Brenton M. Wiernik University of Minnesota. Supplemental results for Study 1

Transcription

1 Online Supplemental Material Wiernik, B. M. (2015) Intraindividual personality profiles associated with Realistic interests. Journal of Career Assessment. Brenton M. Wiernik University of Minnesota Supplemental results for Study 1 The text of the published paper includes results for a selected set of Producing and Adventuring interest scales that were chosen to be illustrative of general findings for the analyzed interests, as well as several clusters of interests with unique features in their personality profiles. Results for all analyzed interest scales are presented below. Producing Interests Model summaries for predicting Realistic-Producing interests are shown in Table S1. Results are organized into three clusters of interest scales general Producing interests, mechanical interests, and agricultural interests. Personality profile patterns for interest scales in each cluster are shown in Figure S1. All Producing interests were marked by intraindividually high Openness to Intellect (as measured by the HPI Intellectance scale) and low Extraversion (specifically Sociability) and low HPI School Success (which measures interest in formal schooling and self-ratings of ability). Patterns for agricultural interests had this general shape, but were less pronounced, suggesting that factors other than personality traits (e.g., being reared in an agricultural area, growing up in a family operating a farm) are more important in driving agricultural interests. In addition to high Openness to Intellect and low Sociability, mechanical interests were also marked by low Openness to Experiences (as measured by NEO Openness) and low Agreeableness, suggesting that mechanical interests are strongest among individuals drawn to solving problems and way from aesthetics, feelings, and interacting with others.

2 Table S1. Model Summaries for Predicting Realistic-Producing Interests Overall Profile pattern effect Profile level effect R R 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 Producing Orientation NEO PI-R HPI General Producing interest scales Woodworking (B) NEO PI-R HPI Carpenter (O) NEO PI-R HPI Landscape Architect (O) NEO PI-R HPI Mechanical interest scales Mechanical Crafts (B) NEO PI-R HPI Airline Mechanic (O) NEO PI-R HPI Electrician (O) NEO PI-R HPI Agricultural interest scales Farming/Forestry (B) NEO PI-R HPI Plants/Gardens (B) NEO PI-R HPI Animal Care (B) NEO PI-R HPI Agribusiness Manager (O) NEO PI-R HPI Note. Sample sizes for correlations between interest criteria and profile level and pattern effects were N = 521 (NEO PI-R) and 520 (HPI). R = multiple correlation for pattern effect and level effect with interest scale; R 2 = variance accounted for by both effects; β = standardized regression coefficient; ΔR 2 = incremental amount of variance accounted for by one effect over the other; B = Basic interest scale; O = Occupational interest scale; NEO PI-R = NEO Personality Inventory-Revised; HPI = Hogan Personality Inventory.

3 Figure S1. Personality criterion profile patterns for Realistic-Producing interests Producing Orientation General Producing Interests Carpenter (O) Landscape Architect (O)

4 Mechanical Interests Mechanical Crafts (B) Airline Mechanic (O) Electrician (O)

5 Agricultural Interests Farming/Forestry (B) Plants/Gardens (B) Animal Care (B) Agribusiness Manager (O)

6 Adventuring Interests Model summaries for predicting Realistic-Adventuring interests are shown in Table S2. Results are organized into three clusters of interest scales general Adventuring interests, military interests, and athletic interests. Personality profile patterns for interest scales in each cluster are shown in Figure S2. All Adventuring interests were marked by intraindividually high Extraversion and low Agreeableness. For most Adventuring interests, Sociability underlay the prominent peak for Extraversion, but for military interests, the Extraversion peak was driven by Ambition. Intraindividually high Openness was a marker trait for interests associated with thrillseeking (e.g., Risk/Adventure, Ski Instructor). Intraindividually low Openness, especially HPI School Success and NEO Openness, were marker traits for athletic interests, suggesting that interest in athletic careers stems from a cardinal aversion to novelty and a lack of curiosity, in addition to the prominent levels of sociability and gregariousness.

