Strong Interest Inventory, Research Paper Example

Abstract

Strong Interest Inventory is a standard assessment to measure the vocational interests of U.S. individuals looking to work. The test was originally constructed by psychologist, and Stanford University researcher, Edward K. Strong Jr. The test has been used to recruit for both private sector ad public sector staffing, and was originally designed to assist soldiers exiting the military.

Inventory therefore helps individuals make more informed professional decisions, regardless of career, or development stage. This theory is recognized as being adaptable to every age group, for both workers and students. Recently industry inclination towards the Revised version of the tests have proven to be significantly helpful in finding potential workers for numerous industries specifically that of the Healthcare industry as well as other sectors that are high in demand. The following are a number of studies assessing the effectiveness of the Strong Interest Inventory Revised test in regards to newly found ability to supply respondents with a satisfying careers.

Introduction

The specific way in which Strong Interests works is by requesting five key facets of information from an individual, based on what it refers to as general occupational themes. These themes are broken down into six basic structures.

The test assesses metrics on six General Occupational Themes (GOT), which is the basic vocational interests of the respondents (Donnay et al., 2005).The test measures Basic Interest Scales (BIS), which focuses solely on exact interest areas within the six General Occupational Themes. This indicator defines the jobs most likely to inspire respondents and create beneficial work environment.

The Occupational Scales (OS) measure assess work satisfaction, or the potential satisfaction of preferred jobs, specifically the likes and dislikes as they relate to occupational compatibility.,

Out of five e Personal Scales (PS)which describe differences between work style, education retention, management skills, risk-taking and ability to work in teams, all are evaluated for the ability to provide deeper perspective, providing insight into work and education environments most likely to fit the client best

The final part of the test is a summary of feedback, summary, which summarizes respondent responses each of the above sections, providing to the career practitioner.

Depending on their interests, respondents are characterized by these exact themes is (eg Artistic, Social).”They are judged specifically through a list of 30 Basic Interest Scales, which are subdivided. Each group subdivision represents a general occupation. The 30 Basic Interest Scales recognized as subdivisions of the six General Occupational Themes, with each GOT containing three to five BIS groups under it in the Strong profile. This study style, originally created by E. K. Strong (Donnay et al., 2005), the 122 Occupational Scales have proven to be significant and influential over the years. This is mainly due to the fact that they provide data on how  individual’s respondents compare with those already employed within  a particular field. The most valuable information that can be taken from these assessment is the measurement of how satisfied these individuals really are, verses the satisfaction of individuals in alternate occupations with the sae personal traits or characteristics as respondents. The five Personal Style Scales, Learning Environment, Work Style, Leadership Style, Risk Taking, Team Orientation, are all factors of the traditional occupational risk scale. The original groups evaluated was used is the General Representative Sample of the US population and consists of 2,250 individuals (50% men, 50% women). This test is often highly effective at fairly representing the real ethnic breakdown of racial and ethnic differences accounted for within the U.S. workforce.

When evaluated alone, or in collaboration with a client’s preferences, the MBTI instrument, and behaviors, the 16PF instrument can be utilized to help the test to empower and supplement career choice in a way that is realistic and cost effective. The Strong Interest Inventory assessment As the most common, and predominantly used tool to assess vocational interests in the United States. It has been used in educational settings, public institutions, and private organizations for over 80 years (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004). The revision version of the test was designed for a wide range of improvements. Among other goals, the revision was designed to shorten the instrument and add current occupations, increase the level of business, technology, and teamwork measures. Most importantly it was constructed with the hope that it would enhance the assessment of work and leisure activities. One specific aspect of the study is that the diversity of the U.S. workforce is fairly represented in the samples obtained (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004).”The new sample group was made up of just as many women as men. The study also had demonstrated a balanced distribution of racial groups in the work force.

There are 6 sections to the revised edition. This is an update from the previous version which only 192 items from the original are included in this version, but there are 317 items in this version.  “The 99 modified items bring the total items on the revised Strong assessment to 291 (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004).” As the authors note,The change resulted in enhanced support and acute measurability, as it relates to inventory scales. This was specifically true in regards to decreased length. of measurement and decreased length of the inventory and its scales (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004).” This is very telling because it shows that through the increased reliability. The revised General Occupational Themes (GOTs) was expanded to account for changes in the workplace in the last decade, especially the use of computers and technology (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004). The Basic Interest Scales (BISs) underwent extensive revision for the second time since their introduction to the Strong in 1968 (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004). The revisions were a product of the fact that the  total number of Occupational Scales (OSs) wereincreased to 244 from the 211 in the 1994 version of the test., The Personal Style Scales were introduced to the Strong in 1994 (Donnay, Thompson, Morris &Schaubhut, 2004).

