An Investigation Into the Structural Form of the O*NET–Interest Profiler–Short Form

Abstract

Since their introduction, interests have been important to the field of vocational psychology. Within career counseling, they often serve as a starting point to career exploration. The changing nature of the world of work means that accurate assessment is even more imperative. There remain a number of inventories to help assess this construct. The Occupational Information Network–Interest Profiler–Short Form (O*NET-IP-SF) is a public domain assessment utilized to measure Holland’s six occupational profiles: realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional. Using confirmatory factor analysis, this study examined the structural integrity of the O*NET-IP-SF and interpretive potential using a regionally and racially diverse sample of American college students. Results suggest that O*NET-IP-SF possesses poor fit with a six-factor structure and that modifications are needed to reach acceptable levels of scale performance. Implications for researchers and career counselors are discussed.

Toward a dimensional model of vocational interests.

“…We caution researchers against the use of item-level CFA in evaluating dimensional models of interests, because poor fit may simply reflect the intrinsic heterogeneity of broad-band interest factors. For example, Warlick and colleagues (2018) conducted a six-factor CFA to evaluate the O*NET Interest Profiler Short Form (Rounds, Su, Lewis, & Rivkin, 2010), with 10 items as indicators for each RIASEC type. Their study reported inadequate fit of the six-factor structure for the measure (CFI = .70, TLI = .69, RMSEA = .08, SRMR = .10).…”

“…CFA has had limited applications in interest research and, when conducted, has generally yielded poor model fit (e.g., Boyle & Fabris, 1992; L. L. Jones, 2001; Warlick, Ingram, Ternes, & Krieshok, 2018). Similarly, inadequate model fit has been reported in the personality literature when CFA was used to evaluate structural validity (see Hopwood & Donnellan, 2010, for a review).…”

“…previously reviewed, mostly used exploratory methods. CFA has had limited applications in interest research and, when conducted, has generally yielded poor model fit (e.g., Boyle & Fabris, 1992; L. L. Jones, 2001;Warlick, Ingram, Ternes, & Krieshok, 2018).…”

Examination of the Relationship Between Personality Traits and Vocational Interests: In a Sample of the Uk Undergraduate Students

“…The construct validity of this inventory was examined by EFA and subsequently CFA. The findings showed a six factors solution and the best-fit model (χ2 (300) =2,899.25, CFI=.88, TLI=.87, RMSEA=.07) (Warlick et al, 2018). This short-form version of the scale was developed for application to counselling and consulting settings because it can be completed in a short time (Rounds et al, 1999).…”