7 Table S2. Model Summaries for Predicting Realistic-Adventuring Interests Overall Profile pattern effect Profile level effect R R 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 Adventuring Orientation NEO PI-R HPI General Adventuring interest scales Risk/Adventure (B) NEO PI-R HPI Ski Instructor (O) NEO PI-R HPI Military interest scales Military/Law Enforcement (B) NEO PI-R HPI Military Officer (O) NEO PI-R HPI Police Officer (O) NEO PI-R HPI Athletics interest scales Athletics/Physical Fitness (B) NEO PI-R HPI Athletic Coach (O) NEO PI-R HPI Athletic Trainer (O) NEO PI-R HPI Fitness Instructor (O) NEO PI-R HPI Note. Sample sizes for correlations between interest criteria and profile level and pattern effects were N = 521 (NEO PI-R) and 520 (HPI). R = multiple correlation for pattern effect and level effect with interest scale; R 2 = variance accounted for by both effects; β = standardized regression coefficient; ΔR 2 = incremental amount of variance accounted for by one effect over the other; B = Basic interest scale; O = Occupational interest scale; NEO PI-R = NEO Personality Inventory- Revised; HPI = Hogan Personality Inventory.

8 Figure S1. Personality criterion profile patterns for Realistic-Adventuring interests Adventuring Orientation General Adventuring Interests Risk/Adventure (B) Ski Instructor (O)

9 Military Interests Military/Law Enforcement (B) Military Officer (O) Police Officer (O)

10 Athletic Interests Athletics/Physical Fitness (B) Athletic Coach (O) Athletic Trainer (O) Fitness Instructor (O)

11 Additional Results Separated by Gender The main text of the paper presented personality profile patterns for the Producing Orientation and Adventuring Orientation scales separately for men and women. Gender differences in personality profile pattern were generally similar for Basic and Occupational interest scales in each of these domains. These patterns are shown in Figure S3. Figure S3. Personality criterion profile patterns for men and women Producing Interests Men Producing Orientation Men Mechanical Crafts

12 Men Woodworking Men Farming/Foresty Men Plants/Gardens

13 Men Animal Care Men Agribusiness Manager Men Airline Mechanic

14 Men Carpenter Men Electrician Men Lanscape Architect

15 Men Adventuring Interests Adventuring Orientation Men Athletics/Physical Fitness Men Military/Law Enforcement

16 Men Risk/Adventure Men Athletic Coach Men Athletic Trainer

17 Men Fitness Instructor Men Military Officer Men Police Officer

18 Men Ski Instructor

19 Supplemental results for Study 2 The text of the published paper includes descriptions and model summaries for 19 samples from the literature which were reanalyzed to examine the consistency of personality patterns associated with Realistic interests across samples. Plots of the profile patterns for the three largest studies using Openness measures saturated with Intellect and Experiences, respectively, were shown. Descriptions, model summaries, and profile patterns for all reanalyzed samples are shown below. Sample descriptions and model summaries are shown in Table S3. Results were similar to the analyses of Producing interests in Study 1. In all but two samples, personality profile pattern showed a stronger relationship with Realistic interests than profile level, and in most samples, the relative contribution of pattern to the personality-interest relationship was substantially larger than the contribution of level. Overall, the results of Study 2 confirm that it is personality pattern, not absolute level, which drives the relationship between broad personality traits and Realistic interests. Plots of personality profile patterns for Realistic interests in Study 2 are shown in Figure S4. Pattern shape was moderated by which aspect of Openness the study measure emphasized. For studies using Intellect-saturated measures, the profile patterns included a prominent peak for Openness (with the exception of Ehrhart & Makransky, 2007, which used an Openness measure consisting primarily of self-descriptions of cognitive ability, similar to the HPI School Success scale). For studies using Experiences-saturated measures, the peak for Openness was much weaker or absent from the profile pattern. This result was especially striking in the flat patterns for Barrett (2009) and Birkman et al. (2008), whose Openness measures included virtually no Intellect items.

20 Table S3. Descriptions of Samples from the Literature Reanalyzed in Study 2 and Model Summaries for Predicting Realistic Interests Sample description Openness aspect % Female Overall Profile pattern effect Profile level effect N R R 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 Ackerman et al. (1995) Adults in a variety of occupations Exp 55% Barrett (2009) Undergraduate students Exp 62% Birkman et al. (2008) De Fruyt & Mervielde (1999) Representative sample of employed adults from 15 U.S. industries Exp 47% 4, Adults in a variety of occupations Exp 47% Duffy et al. (2009) Medical students Exp 60% Ehrhart & Makransky (2007) Undergraduate psychology majors Int 1 78% Fox (1995) Undergraduate students Int 58% Fritzsche et al. (2002) Undergraduate students Exp 62% Hirschi (2008) High school and trade students Exp 59% Logue et al. (2007) Undergraduate business majors Exp 42% Nauta (2004) Undergraduate students Int 71% Nauta (2007) Undergraduate students Int 89% Rottinghaus et al. (2002) Undergraduate psychology majors Int 66% (continued on next page)