1^st study

The first study assessing the revised strong test evaluated  scores evaluated based on  281 female and 133 male rehabilitation counselors. The data retrieved from these respondents developed prototypical, Strong Interest Inventory (SIl) profiles (Leierer, Blackwell, Strohmer, Thompson & Donnay, 2008).” The differences in each of the SII scales  across  genders did not affect congruence   within the scales of a particular  gender but also across genders (Leierer, Blackwell, Strohmer, Thompson & Donnay, 2008) .” All rehabilitation counselor profiles require extensive people skills,  verbal abilities, and listening  and comprehension skills. These individuals tend to be drawn to creative a preference  for settings  that  allow for the  expression  of  creativity (Leierer, Blackwell, Strohmer, Thompson & Donnay, 2008) .” This study allowing for comparison  of interests  to the rehabilitation  counselors is a factor only and need only newly revised SIl can serve  as  selecting, and the research ultimately results the tests being about to seek out and recruit  people  with profiles  similar  to  rehabilitation  counselors (Leierer, Blackwell, Strohmer, Thompson & Donnay, 2008) .This study can be replicated across fields to find exact

2^nd study

The newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory assessments tests, “reliability and validity of the SIE assessment was evaluated by administering, “three samples: 343 high school students, 321 students at a large Midwestern university, and143 employed adults (CPP, 2002).” A sample of 513 individuals were evaluated in ting the SIE assessment and the SII assessment online, as a part of a larger study of the Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory assessments. total of 350 females and 163 males participated. The results suggest Strong Interest Explorer assessment metrics are as credible as the original test. Combined the results of these analyses show good evidence of the validity of the SIE assessment.

3^rd study

In this third study Lattimore and Borgen focus predominantly on race in the professional arena. The authors note that During the revision of the 1994 Strong Interest Inventory (SII; Harmon, Hansen, Borgen & Hammer, 1994), information was obtained about the race–ethnicity and careers of over 55,000 employed adults in 50 different occupations (Lattimore & Borgen, 1999).The national norm group, or original general reference group which this revised test was compared to , contained 18,789 test subjects. They identified themselves racial through the following criteria,  “378 African Americans; 363 Asian Americans; 17,365 Caucasian Americans; 349 Hispanic Americans/Latinos (Latinas); and 77 Native Americans/American Indians (Lattimore & Borgen, 1999).”The results of these studies found that  validity was parallel and that specifically counseling ethnic groups through SII was beneficial in leveling out discrepancies between ethnic groups, whil there were still some . “interesting trends and important limitations(Lattimore & Borgen, 1999).”

4^th study

The goal of this study was to evaluate1,800 licensed dental hygienists in the U.S. and hone in on interest patterns, “within Holland’s 6 General Occupational Themes (Monson, 2012).” The patterns that were reviewed were both broad and basic. The authors note specifically that ,“A national stratified random sample of 1,800 members of the American Dental Hygienists’ Association was surveyed (Monson, 2012).” More telling than the actual set region of the study was the random pool.The key results showed that, “support coding the dental hygiene profession as Investigative–Social–Realistic using the General Occupational Themes (Monson, 2012).” The main revelation was that theme, was in influencing factor on many students questioning whether to take-up dentistry as a career.

5^th study

In assessment of Strong Revised , there were three studies that accounted for the relation between color preference and personality. This was based on a number, “of respondents from a pool of volunteers who participated in a series of Career Transition Clinics provided by an Atlanta, GA church (Lange & Rentfrow, 2007) .” The first study showed, “Study I (n = 885) showed that the Strong’s Basic Interest Scales (BIS) could be predicted reliably (Median r = 0.68) from the Dewey Color System Test…(Lange & Rentfrow, 2007) ” Over 885 potential career changers were given a tests completed both the Strong and the Dewey Color Test consisted of 524 women and 359 men, and 2 persons with unknown sex. On average the ages of these 32.1 years (Median = 29.0, SD = 12.9 years) with missing age information for 28 individuals (Lange & Rentfrow, 2007).” It was conclude  that color preferences as according to  the Dewey Color System Test are influential predictors of all Basic Interest Scales of the Strong Interest Inventory (Lange & Rentfrow, 2007).” The study’s results show that the vocational preferences could possibly be inferred through some form of Revised Strong evaluation (Lange & Rentfrow, 2007).

In sum, Strong Interest Inventory is powerful data in almost any field, but specifically as it relates to the healthcare industry when utilizing the revised test the information is very telling of unique aspects that might not be assessed accurately otherwise. Respondents are often unaware of just how significant resources can be in defining preference or influence. Strong Interest Inventory Revised brings about a new era in vocational assessment. Many of the new criteria for the test, such as color preference as it relates to vocation satisfaction, have their own advantage and it demonstrate how far along the test has come since its creation. Most importantly these tests show how far the test will come in the future.

Work Cited

Donnay, D; Thompson, R.C.; Morris, M.L., & Schaubhut,N.A.,(2004). Technical Brief for the Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory. Strong. https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/StrongTechnicalBrief.pdf

Leierer, S. J., Blackwell, T. L., Strohmer, D. C., Thompson, R. C., & Donnay, D. A. C. (2008). The newly revised strong interest inventory. a profile interpretation for rehabilitation counselors.

Lattimore, Ronke R.; Borgen, Fred H. (1999). Validity of the 1994 Strong Interest Inventory with racial and ethnic groups in the United States. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46(2), 185-195. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.46.2.185

Monson, A. L. (2012). Characteristic of dental hygienists based on holland´s career choice theory. Journal of Dental Hygiene, 86(2), 141.

Lange, R., & Rentfrow, J. (2007). Color and personality:strong interest inventory and cattell´s 16pf.North American Journal of Psychology,9(3)