See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/240730854

The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory

Article  in  Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin · January 2008

DOI: 10.1177/0034355207311342

CITATIONS READS
6 3,151

5 authors, including:

Stephen James Leierer Terry L. Blackwell

East Carolina University Montana State University Billings
43 PUBLICATIONS   409 CITATIONS    24 PUBLICATIONS   163 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Douglas Clark Strohmer

The University of Memphis
90 PUBLICATIONS   1,236 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

State-Federal VR Outcome Research View project

Career State Inventory View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Stephen James Leierer on 17 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin http://rcb.sagepub.com/

The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory: A Profile Interpretation for Rehabilitation Counselors
Stephen J. Leierer, Terry L. Blackwell, Douglas C. Strohmer, Richard C. Thompson and David A. C. Donnay
Rehabil Couns Bull 2008 51: 76
DOI: 10.1177/0034355207311342

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://rcb.sagepub.com/content/51/2/76

Published by:
Hammill Institute on Disabilities

and

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://rcb.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://rcb.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Feb 26, 2008

What is This?

Downloaded from rcb.sagepub.com by guest on October 11, 2013

 Rehabilitation Counseling
Bulletin
Volume 51 Number 2
January 2008 76-84
The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory © 2008 Hammill Institute
on Disabilities
10.1177/0034355207311342
http://rcb.sagepub.com
A Profile Interpretation for Rehabilitation Counselors hosted at
http://online.sagepub.com

Stephen J. Leierer
University of Memphis, Tennessee
Terry L. Blackwell
Montana State University–Billings
Douglas C. Strohmer
University of Memphis, Tennessee
Richard C. Thompson
Consulting Psychology Press, Inc., Palo Alto, California
David A. C. Donnay
MDA Leadership Consulting, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Using aggregate scores from 281 female and 133 male rehabilitation counselors, the researchers developed prototypical Strong
Interest Inventory (SII) profiles. They used these profiles to explore the interests, preferences, and professional identity of reha-
bilitation counselors. Using the General Occupational Themes (GOTs), Basic Interest Scales (BISs), Occupational Scales
(OSs), and Personal Style Scales (PSSs), which make up the newly revised SII, the authors obtained empirically defined pro-
totypical profiles for female and male rehabilitation counselors. The Social–Artistic Holland-code dyad was a reoccurring
theme across the each profile. Although there are differences in each of the SII scales across genders, the authors found con-
gruence not only within the scales of a particular gender but also across genders. Consistencies and inconsistencies among the
GOTs, BISs, OSs, and PSSs are discussed. Implications for counselor recruitment and practice are also discussed.

Keywords: career assessment; vocational assessment; rehabilitation counselors professional issues

I n a review of various occupations, U.S. News & World

Report (1998) noted,
The demand for (rehabilitation) counselors already
exceeds the supply by at least 25 percent, and the
number of people needing rehabilitation services
will rise as advances in medical technology save
more lives. Legislation requiring equal-employment
rights for persons with disabilities also will spur
demand for counselors. (p. 57)
Despite this long-term and ever-increasing demand, no
systematic research has examined the interest patterns
that are predictive of success and satisfaction as a reha-
bilitation counselor (Janes & Emener, 1986; Matkin &
Bauer, 1993; Patterson, 1962; Rubin & Roessler, 2001).
Given the lack of information on this topic, we used the
research reported by Leierer, Strohmer, Blackwell,
Thompson, and Donnay (2008 [this issue]) to further
examine the prototypical interests and preferences of
male and female rehabilitation counselors based on the
newly revised Strong Interest Inventory (SII; 2004).
The SII has a long and venerable history, beginning
with the work of E. K. Strong Jr. and the publication of
his first formal assessment inventory in 1927 (Donnay,
Morris, Schaubhut, & Thompson, 2004). Since that time, the
SII has been regularly updated and continues to be one
of the most scientifically sound, thoroughly researched,
and widely used interest inventories. The strength of the
SII lies in the variety of data generated in the interpretative
report. These data are useful in counseling and provide
Authors’ Note: The authors would like to acknowledge the work of
Nancy Schaubhut and Michael Morris, and the entire SII research
team at CPP, for allowing us to participate in the renorming of the
SII. In addition, we would like to acknowledge the assistance of our
graduate students at LSU Health Sciences Center, Kacie Kelly,
Tiffany Jenkins, Kathryn Burton, Eva Belcas, and Jennifer Koenig.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Stephen J. Leierer, College of Education, 100 Ball Hall, University
of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152; e-mail: sleierer@memphis.edu.