21 Sample description Openness aspect Schinka et al. (1997) Adults in a variety of occupations Exp % Female Overall Profile pattern effect Profile level effect N R R 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 r β r 2 ΔR 2 Tokar & Swanson (1995) Tokar, Vaux & Swanson (1995) Female 100% Male 0% Adults in a variety of occupations Exp Female 100% Male 0% Undergraduate students Exp Female 100% Male 0% Note. R = multiple correlation for pattern effect and level effect with interest criteria; R 2 = amount of variance accounted for by both effects; β = standardized regression coefficient; ΔR 2 = incremental amount of variance accounted for by one effect over the other; Int = study used an Intellect-saturated Openness measure; Exp = study used an Experiences-saturated Openness measure; 1 Ehrhart and Makransky s (2007) Openness scale includes mostly self-ratings of cognitive ability, similar to the HPI School Success scale.

22 Figure S4. Personality criterion profile patterns for reanalyzed studies predicting Realistic interests. Studies using Intellect-saturated measures of Openness Ehrhart & Makransky (2007) Fox (1995) Nauta (2004) Nauta (2007) Rottinghaus et al. (2002)

23 Studies using Experiences-saturated measures of Openness Ackerman et al. (1995) Barrett (2009) Birkman et al. (2008) De Fruyt & Mervielde (1999) Duffy et al. (2009) Fritzsche, McIntire, & Yost (2002)

24 Hirschi (2008) Logue et al. (2007) Schinka et al. (1997) Tokar & Swanson (1995) Tokar, Vaux, & Swanson (1995)

25 Descriptive Statistics for Measures in Study 1 Table S4. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations for Personality and Interest Measures in Study 1 Scale M SD NEO Personality Inventory 1 Emotional Stability Extraversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousness Hogan Personality Inventory 6 Adjustment Ambition Intellectance Likeability Prudence Sociability School Success Campbell Interest and Skills Survey 13 Producing Orientation Mechanical Crafts Woodworking Farming/Forestry Plants/Gardens Animal Care Agribusiness Manager Airline Mechanic Carpenter Electrician Landscape Architect Adventuring Orientation Athletics/Physical Fitness Military/Law Enforcement Risk/Adventure Athletic Coach Athletic Trainer Fitness Instructor Military Officer Police Officer Ski Instructor Note. Reliability coefficients are presented on the diagonal. Cronbach alpha reliabilities for the NEO PI-R were computed based on item level responses from the current sample. As the scoring key for the Hogan Personality Inventory is proprietary, Cronbach alpha reliabilities for the HPI were obtained from the technical manual. For the Campbell Interest and Skills Survey, all reliabilities were obtained from the technical manual, as only scale scores were available. Reliability coefficients for the Orientation and Basic scales are internal consistency estimates. Reliability coefficients for the Occupational scales are test-retest estimates (3-month interval). Boldface values represent convergent validities between corresponding scales across personality inventories. Correlations based on pairwise deletion. Pairwise Ns: NEO PI-R and HPI = 484; CISS and NEO PI-R/HPI = 521/520. (continued on next page)

26 Table S4., continued Campbell Interest and Skills Survey 13 Producing Orientation Mechanical Crafts Woodworking Farming/Forestry Plants/Gardens Animal Care Agribusiness Manager Airline Mechanic Carpenter Electrician Landscape Architect Adventuring Orientation Athletics/Physical Fitness Military/Law Enforcement Risk/Adventure Athletic Coach Athletic Trainer Fitness Instructor Military Officer Police Officer Ski Instructor

