personality, not the absolute strength of each value. As one of the clearest instantiations of Allport’s ‘idiographic’
approach to personality (cf. Piekkola, 2011 ), the measure reveals (only) the relative emphases placed on each
value; it does not permit between-person comparisons. It is possible for the highest value of an apathetic person
to be less intense and effective than the lowest value of a person in whom all values are prominent and dynamic
(Allport, Vernon, & Lindzey, 1960 ). Third, this within-person orientation is implemented by a unique response
format, in which the respondent allocates points to indicate relative preference for behavioral statements that
reflect paired values.
Description
Kopelman et al. (2003) maintained the format and scoring of the SOV. In Part 1, the respondent rates 30 items
regarding activities, preferences, and desired outcomes by allocating points between two alternatives, each of
which represents one of Spranger’s values. A strong preference for one value over the other is indicated by allo-
cating 3 points to the first and 0 points to the second, while a slight preference is indicated by allocating 2 points
to the first and 1 point to the second. Part 2 is similar, but the respondent ranks four possible alternatives (repre-
senting four of the Spranger values) by assigning a score of 4, 3, 2, or 1 to each alternative. There are 120 response
options in all, 20 of which refer to each of the six values. A score of 40 on each would indicate equal preference
for the six values. Kopelman et al. (2003) revised and updated 15 of the original 45 SOV items. These item
changes fell into three categories: ‘gender-inclusive wording, expanded religious inclusiveness, and updated cul-
tural conventions’ (p. 206). Gender-inclusive wording was added in seven items, wording was changed to
expand religious inclusiveness in five items, and eight items were changed to reflect more current cultural refer-
ents and mores. Combining the two response options is problematic, both conceptually and psychometrically.
For example, responses in Part 1 yield at least quasi-interval data, but the rankings in Part 2 must be considered
to be ordinal; the paired comparison response format also renders scale scores statistically non-independent.
Sample
Kopelman et al. (2003) had 121 university graduate students and 58 undergraduate students, all enrolled in
‘business-related programs,’ complete the original and revised versions of SOV. No age data were provided for
the sample, but 54% were male.
Reliability
Internal Consistency
Mean Cronbach alpha coefficients across the six values for the original and revised SOV versions were found
to be .66 and .67, respectively, although the alpha coefficient differed somewhat for the Economic value domain
(.64 for the original versus .72 for the revised version) and the Political value domain (.61 for the original versus
.55 for the revised version; Kopelman et al., 2003 ).
Test/C0Retest
Respondents completed the SOV (3rd ed.) and the SOV4 in a counterbalanced order, with approximately a
two-month interval. Across the six value domains, the median cross-form correlation was 0.74. Value domain
scores on the SOV (3rd ed.) and the SOV4 shared only 55% common variance.
Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
While Kopelman et al. (2003) did not report any validity correlations for the SOV4 with scores on external
measures, the median between-version correlation of .74 (albeit attenuated by a two-month interval), suggests
that value domain scores on the original and the revised SOV share considerable measurement variance.
Kopelman, Prottas, and Tatum (2004) did compare the SOV with both the Rokeach and Schwartz value measures
in terms of ideal value profiles perceived by graduate administrators for students in six graduate programs, but
they compared only the idealized value domains, rather than actual scores. Mean scores on the six value domains
did not differ between the two versions (see Kopelman et al., 2003 , Table 1). The median correlation between cor-
responding scores on the six value domains was .74 (ranging from .72 to .83).508 18. MEASURES OF VALUES AND MORAL PERSONALITY
V. VICES AND VIRTUES