76

information that is usually not found with other interest
inventories (Osborn & Zunker, 2006).
There are 291 items on the newly revised SII. For each of
the items, the respondent is asked to indicate his or her pref-
erences from among five response categories on an answer
sheet. The answers are then analyzed by computer (the SII
cannot be scored by hand) to derive scores on measures of
interest type, called scales. The results are printed on a report
called a profile, which presents the scale scores in an orga-
nized format and offers interpretive information. Comparing
the individual’s pattern of responses to the patterns of
responses of a general representative sample of people of
different types and in different occupations, the SII then
gives the respondent five main types of information:
1. scores on 6 General Occupational Themes
(GOTs), which reflect the respondent’s overall
orientation to work based on Holland’s theory of
types (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social,
Enterprising, and Conventional);
2. scores on 30 Basic Interest Scales (BISs), which
report consistency of interests or disinterests in
30 specific areas, such as art, science, teaching,
and education;
3. scores on 244 Occupational Scales (OSs; 122 for
each gender), which indicate the degree of similarity
between the respondent’s interests and the character-
istic interests of people working in those occupations;
4. scores on five Personal Style Scales (PSSs), which
measure aspects of style with which an individual
likes to learn, work, assume leadership, take risks,
and work within teams; and
5. summary of item responses to help identify
inconsistent or unusual profiles for special atten-
tion (Donnay et al., 2004, p. 2).
The purposes of this article are to present the SII pro-
files for the prototypical male and female rehabilitation
counselor (see Note 1), based on an accompanying study
by Leierer et al. (2008), and to use the profiles to inter-
pret the interests and preferences of rehabilitation coun-
selors. This article assumes that the reader has a working
knowledge of the SII and Holland’s theory of types.
Furthermore, critique of the newly revised SII is beyond
the scope of this article, but it is provided in the test
review by Case and Blackwell (2008 [this issue]).
Profile Interpretation
Administrative Indices
The first step in SII profile interpretation is to deter-
mine if there are any unusual response patterns present
Leierer / The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory 77
prior to providing an interpretation of the results. The
Response Summary for prototypical rehabilitation coun-
selors (see Table 1) on the profile provides a summary of
the percentage of responses made in each section of the
inventory using the five possible response options. By
examining the individual’s response percentages for each
section of the test, as well as for the entire test, the coun-
selor can begin to develop insight into the individual’s
approach to the assessment and general disposition
regarding the areas covered in the various sections of the
SII. The counselor can then begin to develop direction
for the interpretation conversation with the individual
(Donnay et al., 2004).
The next step looks at the Total Responses Index of
the profile, which is summarized with three numeric val-
ues under the summary table. The first value is the “total
possible responses,” which will always be 291 as there
are 291 items on the newly revised SII. “Your response
total” is the second value and shows the number of items
to which the individual responded on the inventory. The
difference between the two values is shown in “items
omitted.” If more than 15 items on the SII are omitted, a
profile will not be generated.
Finally, the Typicality Index provides the user with a
numerical value index for how consistent or inconsistent
the individual was in terms of an overall pattern of
responses. Scores between 17 and 24 suggest a combi-
nation of item responses that “appears consistent.”
Although a Typicality score below 17 results in a report
that the combination of item responses “appears incon-
sistent,” this report does not necessarily indicate an
invalid profile. In some cases, it may be a reflection of
the individual’s idiosyncratic interest pattern that war-
rants further discussion with the respondent.
It is interesting to note some similarities and differ-
ences between the response patterns of the prototypical
male and female rehabilitation counselor. Both groups
endorsed at least 50% of the items on the SII as like or
strongly like. Although men and women generally had
consistent item responses, there is a significant differ-
ence, χ2(20, N = 414) = 19.24, p = .001, in the distribu-
tion of the item responses. That is, women had a greater
percentage of strongly dislike marked than men did
(33% vs. 11%). This difference was also seen in the
indifferent response category; women had a smaller per-
centage of items marked as indifferent as compared to
their male counterparts (9% vs. 23%). It is also interest-
ing to note that the prototypical female counselor indi-
cated a strong dislike for 51% of the occupations listed
in the profile, perhaps suggesting a very clear set of
preferences concerning occupations. The difference in
response patterns may explain why the women’s scores
on the GOT, BIS, and OSS are more differentiated
78 Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin

Table 1
Administrative Indexes—Response Summary
Item Response Percentages

Section Title Strongly Like Like Indifferent Dislike Strongly Dislike

Female rehabilitation counselor

Occupations 4 31 7 7 51
Subject areas 2 52 17 4 24
Activities 5 54 8 7 26
Leisure activities 11 54 4 11 21
People 0 69 19 13 0
Characteristics 11 67 0 11 11
Total percentage 4 46 9 8 33
Male rehabilitation counselor
Occupations 4 33 19 23 21
Subject areas 2 57 26 7 9
Activities 0 64 24 8 5
Leisure activities 4 54 32 7 4
People 0 56 38 6 0
Characteristics 0 89 11 0 0
Total percentage 2 51 23 13 11

Source: Reproduced by permission from the Strong Interest Inventory® Profile of the Strong Interest Inventory® Copyright © 1933, 1938, 1945,
1946, 1966, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1985, 1994, 2004 by Consulting Psychology Press, Inc.
Note: Total possible responses: 291; Your response total: 291; Items omitted: 0; Typicality index: 23. Due to rounding, total percentage may not
add up to 100%.

(i.e., distinctness of their work personality profile) than
the men’s scores are.
Because the indices are all in the acceptable range,
the user may now go to the profile summary to find a list
of the prototypical rehabilitation counselor’s GOTs,
BISs, and OSs elevations and the preferred personal
styles (see Table 2).
General Occupational Themes
Interpreting the SII profile begins by looking at the
individual’s GOT scores. The GOTs address the ques-
tion, “What do you like?” In other words, these themes
not only define work interests, but also motivations and
particular skill areas. These themes, based on Holland’s
theory of types, were added to an earlier version of the
SII to give a theoretical component to what had been pri-
marily a strictly empirically based test. Each of these
scales has a standard score mean of 50 and a standard
deviation of 10. When interpreting the GOTs, the user
should focus on the individual’s general interests and
then use this information as a bridge to the world of work
(see Table 3). According to Prince and Heiser (2000),
“Scores that differ by only three or four [t score] points
should be considered essentially equivalent” (p. 39). As
there is always some degree of error in the measurement,
it is important not to infer meaningful distinctions when
the difference is only a few points. Because the GOTs are
“reported in terms of Holland codes, they should be
interpreted in the context of that theory” (Osborn &
Zunker, 2006, p. 85). The basic idea is that individuals
will be most satisfied with work environments that match
their work personality (Dawis, 2002; Holland, 1987,
1992; Lofquist & Dawis, 1991).
The GOT scores for the prototypical female rehabili-
tation counselor reveal a three-letter pattern of Social,
Artistic, and Enterprising (SAE). The GOT elevations
would suggest underlying career motivators that include
helping others while at the same time allowing for
expression of creativity along with persuading and influ-
encing. For the prototypical male rehabilitation coun-
selor, the three-letter GOT is somewhat different. In this
case, the GOT scores are elevated on the Social, Artistic,
and Realistic (SAR) themes. Although this would sug-
gest career motivators of cooperation, service to others,
and the ability to express independence and imagination,
the prototypical male rehabilitation counselor also evi-
dences a need for work settings that recognize tradition,
practicality, and the use of commonsense approaches to
problem solving. Both profiles draw heavily on people
skills, verbal abilities, and the ability to listen and under-
stand; and both profiles suggest the importance of work
settings that allow for the expression of creativity.
 Leierer / The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory 79