27 Intercorrelation Matrices Reanalyzed in Study 2 Table S5. Intercorrelation Matrices from the Literature Reanalyzed in Study 2 Ackerman et al. (1995) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI-R) -- Extraversion (NEO PI-R) Openness (NEO PI-R) Agreeableness (NEO PI-R) Conscientiousness (NEO PI-R) Realistic interests (UNIACT) N = 93 Barrett (2008) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (IPIP NEO) -- Extraversion (IPIP NEO) Openness (IPIP NEO) Agreeableness (IPIP NEO) Conscientiousness (IPIP NEO) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 194 Birkman et al. (2008) ES Ex O A C MI Emotional Stability (TBM Emotive, rev.).88 Extraversion (TBM Social) Openness (TBM Change) Agreeableness (TBM Control, rev.) Conscientiousness (TBM Process) Mechanical interests (TBM) N = 4,300 De Fruyt & Mervielde (1999) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI-R).92 Extraversion (NEO PI-R) Openness (NEO PI-R) Agreeableness (NEO PI-R) Conscientiousness (NEO PI-R) Realistic interests (SDS/BZO95) N = 335 Duffy et al. (2009) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI-R) -- Extraversion (NEO PI-R) Openness (NEO PI-R) Agreeableness (NEO PI-R) Conscientiousness (NEO PI-R) Realistic interests (SII) N = 282 Ehrhart & Makransky (2007) ES Ex O A C TI Emotional Stability (IPIP Big Five).88 Extraversion (IPIP Big Five) Openness (IPIP Big Five) Agreeableness (IPIP Big Five) Conscientiousness (IPIP Big Five) Technology interests (COPS-P) N = 335 Fox (1995) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (ACL).70 Extraversion (ACL) Openness (ACL) Agreeableness (ACL) Conscientiousness (ACL) Realistic interests (SII) N = 147

28 Table S5., continued. Fritzsche et al. (2002) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI-R).92 Extraversion (NEO PI-R) Openness (NEO PI-R) Agreeableness (NEO PI-R) Conscientiousness (NEO PI-R) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 455 Hirschi (2008) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (German NEO FFI).78 Extraversion (German NEO FFI) Openness (German NEO FFI) Agreeableness (German NEO FFI) Conscientiousness (German NEO FFI) Realistic interests (AIST-R) N = 492 Logue et al. (2007) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (PSI).81 Extraversion (PSI) Openness (PSI) Agreeableness (PSI) Conscientiousness (PSI) Realistic interests (SII) N = 164 Nauta (2004) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (ACL) -- Extraversion (ACL) Openness (ACL) Agreeableness (ACL) Conscientiousness (ACL) Realistic interests (SII) N = 147 Nauta (2007) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (ACL) -- Extraversion (ACL) Openness (ACL) Agreeableness (ACL) Conscientiousness (ACL) Realistic interests (SII) N = 113 Rottinghaus et al. (2002) ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (ACL) -- Extraversion (ACL) Openness (ACL) Agreeableness (ACL) Conscientiousness (ACL) Realistic interests (SVI) N = 365

29 Table S5., continued. Schinka et al. (1997) Female ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI-R) -- Extraversion (NEO PI-R) Openness (NEO PI-R) Agreeableness (NEO PI-R) Conscientiousness (NEO PI-R) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 645 Schinka et al. (1997) Male ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI-R) -- Extraversion (NEO PI-R) Openness (NEO PI-R) Agreeableness (NEO PI-R) Conscientiousness (NEO PI-R) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 645 Tokar & Swanson (1995) Female ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO FFI).85 Extraversion (NEO FFI) Openness (NEO FFI) Agreeableness (NEO FFI) Conscientiousness (NEO FFI) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 213 Tokar & Swanson (1995) Male ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO FFI).86 Extraversion (NEO FFI) Openness (NEO FFI) Agreeableness (NEO FFI) Conscientiousness (NEO FFI) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 146 Tokar, Vaux, & Swanson (1995) Female ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI).88 Extraversion (NEO PI) Openness (NEO PI) Agreeableness (NEO PI) Conscientiousness (NEO PI) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 102 Tokar, Vaux, & Swanson (1995) Male ES Ex O A C RI Emotional Stability (NEO PI).91 Extraversion (NEO PI) Openness (NEO PI) Agreeableness (NEO PI) Conscientiousness (NEO PI) Realistic interests (SDS) N = 91 Note: ES = Emotional Stability; Ex = Extraversion; O = Openness; A = Agreeableness; C = Conscientiousness; RI = Realistic Vocational Interests; MI = Mechanical Vocational Interests; NEO PI-R = NEO Personality Inventory-Revised; IPIP NEO = International Personality Item Pool version of the NEO PI-R; TBM = The Birkman Method; IPIP Big Five = International Personality Item Pool Big Five Marker Scales; ACL = Adjective Check List Big Five Marker Scales; NEO FFI = NEO Five-Factor Inventory; PSI = Personal Style Inventory for College Students; NEO PI = NEO Personality Inventory; UNIACT = Unisex Edition of ACT Interest Inventory; SDS/BZO95 = Dutch adaptation of Self Directed Search; SII = Strong Interest Inventory; COPS-P = Career Occupational Preference System Interest Inventory; AIST-R = Revised General Interest Structure Test; SVI = Strong Vocational Inventory; SDS = Self Directed Search; Values on the diagonals are alpha coefficients.