Types produce types: An examination of personality development using Holland's theory

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 5, 231-239 (1974)

Types Produce Types: An Examination of Personality Development using Holland’s Theory1

THOMAS G. GRANDY and ROBERT F. STAHMANN University of Iowa

This study was designed to test Holland’s hypothesis that parents encourage the development of their own personality types in their offspring. Data were collected by personal interviews from three freshmen classes at a large midwestern university. Parent’s personality types (occupations) were compared to offsprings’ personality types (expressed occupational choices) using the Kolmogorov-Smlrnov one-sample test to determine whether or not the comparisons were due to chance. The results indicated that relationships existed between the personality types of fatherpsons, fatheredaughters and mothers-daughters while no relationship was confirmed between mothers-sons.

Vocational theorists have, for a long time, recognized the family influence upon the vocational choice process. As summarized in Crites’ Vocational psychology (1969) studies dealing with this influence have concen- trated on three areas: (1) The extent to which sons follow the same occupations as their fathers; (2) The part which identification with the parents plays in vocational choice, and (3) The effects of interpersonal relationships with the parents upon the selection of an occupation. Research on whether offspring tend to enter the same occupations as a parent has been limited to father-son. relationships and has failed to demonstrate a strong relationship (Crites, 1969). Studies by Bordin (1940), Super (1953), and Crites (1962) suggested that identification with the parents may be one way in which vocational interests are acquired. One theorist, Roe, has proposed that parental attitudes of acceptance, avoidance, concentration are differentially associated with the choices of children raised in these three interpersonal atmospheres (Crites, 1969). Research, however, has not supported Roe’s theory (Osipow, 1973).

Holland (1973) has proposed that persons can be characterized by their degree of resemblance to each of six personality types: Realistic, Investigative,

1Requests for reprints should be directed to: Robert F. Stahmann, University Counseling Service, University of Iowa, Iowa Memorial Union, Iowa City, Iowa 52242.

231

Copyright @ 1974 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

232 GRANDYANDSTAHMANN

Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. Six corresponding environ- ments are also defined in terms of the personality types living or working in a particular setting. And, as individuals choose occupations aligned with their personality types, the development of personality types is of great importance. Holland does not explicitly discuss the way in which types develop, however, presumably, parents provide opportunities for certain experiences and also deny opportunities for other experiences. Parents also influence offspring by their own attitudes and, the more a child resembles a particular parent, the more reward he receives (Holland, 1973). it follows that parental types encourage the development of similar personality types in their offspring. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between parents’ and offsprings’ personality types.

METHOD

Subjects. Data were collected by personal interview from a random sample (N= 603) of three freshman classes at The University of Iowa. Among the data collected were students’ expressed occupational choices and parents’ occupations. Both students’ choices and parents’ occupations were coded (three-letter codes) according to Holland’s personality types using the Occupa- tions finder (Holland, 1970). Students were assigned to groups corresponding to the six personality types on the basis of their expressed occupational choices (one-letter codes) and also classified as “decided” or “undecided” with respect to these choices. Thus, a student who expressed the occupational choice, physician, was coded ISA, however, the primary code letter I was used in the analysis. Only data from “decided” students were used in this study (iV= 487). The numbers of students in each group were as follows: Realistic, 8 males, 0 females; Investigative, 100 males, 40 females; Artistic, 23 males, 48 females; Social, 32 males, 145 females; Enterprising, 59 males, 11 females; and Conventional, 13 males, 8 females. Data were analyzed separately by sex.

Procedure. The relationship between parent-offspring’s personality types was defined in terms of the extent to which offspring’s personality types (expressed occupational choice) followed parental types (occupations). One- letter codes of offspring’s personality types were compared to codes of both parent’s types using a simple matching procedure. The comparisons were evaluated with respect to Holland’s hexagonal model which places the six personality types at adjacent points in a hexagon-Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional (Holland, 1973). That is, the degree of similarity was a function of the proximity of two types on the hexagonal model-closer types were more alike, and so on.

TYPES PRODUCE TYPES 233

TABLE 1

Agreement Between Mothers’ and Sons’ Personality Types

Sons’ personality types

Mothers’ personality types

R I A S E C Total

R .ooo (0)

I ,445

(4)

A

S

E

C

Total

.lll (1)

.333

(3)

.ooo (0)

.lll (1)

1 .ooo 9

.143 (1)

.286

(2) .286

(2) .143

(1) .ooo

(0) ,142

(1)

1.000 I

.ooo (0)

.400

(2) ,200

(1) .ooo

(0) .400

(2) .ooo

(0) 1.000

5

,031

(6) .442

(72) .080

(13)

.097 (16)

,216

(45)

.068

(11) 1 .ooo

163

.125 (1)

.315

(3)

.ooo (0)

.ooo (0)

so0 (4)

,000 (0)

1 .ooo 8

.ooo (0)

,395 (12)

.140 (6)

.280

(12) .185

(8) .ooo

(0)

1 .ooo 43

8

100

23

32

59

13

6.000 235

Note: Rows and row totals indicate the numbers of offspring in each personality type. Columns and column totals refer to the numbers of parents in each personality type. The intersection of each row and column represents the sum of parents and offspring in each personality.