Table 2
Strong Rehabilitation Counselor Profile Summary
Female Male

HIGHEST THEMES
Social, Artistic, Enterprising (SAE) Social, Artistic, Realistic (SAR)
TOP FIVE INTEREST AREAS
1. Counseling & Helping (S) 1. Counseling & Helping (S)
2. Teaching & Education (S) 2. Social Sciences (S)
3. Human Resources & Training (S) 3. Law (E)
4. Visual Arts & Design (A) 4. Human Resources & Training (S)
5. Social Sciences (S) 5. Nature & Agriculture (R)
AREAS OF LEAST INTEREST
Mathematics (I) Office Management (C)
Computer Hardware & Electronics (R) Taxes & Accounting (C)
Taxes & Accounting (C) Military (R)
TOP TEN STRONG OCCUPATIONS
1. Speech Pathologist (SA) 1. Rehabilitation Counselor (SAI)
2. Rehabilitation Counselor (SAI) 2. Urban & Regional Planner (AI)
3. Social Worker (SA) 3. Corporate Trainer (AES)
4. Photographer (ARE) 4. Special Education Teacher (SEA)
5. Special Education Teacher (SE) 5. English Teacher (ASE)
6. Foreign Language Teacher (SAE) 6. Paralegal (CA)
7. College Instructor (SA) 7. School Counselor (SE)
8. Corporate Trainer (AES) 8. Nursing Home Administrator (CES)
9. Psychologist (IA) 9. Human Resources Manager (ES)
10. Registered Nurse (SI) 10. Psychologist (IA)
OCCUPATIONS OF DISSIMILAR INTEREST
Physicist (IRA) R&D Manager (IRC)
Mathematician (IRC) Actuary (CI)
Chemist (IR) Mathematics Teacher (CIS)
R&D Manager (IR) Computer Scientist (ICR)
Actuary (CI) Carpenter (REA)
PERSONAL STYLE SCALE PREFERENCES
1. Likely to prefer working with people 1. Likely to prefer a balance of working alone and working with people
2. Seem to prefer to learn through lectures and books 2. Seem to prefer to learn through lectures and books
3. Probably are comfortable both leading by example 3. Probably prefer to lead by taking charge
and taking charge
4. May dislike taking risks 4. May like taking risks
5. Probably enjoy both team roles and independent roles 5. Probably enjoy both team roles and independent roles

Source: Reproduced by permission from the Strong Interest Inventory® Profile of the Strong Interest Inventory® Copyright © 1933, 1938, 1945,
1946, 1966, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1985, 1994, 2004 by Consulting Psychology Press, Inc.

According to the SII manual, when examining the
respondents’ scores on the GOTs, “It may be helpful to
emphasize only those Themes on which they scored high
or very high” (Donnay et al., 2004, p. 168). In that case,
only two letters elevate in the high range on the proto-
typical male and female rehabilitation counselor profiles,
indicating an SA two-letter pattern for both genders.
From this perspective, it seems that the work personality
and preferred work environments for male and female
rehabilitation counselors are very similar. It may be that
the R theme evidenced by male rehabilitation counselors
is more a reflection of their avocational interests than of
their preferred work environments.
A mention of those themes in which the respondents
showed little or very little interest may also be warranted
at this time. For the prototypical female rehabilitation
counselor profile, little interest is evidenced on the
Conventional (C) and Realistic (R) themes. For the male
rehabilitation counselor profile, little interest is evi-
denced on the Conventional theme. (This pattern is typi-
cal of men and women in general as well.) Overall, it
seems that both male and female rehabilitation coun-
selors prefer work environments that allow social and
artistic activities and duties and would tend not to enjoy
work environments that have heavy loads of data man-
agement and record keeping.
80 Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin

Table 3
General Occupational Theme Descriptions
Theme Code Interests Work Activities Potential Skills Values

