. (1975) Multiple correlations between personality factors and SVIB

occupational scales. J. Counsel. Psycho/. 22, 217-222. Kirkcaldy B. D. (1986) The relationship between occupational interests and personality variables in a psychiatric group.

Person. individ. D# 7, 503-508. Kuder G. F. (1975) Kuder General Merest Surrey. Science Research Associates, Chicago. Morris L. W. (1979) Exrrarersion and Introcersion. An Interactional Perspective, pp. 102-I I I. Hemisphere. Washington,

D. C. Ruth W. Personal communication. IO September, 1986. Super D. E., and Crites J. 0. (1962) Appraising Vocational Fitness by Means of Psychological Tests. Harper, New York. Swatko M. K. (1981) What’s in a title. Personality, job aspirations, and the nontraditional woman. J. Voc. Behau. 18,

174-183. Thomas L. E. and Robbins P. 1. (1979) Personality and work environment congruence of mid-life career changers.

J. occupal. Psycho/. 52, 177-183. Tyler L. (1965) The Psvchology of Human Differences, 3rd edn. Appleton Century Crofts, New York.