RESULTS

The results of the comparisons between parental and offsprings’ personality types can be found in Tables l-4. Tables 1 and 2 contain the comparisons of sons-parents’ personality types. Tables 3 and 4 contain the comparisons of daughters-parents’ types. In these four tables, rows and row totals indicate the numbers of offspring in each personality type. Columns and column totals refer to the numbers of parents in each personality type. The intersection of each row and column indicate the sum of parents and offspring in each personality type.

From the column totals in Tables l-4, it can be seen that mother’s personality types tended to overload in Social (see Tables 1 and 3) while the personality types of fathers were predominantly Enterprising and Realistic (see Tables 2 and 4). In order to correct for unequal sample size among these parental personality types categories, the N for each category was converted

234 GRANDY AND STAHMANN

TABLE 2

Agreement Between Fathers’ and Sons’ Personality Types

Sons’ personality types

Fathers’ personality types

R I A S E C Total

R .061 .ooo .ooo .ooo .027 ,077 (4) (0) (0) (0) (31 (1) 8

I .500 .740 .ooo .467 .330 .231 (331 cm (0) (7) (37) (3) 100

A .030 ca

S .135 (9)

E .213 (14)

C ,061 (4)

Total 1.000 66

.148 1 .ooo (41 (2)

.074 ,000 (2) (0)

.038 .ooo (1) (0)

,000 .ooo (0) (0)

1.000 1 .ooo 27 2

,200 (3)

.200 (3)

.133 (2)

,000 (0)

1.000 15

.107 ,000 (121 (0) 23

.143 ,154 (16) (2) 32

,321 ,461 (36) (6) 59

.072 .077 (8) (1) 13

1 .ooo 1.000 6.000 112 13 235


to decimals for use in the Kolmogrov-Smirnov one sample test (Siegel, 1956). Decimals were computed from column totals. Thus, the number of parental types received equalized weighting in the statistical analyses.

The information from Tables l-4 was analyzed statistically to determine if the parent-offspring relationships were due to chance. Tables 5 and 6 contain the result of this analysis.

An evaluation of the comparisons between parental-offspring personality types was made in terms of the degree of similarity between the two types. Four categories of similarity were defined: “exact,” “adjacent,” “intermediate,” and “opposite.” For example, a mother’s personality type (occupation) might be Artistic. Her daughter’s personality type (expressed occupational choice) could be any of the six types. Accordingly, her type might be “exact” (Artistic), “adjacent” (Investigative or Social), “Intermediate” (Realistic or Enterprising), or “opposite” (Conventional).


TABLE 3

Agreement Between Mothers’ and Daughters’ Personality Types

Daughters’ person- Mothers’ personality types

ality types R I A S E C Total

R

I

A

S

E

C

Total

.ooo .ooo .ooo (0) (0) (0)

.ooo .667 .333 (0) (2) (3)

.I82 .ooo .333 (2) (0) (3)

.636 .333 ,333 (7) (1) (3)

.091 ,000 .ooo (1) (0) (0)

.091 .ooo .ooo (1) (0) (0)

1.000 1 .ooo 1 .ooo 11 3 9

.ooo (0)

.165 (301

.I93 (35)

,565 (103)

,044 (8)

.033 (6)

1.000 182

.ooo .ooo (0) (0)

.I67 ,086 (2) (3)

.250 .143 (3) (5)

.583 .685 (7) (24)

,000 ,057 (0) (2)

,000 ,029 (0) (1)

1.000 1.000 12 35

0

40

48

145

11

8

6.000 252


In Tables 5 and 6, chance effects are indicated by the “expected” rows. Using Holland’s model, the probability of offspring and parent-offspring types being “adjacent” is two-sixths, and so on. Four possible comparisons were made using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov one sample test (Siegel, 1956). This test is one of goodness of fit in which an observed distribution is compared with a distribution based on chance. The largest significant differ- ence between the two distributions would indicate the direction of the “observed” values. The “observed” values in Tables 5 and 6 were calculated from the data in Tables l-4. “Exact” values were found by adding separately the numbers in parentheses and decimals on the diagonal (upper left to lower right). Decimals and numbers in parentheses next to (across) the figures on the diagonal were summed separately to find “adjacent” comparisons. “Intermediate” and “opposite” sums were computed in much the same way.