Realistic R Machines, computer Operating equipment, using Mechanical ingenuity Tradition, practicality,
networks, athletics, tools, building, repairing, and dexterity, physical common sense
working outdoors providing security coordination
Investigative I Science, medicine, Performing lab work, Mathematical ability, Independence,
mathematics, solving abstract problems, researching, writing, curiosity,
research conducting research analyzing learning
Artistic A Self-expression, art Composing music, Creativity, musical Beauty, originality,
appreciation, performing, writing, ability, artistic independence,
communication, creating visual art expression imagination
culture
Social S People, teamwork, Teaching, caring for People skills, verbal Cooperation,
helping, community people, counseling, ability, listening, showing generosity, service
service training employees understanding to others
Enterprising E Business, politics, Selling, managing, Verbal ability, Risk taking, status,
leadership, persuading, ability to motivate competition,
entrepreneurship marketing and direct others influence
Conventional C Organization, data Setting up procedures and Ability to work with Accuracy, stability,
management, accounting, systems, organizing, numbers, data analysis, efficiency
investing, information keeping records, finances, attention
systems developing computer to detail
applications

Source: Reproduced by permission from the Strong Interest Inventory® Profile of the Strong Interest Inventory® Copyright © 1933, 1938, 1945,
1946, 1966, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1985, 1994, 2004 by Consulting Psychology Press, Inc.

Basic Interest Scales BISs for both genders on the SII. In addition, the women
showed interests in the areas of Teaching and Education
Whereas the “GOTs address the career issues of Who
(S) and Visual Arts and Design (A), whereas the men
am I?, Why do I want to work?, and Where do I want to
showed additional interests in Law (E) and Nature and
work?, the Basic Interest Scales (BIS) delve into the
Agriculture (R).
broader themes by beginning to answer the question
Areas in which the female rehabilitation counselors show
What do I want to do?” (Grutter & Hammer, 2004, p. 13).
least interest were Mathematics (I), Computer Hardware and
The BISs help a test-taker organize and prioritize topics
Electronics (R), and Taxes and Accounting (C). For the men
and activities that she or he likes and dislikes. The BISs
the areas of least interest were Office Management (C),
reflect interests that cannot be identified only through
Taxes and Accounting (C), and Military (R).
work task and work environment but also through the
The male and female prototypical rehabilitation coun-
respondent’s general lifestyle—friends, family, home
selor both scored high on items that manifested their
environment, volunteer activities, hobbies, and so forth
interest in helping others. The high interests evidenced
(Prince & Heiser, 2000). Like the GOT scales, each of
on the male and female SII profiles for the Social GOT
these scales has a standard score mean of 50 and a stan-
and the Social BIS next lead to a discussion of the 122
dard deviation of 10.
OSs of the Profile.
The newly revised SII now has 30 BISs. Although it is
possible to have high interest in a particular Holland type
as described by the GOTs and, at the same time, show
Occupational Scales
little interest in the basic interest scales of that theme, the Whereas the GOTs “provide information about general
BIS findings for the prototypical rehabilitation counselor interest themes and the BISs about more specific activi-
in this sample were consistent with the GOT results (see ties, the Occupational Scales (OSs) provide information
Table 2). The GOT letter elevations for the prototypical about how similar the respondents’ likes and dislikes are
rehabilitation counselor are further defined by their high to people working in 122 different occupations” (Grutter
scores on the Counseling and Helping (S), Human & Hammer, 2004, p. 14). The OSs were the original scales
Resources and Training (S), and Social Sciences (S) of the developed by E. K. Strong Jr. Unlike the GOTs and BISs,

