Vocational Interests
Holland, J. L. · 1959
別名: Occupational Interests · RIASEC
Holland's theory treats occupational preference as a stable dispositional trait rather than a passing choice, organising both people and work environments into the same six types: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising and Conventional. The types are arranged in a hexagon whose geometry is a substantive claim — adjacent types are more similar than opposite ones — and the theory's core prediction is congruence: people whose interest profile matches their environment show higher satisfaction, stability and achievement. Interests are treated as a distinct domain from both ability and personality.
Framework treating occupational preference as a stable dispositional trait rather than a skill: what a person is drawn to doing is measurable, consistent over time, and distinct from what they are able to do. Holland's RIASEC typology is the field's reference structure; the ORVIS operationalises the same territory over eight scales derived empirically rather than from the hexagon.
- 出典:
- Holland, J. L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 6(1), 35-45.
- デジタルオブジェクト識別子 — ジャーナル記事への直接リンク。:
- 10.1037/h0040767
この理論に基づいて構築された検証済みテストを受ける
構成概念について読むことは何であるかを教えてくれます。検証済み測定具はそこでの自分の位置を教えてくれます。無料で受けられ、数分で結果が出ます。
エビデンス概要
- 実証的サポート
- 強力なエビデンス
- 再現性
- 十分に再現
- 異文化
- ほぼ普遍的
- メタ分析
- 18件索引済み
これらの評価は、理論に関する公開文献を要約したもので、それに基づいて構築された個々のテストの品質ではありません。以下に記載された出典に基づく編集判断であり、エビデンスが蓄積されるにつれて変化します。
歴史的背景
Holland proposed the typology in 1959 and refined it through four editions of Making Vocational Choices between 1973 and 1997. It absorbed and organised the older interest-measurement tradition running from Strong's 1927 Vocational Interest Blank and Kuder's inventories, giving a scattered empirical practice a testable structure. The RIASEC framework became the organising backbone of the U.S. Department of Labor's O*NET occupational database, which is what allows interest profiles to be matched against thousands of real occupations rather than a short list.
構成概念
リーダーシップ
Vocational interest in directing, persuading, and being the one who decides — the appetite for leading rather than the skill at it (Pozzebon et al., 2010). High scorers are drawn to roles that own outcomes in public; a low score is not passivity, since many people want real influence over the work with no interest in owning the outcome visibly.
組織化
Vocational interest in budgets, schedules, records, and the administrative machinery that keeps an operation from drifting (Pozzebon et al., 2010). High scorers find genuine satisfaction in a system that holds — a different thing from personal tidiness; low scorers are not disorganized, they simply get nothing back from maintaining the structure itself.
利他性
Vocational interest in work whose result is another person being better off — teaching, care, counselling, service (Pozzebon et al., 2010). A low score says nothing about whether the person is kind, only that helping is not what they want the working day to consist of.
創造性
Vocational interest in writing, performing, design, and art as working activities rather than as tastes (Pozzebon et al., 2010). It asks about making, not appreciating: enjoying music and wanting to play it professionally are different answers, and this construct is about the second.
分析
Vocational interest in the sciences, mathematics, and problems that hold still long enough to be taken apart (Pozzebon et al., 2010). High scorers want the mechanism, not just the outcome; a low score is common in people entirely capable of the work who would rather spend the day doing something else.
生産性
Vocational interest in growing, building, repairing, and working with tools, land, and animals — the most physical of the eight ORVIS interests (Pozzebon et al., 2010). It describes wanting the day to end with something concrete to point at.
冒険
Vocational interest in competition, physical challenge, and work with real stakes attached (Pozzebon et al., 2010). It is not recklessness: a high score describes someone who is more present when something is on the line, while a low score describes a preference for conditions where attention can go to the work instead of the danger.
博学
Vocational interest in reading, writing, languages, and the handling of ideas in words (Pozzebon et al., 2010). It sits close to Analysis without being the same: one wants the mechanism, the other wants the expression.
現実的
Holland's Realistic type: vocational interest in working with things — building, repairing, operating, testing — work whose result is tangible (Holland, 1997; Rounds et al., 2016). People high on R are often worn down not by effort but by abstraction: a whole day about the work instead of in it.
研究的
Holland's Investigative type: vocational interest in working with ideas — experiments, diagnosis, evidence, questions actually answered (Holland, 1997; Rounds et al., 2016). High I profiles do their best work one step back from the action; the construct does not require a lab coat — analysis lives in finance, medicine, code, and repair shops alike.
芸術的
Holland's Artistic type: vocational interest in creating — making something exist that did not: text, music, images, scenes (Holland, 1997; Rounds et al., 2016). A high A in rigidly structured work is a common source of quiet career misery; a low A is equally informative — briefs, standards, and formats feel like support, not a cage.
社会的
Holland's Social type: vocational interest in helping — people changing because you were there: taught, guided, treated, supported (Holland, 1997; Rounds et al., 2016). It is not extraversion: one can love helping and still need silence afterwards; the content reflects sustained one-on-one impact more than social buzz.
企業的
Holland's Enterprising type: vocational interest in persuading and leading — negotiating, deciding, owning outcomes including the risk (Holland, 1997; Rounds et al., 2016). High E profiles often already run things informally wherever they are placed.
慣習的
Holland's Conventional type: vocational interest in organizing data and processes — records kept right, inventories that balance, systems where nothing falls through (Holland, 1997; Rounds et al., 2016). Organizations run on high C people and habitually forget to say so; precision work here is the something, not a stepping stone.
機器
- Oregon Vocational Interest Scales(ORVIS)Pozzebon, Visser, Ashton, Lee & Goldberg2010
- O*NET Mini Interest Profiler(Mini-IP)Rounds, J., Wee, C. J. M., Cao, M., Song, C., & Lewis, P.2016
この理論に基づくテスト
実践的応用
RIASEC is the dominant framework in career counselling worldwide, used to generate occupational suggestions from an interest profile and to structure conversations about fit. Its integration with O*NET means profiles map onto real labour-market data on tasks, training routes and outlook. Interests predict educational major choice and occupational membership well, and persistence in a field moderately. Read for self-knowledge, the profile is most useful as a description of the kind of work activity a person gravitates to, not as a prescription of a job title.
測定方法
Measured by rating liking for occupational activities, producing scores on six scales usually summarised as a three-letter code from the highest types; interpreted through congruence with environment codes.
批評と制限事項
Congruence — the theory's central prediction — has weaker meta-analytic support than the framework's popularity suggests, with correlations to job satisfaction typically in the .15 to .25 range. The hexagonal structure fits well in U.S. samples but is distorted in many non-Western ones, where the Artistic and Investigative positions in particular shift. The six types show large and stable sex differences (notably Realistic and Social), which raises real questions about whether interest-based recommendation reinforces occupational segregation. Interests also predict what people choose far better than how well they will perform.
主要文献
- Holland, J. L.. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. 10.1037/h0040767
- Holland, J. L.. (1997). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments, 3rd edition.
- Tsabari, O., Tziner, A. & Meir, E. I.. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relation between person-environment congruence and work outcomes. 10.1177/1069072704270793