TABLE 4

Agreement Between Fathers’ and Daughters’ Personality Types

Daughters’ personality types

R

I

A

s

E

C

Total

Fathers’ personality types - R I A S E C Total

.ooo .ooo .ooo .ooo ,000 .ooo (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) 0

.145 641 .167 .090 .120 .071 (9) (11) (1) (1) (17) (1) 40

.194 .118 .233 .182 .197 .143 (12) (2) (2) (2) (28) (2) 48

.591 .235 .500 .546 .605 ,643 (37) (4) (3) (6) (86) (9) 145

.ooo ,000 .ooo .182 .050 .143 (0) (0) (0) (2) (7) (2) 11

.064 .ooo ,000 .ooo ,028 ,000 (4) (0) (0) (0) (4) (0) 8

1.000 1.000 1 .ooo 1 .ooo 1.000 1 .ooo 6.000 62 17 6 11 142 14 252


The four sums involving decimals were divided by six, since the possibility of any one type occurring by chance was one-sixth.

Three of four comparisons between the “observed” and “expected” distributions for “exact” and “adjacent” values were significant. Sons’ personality types resembled the types of their fathers, however, no relationship was found to exist between the personality types of sons and mothers. Findings for daughters indicated that relationships existed between both mother- daughter and father-daughter personality types.

DISCUSSION

Several considerations should be made in interpreting the results of this study. First, the fact that the sample contained only “decided” university


TABLE 5

Observed vs Expected Predictions of Sons’ Personality Types

Predicted Personality Types

Same-sex parent (Comparison 1)

Inter- Exact Adjacent mediate Opposite

Opposite-sex parent (Comparison 2)


No. subjects (observed)

No. subjects (expected)

Cumulative distribution

(observed)

66 II 45 41 23 76 118 18

39 18 79 39 39 78 19 39

.400 .701 .918 1 .ooo .181 so2 .852 1.000


(expected)

Obs.-exp.

.167 .500 .875 1.000 .I67 so0 .875 1 .ooo

.23.3* .201 .043 .ooo .014 .002 .023 .ooo

*Significant at .Ol level.

students, omitting “undecided” students, must be considered. Second, even though students’ expressed occupational choice and parents’ occupation were coded according to three-letter code designations, only one-letter code sum- mary categories were used for the analysis. Finally, the small N in some categories, most notably Realistic, limits the generalizability of the findings.

The results of this study supported the hypothesis that a relationship exists between parents’ and offsprings’ personality types. Offsprings’ personality types were more like parental types than could be attributed to chance for the father-son, mother-daughter and father-daughter comparisons. Findings for sons indicate that father-son relationships existed and no relationship existed between mother-son personality types. In other words, sons’ personality types were neither like nor unlike the personality types of their mothers. The findings for women were unexpected, indicating that relationships with both parents, rather than primarily one parent, have implications for the


TABLE 6

Observed vs Expected Predictions of Daughters’ Personality Types

Predicted Personality Type

Same-sex parent (Comparison 3)


No. subjects (observed)

No. subjects (expected)


(observed)

109 59 70 14

42 84 84 42

.266 .538 .a44 1 .ooo


(expected)

Obs.-exp.

,167 .500 .a75 1 .ooo

.099* .038 .031 .ooo

Opposite-sex parent (Comparison 4)


__.__-

26 115 55 56

42 84 84 42

.246 ,601 ,839 1 .ooo

.167 .500 .a75 1 .ooo

.079 .101* .036 .ooo

*Significant at .05 level.

development of personality types. It is important to note that a slightly stronger relationship was suggested between mother-daughter than between father-daughter (see Table 6).

The findings of this study supported the notion that relationships between offspring and same-sex parent have relevance for the development of personality types (Whitney, 1970). However, the findings for women under- minded this hypothesis to some extent. Instead, the relationship indicated between daughters and both parents supported the idea that the parents together form an “environment” (Nafziger, Holland, Helms, & McPartland, 1972; Barclay, Stillwell, & Barclay, 1972). Following this lead, future studies might take into account the extent to which parental personality types are congruent (alike) in their attitudes, values, and beliefs. What are the implications for offsprings’ personality types when parental types are congruent? When parental types are incongruent?


REFERENCES

Barclay, J. R., Stillwell, W. E., & Barclay, L. K. Influence of paternal occupation in social interaction measures in elementary school children. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1972, 4, 433-446.

Bordin, E. S. A theory of vocational interests as dynamic phenomena. Educafional and Psychological Measurement, 1943, 3, 49-65.

Crites, J. 0. Parental identification in relation to vocational interest development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1962, 53, 262-270.

Crites, J. 0. Vocational psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1969. Holland, J. L. Occupations finder. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1970. Holland, J. L. Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliff, New

Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1973. Nafziger, D. H., Holland, J. L., Helms, S. T., & McPartland, J. M. Applying an

occupational classification to a national representative sample of work histories of young men and women. Center for the Social Organization of Schools, Research Report No. 131. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1972.

Osipow, S. H. Theories of career development, 2nd edition. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1973.

Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956.

Super, D. S. A theory of vocational development. American Psychologist, 1953, 8, 185-190.

Whitney, D. R. Predicting vocational interests of high ability students, Unpublished paper, 1970.

Received: October 19, 1973.

Documents

Types produce types: An examination of personality development using Holland's theory