• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

人——物与数据——观念:两极维度?

People--things and data--ideas: bipolar dimensions?

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, USA.

出版信息

J Couns Psychol. 2011 Jul;58(3):424-40. doi: 10.1037/a0023488.

DOI:10.1037/a0023488
PMID:21639616
Abstract

We examined a longstanding assumption in vocational psychology that people-things and data-ideas are bipolar dimensions. Two minimal criteria for bipolarity were proposed and examined across 3 studies: (a) The correlation between opposite interest types should be negative; (b) after correcting for systematic responding, the correlation should be greater than -.40. In Study 1, a meta-analysis using 26 interest inventories with a sample size of 1,008,253 participants showed that meta-analytic correlations between opposite RIASEC (realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, conventional) types ranged from -.03 to .18 (corrected meta-analytic correlations ranged from -.23 to -.06). In Study 2, structural equation models (SEMs) were fit to the Interest Finder (IF; Wall, Wise, & Baker, 1996) and the Interest Profiler (IP; Rounds, Smith, Hubert, Lewis, & Rivkin, 1999) with sample sizes of 13,939 and 1,061, respectively. The correlations of opposite RIASEC types were positive, ranging from .17 to .53. No corrected correlation met the criterion of -.40 except for investigative-enterprising (r = -.67). Nevertheless, a direct estimate of the correlation between data-ideas end poles using targeted factor rotation did not reveal bipolarity. Furthermore, bipolar SEMs fit substantially worse than a multiple-factor representation of vocational interests. In Study 3, a two-way clustering solution on IF and IP respondents and items revealed a substantial number of individuals with interests in both people and things. We discuss key theoretical, methodological, and practical implications such as the structure of vocational interests, interpretation and scoring of interest measures for career counseling, and expert RIASEC ratings of occupations.

摘要

我们检验了职业心理学中一个长期存在的假设,即人与物和数据与观念是两极维度。提出并检验了两极分化的两个最小标准:(a)相反兴趣类型之间的相关应该为负;(b)在纠正系统反应后,相关应大于-.40。在研究 1 中,使用包含 26 个兴趣量表的元分析,样本量为 1008253 名参与者,结果表明,相反的 RIASEC(现实型、研究型、艺术型、社会型、企业型、传统型)类型之间的元分析相关性范围从-.03 到.18(纠正后的元分析相关性范围从-.23 到-.06)。在研究 2 中,结构方程模型(SEM)分别拟合了兴趣发现者(IF;Wall、Wise 和 Baker,1996)和兴趣分析器(IP;Rounds、Smith、Hubert、Lewis 和 Rivkin,1999),样本量分别为 13939 和 1061。相反的 RIASEC 类型的相关性为正,范围从.17 到.53。除了研究型-企业型(r=-.67)外,没有一个修正后的相关性符合-.40 的标准。然而,使用目标因子旋转对数据-观念两极之间的相关性进行直接估计并未显示出两极分化。此外,双极 SEM 的拟合效果明显不如职业兴趣的多因素表示。在研究 3 中,对 IF 和 IP 受访者和项目进行的双向聚类解决方案揭示了相当数量的对人与物都感兴趣的个体。我们讨论了关键的理论、方法和实践意义,例如职业兴趣的结构、职业咨询中对兴趣测量的解释和评分,以及职业的专家 RIASEC 评级。

相似文献

1
People--things and data--ideas: bipolar dimensions?人——物与数据——观念:两极维度?
J Couns Psychol. 2011 Jul;58(3):424-40. doi: 10.1037/a0023488.
2
Holland in Iceland revisited: an emic approach to evaluating U.S. vocational interest models.再探冰岛的荷兰人:一种评估美国职业兴趣模型的本土化方法。
J Couns Psychol. 2010 Jul;57(3):361-7. doi: 10.1037/a0019685.
3
Theoretical and methodological issues with testing the SCCT and RIASEC models: Comment on Lent, Sheu, and Brown (2010) and Lubinski (2010).测试 SCCT 和 RIASEC 模型的理论和方法问题:对 Lent、Sheu 和 Brown(2010)以及 Lubinski(2010)的评论。
J Couns Psychol. 2010 Apr;57(2):239-47. doi: 10.1037/a0019177.
4
Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: the importance of the people-things dimension.与性别相关的个体差异和职业兴趣结构:人与事物维度的重要性。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Apr;74(4):996-1009. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.4.996.
5
Are you interested? A meta-analysis of relations between vocational interests and employee performance and turnover.你有兴趣吗?职业兴趣与员工绩效和离职关系的元分析。
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Nov;96(6):1167-94. doi: 10.1037/a0024343. Epub 2011 Jul 11.
6
Fitting measurement models to vocational interest data: are dominance models ideal?将测量模型应用于职业兴趣数据:主导模型是理想之选吗?
J Appl Psychol. 2009 Sep;94(5):1287-304. doi: 10.1037/a0015899.
7
Individuals and environments: Linking ability and skill ratings with interests.个体与环境:将能力和技能评级与兴趣联系起来。
J Couns Psychol. 2010 Jan;57(1):36-51. doi: 10.1037/a0018067.
8
Normative changes in interests from adolescence to adulthood: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.从青春期到成年期兴趣的规范变化:纵向研究的元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2018 Apr;144(4):426-451. doi: 10.1037/bul0000140. Epub 2018 Mar 1.
9
Correspondence between five-factor and RIASEC models of personality.五因素人格模型与RIASEC人格模型之间的对应关系。
J Pers Assess. 1997 Apr;68(2):355-68. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6802_7.
10
Men and things, women and people: a meta-analysis of sex differences in interests.男性与物,女性与人:兴趣的性别差异元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2009 Nov;135(6):859-884. doi: 10.1037/a0017364.

引用本文的文献

1
Vocational Interests and Teaching Preferences: Who Prefers Which Teaching Topic in the Nature-Human-Society Subject?职业兴趣与教学偏好:在自然 - 人文 - 社会学科中,谁更喜欢哪个教学主题?
Behav Sci (Basel). 2023 Aug 5;13(8):658. doi: 10.3390/bs13080658.
2
Structure of Arabic Scale of Death Anxiety With Chinese College Students: A Bifactor Approach.阿拉伯死亡焦虑量表在中国大学生中的结构:双因素方法
Front Psychol. 2018 Dec 12;9:2511. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02511. eCollection 2018.
3
Fitting item response unfolding models to Likert-scale data using mirt in R.
使用 R 中的 mirt 拟合李克特量表数据的项目反应展开模型。
PLoS One. 2018 May 3;13(5):e0196292. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196292. eCollection 2018.
4
Engineering Student's Ethical Awareness and Behavior: A New Motivational Model.工科学生的道德意识与行为:一种新的激励模型
Sci Eng Ethics. 2017 Aug;23(4):1129-1157. doi: 10.1007/s11948-016-9814-x. Epub 2016 Oct 17.
5
STEM Education.STEM教育
Annu Rev Sociol. 2015 Aug 1;41:331-357. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659. Epub 2015 May 4.
6
All STEM fields are not created equal: People and things interests explain gender disparities across STEM fields.所有 STEM 领域并非生来平等:人和事物兴趣解释了 STEM 领域的性别差距。
Front Psychol. 2015 Feb 25;6:189. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00189. eCollection 2015.