Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-11T20:40:13.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hereditary Components in vocational Preferences1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Steven G. Vandenberg  and
Lillian Kelly
Steven G. Vandenberg
Affiliation:
Dept. of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., (U.S.A.)
Lillian Kelly
Affiliation:
Dept. of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., (U.S.A.)

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The Strong Vocational Blank inventory was administered to 43 pairs of identical and 34 pairs of fraternal twins in high schools in the Metropolitan Detroit area, and scores obtained on 44 vocational preference scales and 3 personality scales. F tests of the ratio between fraternal and identical within twin pair variances were significant beyond the .01 level of significance for the scales for Physicist, Mathematician and Osteopath while 9 more scales had F-ratios significant beyond the .05 level; these were for the scales of Dentist, Personnel Director, Veterinarian, Sales Manager, Aviator, Chemist, Public Administrator, Engineer and for the scale of Interest Maturity. Thus a total of 12 scales had F-ratios indicative of some hereditary contribution to the within pair variance of the twins in this study.

A comparison with the results published by Carter in 1932 was possible for 21 scales, by computing intraclass correlations for the present data. From these, as well as from the intraclass correlations reported by Carter, h2 values were computed and compared. There was stronger evidence for hereditary components in the earlier study, and the rank order correlation for the h2 values in the two studies was only .16, although in both studies it was found that the “Science” group of interest scales had the highest “average” h2 value (computed from average intraclass correlations, after Z-transformation).

These results are interpreted as indicative of a small but persistent contribution of hereditary components to the vocational choices reflected in scores on the Strong Vocational Preference Blank, particularly for scientific careers.

The use of the male form for the female twins in this study seems partly justified by the presence of equally often high mean values on scales and higher heritability estimates on some scales compared with the boys.

Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 1964 , pp. 266 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1964

Footnotes

1

This study forms part of the Hereditary Abilities Study of which Lee R. Dice was the principal investigator. The data collection phase was supported by McGregor Fund of Detroit, while data analysis was made possible by grant No. M-1045 from the National Institute of Mental Health.

We wish to thank Mrs. Lin Wong and Mrs. Louella Goodall who administered some of the tests and the staff of the Computer Laboratory of the University of Michigan where some of the calculations were carried out.

References

Buros, O. K.: The fifth mental measurements yearbook. The Gryphon Press, Highland Park, N. J., 1959.Google Scholar
Carter, H. D.: Twin similarities in occupational interests. J. educ. Psychol., 1932, 23: 641–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlberg, G.: Twin births and twins from a hereditary point of view. Stockholm, Tidens Tryckeri, 1926.Google Scholar
Darley, J. G. and Haganah, Theda: Vocational interest measurements: theory and practice. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1955.Google Scholar
Holzinger, K. J.: The relative effect of nature and nurture influences on twin differences. J. educ. Psychol., 1929, 20: 241–248.Google Scholar
Joan, May: Note on the assumptions underlying Holzinger's h2 statistics. J. Ment. Sci., 1951, 97: 466–467.Google Scholar
Anne, Roe: The psychology of occupations. Wiley, New York, 1956.Google Scholar
Strong, E. K.: Vocational interests of men and women. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Cal. 1943.Google Scholar
Strong, E. K.: Hankes, E. J.: A note on the Hankes Test Scoring Machine. J. Appl. Psychol., 1947, 31:212–214.Google Scholar
Strong, E. K.: Interest scores while in college of occupations engaged in twenty year later. Ed. Psychol. Meas., 1951, 11: 335–348.Google Scholar
Strong, E. K.: Vocational interests 18 years after college. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1955.Google Scholar
Strong, E. K.: Interests of fathers and sons. J. Appl. Psychol., 1957, 41:284–292.Google Scholar
Strong, E. K.: Vocational interest blank for men. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, Cal. 1938.Google Scholar
Super, D. E.: Appraising vocational fitness by means of psychological tests. Harper, New York, 1949.Google Scholar
Sutton, H. E., Clark, P. J. and Schull, W. J.: The use of multi-allele genetic characters in the diagnosis of twin zygosity. Amer. J. Hum. Genet, 1955, 7: 180–188.Google Scholar
Sutton, H. E., Vandenberg, S. G. and Clark, P. J.: The hereditary abilities study, selection of twins, diagnosis of zygosity and the program of measurements. Amer. J. Hum. Genet., 1962, 14:52–63.Google Scholar
Vandenberg, S. G.: The hereditary abilities study: hereditary components in a psychological test battery. Amer. J. Hum. Genet., 1962, 14: 220–237.Google Scholar