Divergent/Discriminant
Item analyses revealed statistically significant differences for only four of the 43 value domain scores affected
by the Kopelman et al. (2003) changes to item wording. No other divergent/discriminant validity information for
the SOV4 is currently available.
Construct/Factor Analytic
No construct/factor analytic validity evidence for the SOV4 is currently available.
Criterion/Predictive
No criterion/predictive validity evidence has been published for the SOV4.
Location
Kopelman, R.E., Rovenpor, J.L., & Guan, M. (2003). The Study of Values : Construction of the fourth edition.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62 , 203/C0220.
Results and Comments
Availability of a contemporary version of the SOV would be a welcome development. As Kopelman et al.
(2003) have suggested, the SOV differs from many other measures of values by asking respondents to indicate
their relative preference for specific activities and outcomes, rather than more abstract value terms. Such a meth-
odology does have an intuitive appeal, although its relative utility remains an empirical question. Moreover, use
of the SOV4 is limited by absence of published information regarding normative statistics, reliability, and valid-
ity. As a consequence, the relative predictive utility of the revised SOV, as well as the underlying Spranger
model, has not been sufficiently evaluated. In addition, correlates of SOV4 with other established measures of
values are necessary in order to establish any distinctive descriptive power of this instrument. Finally, users of
the SOV4 must directly address lingering questions regarding psychometric limitations of idiographic measure-
ment strategies, or consider migrating to a comparative response format.
SOV4 SAMPLE ITEMS
Directions for Part I
A number of controversial statements or questions
with two alternative answers are given below. Indicate
your personal preferences by writing appropriate
figures in the boxes to the right of each question. Some
of the alternatives may appear equally attractive or unat-
tractive to you. Nevertheless, please attempt to choose
the alternative that is relatively more acceptable to you.
For each question you have three points that you may
distribute in any of the following combinations [exam-
ples illustrating the 3 /C00, 0/C03, 2/C01, and 1 /C02 possible
allocation follow].
Item 21. ‘Are you more interested in reading accounts
of the lives and work of individuals [men, in the
original] such as: (a) Indira Gandhi, Theodore
Roosevelt, and Winston Churchill [the Political
response; versus ‘Alexander, Julius Caesar, and
Charlemagne’ in the original]; (b) Ayn Rand, Jean-
Paul Sartre, and Immanuel Kant [the Theoretical
response; versus ‘Aristotle, Socrates, and Kant’ in the
original].’Item 41. ‘Do great exploits and adventures of
discovery such as Columbus’s, Magellan’s, and
Earhart’s [‘Columbus’s, Magellan’s, Byrd’s, and
Amundsen’s’ in the original] seem to you significant
because /C0
a.they demonstrate the ability of human beings
[‘man’ in the original] to overcome the difficult
forces of nature [the Political response]
b.they add to our knowledge of geography,
meteorology, oceanography, etc. [the Theoretical
response]
c.they weld human interests and international
feelings throughout the world [the Social
response]
d.they contribute each in a small way to an ultimate
understanding of the universe’ [the Religious
response].
Notes :
Written permission required prior to use.
Reproduced with permission.509 OVERVIEW OF THE MEASURES
V. VICES AND VIRTUES