which have a standard score mean of 50, the OSs are
interpreted differently. Generally, the more extreme the
score, the stronger the inference that can be made about
the similarity or dissimilarity of the individual’s
responses to a particular occupation comparison group.
Scores of 40 or above on any particular occupational
scale indicate the respondent has a pattern of likes and
dislikes similar to individuals in that occupation and
would suggest that the individual might find the occupa-
tion satisfying or rewarding. For example, if someone
scored above 65 on the Rehabilitation Counselor
Occupational Scale, she or he would have interest pat-
terns very similar to rehabilitation counselors. On the
other hand, scores below 30 indicate pattern of interests
that are not shared by people on a particular OS and
might suggest that the individual may find that particular
occupation less satisfying and less rewarding.
The 10 OSs most closely aligned with the interest of
the prototypical female rehabilitation counselor (in order
of similarity) are speech pathologist (SA), rehabilitation
counselor (SAI), social worker (SA), photographer
(ARE), special education teacher (SE), foreign language
teacher (SAE), college instructor (SA), corporate trainer
(AES), psychologist (IA), and registered nurse (SI).
These scale elevations indicate that the prototypical
female rehabilitation counselor has interest patterns sim-
ilar to people who are satisfied with their employment in
these occupations. Conversely, the five lowest OSs of the
female rehabilitation counselor are physicist (IRA),
mathematician (IRC), chemist (IR), R&D manager (IR),
and actuary (CI). It would probably be safe to say that
female rehabilitation counselors would tend to be dissat-
isfied and unfulfilled in these occupations.
Occupations where the prototypical male rehabilita-
tion counselor scored “Similar” are rehabilitation coun-
selor (SAI), urban and regional planner (AI), corporate
trainer (AES), special education teacher (SEA), English
teacher (ASE), paralegal (CA), school counselor (SE),
nursing home administrator (CES), human resources
manager (ES), and psychologist (IA). “Dissimilar” occu-
pations include R&D manager (IRC), actuary (CI),
mathematics teacher (CIS), computer scientist (ICR),
and carpenter (REA). It is interesting to note here that
the top 10 occupational matches for male and female
counselors had only three in common other than rehabil-
itation counselor: psychologist, special education
teacher, and corporate trainer. Of these three, psycholo-
gist and special education teacher seem intuitively logi-
cal, but corporate trainer is less so. An examination of
the description for corporate trainer in the Occupational
Outlook Handbook (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 2006) offers a logical connection:
Leierer / The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory 81
“attracting the most qualified employees and matching
them to the jobs for which they are best suited”
(http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos021.htm). It is also inter-
esting to note that male counselors were very similar to
school counselors and paralegals, whereas females
were very similar to social workers and speech pathol-
ogists. These differences suggest that although there
are many similarities between the male and female
rehabilitation counselors, some differences in interests
exist as well.
Personal Style Scales
The PSSs were initially added to the 1994 SII as a way
of measuring an individual’s preferences for and comfort
with broad styles of living and working. The newly revised
SII added a new style scale, Team Orientation, to the exist-
ing Work Style, Learning Environment, Leadership Style,
and Risk Taking scales (Donnay et al., 2004).
Work style. Moving from the more specific OSs, the
PSSs of the SII help the respondent to further define the
“What do I want to do? and Where do I want to do it?
content covered in the other scales” (Grutter & Hammer,
2004, pp. 15–16). In reviewing the Work Style scale
preferences, some gender differences become evident.
For the general representative sample, women’s scores
are closer to the “Works With People” anchor of the scale
(M = 54), and men are closer to the “Works With
Ideas/Data/Things” anchor of the scale (M = 46).
Although both the female and male prototypical rehabil-
itation counselor profiles show a preference for working
with people versus ideas, data, and things, this prefer-
ence for interaction with people is more pronounced for
the women (M = 66) than for the men (M = 54).
Learning environment. In the general representative
sample, there are no significant gender differences
between men and women on the Learning Environment
scale (women, M = 49.24; men, M = 50.76). Prototypical
rehabilitation counselor profiles for both men and
women show high score elevations on the Learning
Environment scale (women, M = 68; men, M = 66), sug-
gesting a preference for academic environments where
information is primarily conveyed through lectures and
reading opposed to the more practical, hands-on learning
environments. As with the Work Style scale, prototypical
rehabilitation counselors’ Learning Environment scores
fall in the direction suggested by their GOTs, which
point toward the “Academic” anchor on their profile
interests. Test users need to keep in mind that this scale
does not measure abilities but rather is a measure of
interest in academic pursuits (Donnay et al., 2004).
82 Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin
Leadership style. This scale indicates the leadership
style that a respondent would prefer to assume when
working with others. The Leadership Style scale on the
SII elevates in the direction suggested by the prototypi-
cal rehabilitation counselor’s PSSs for both women (M =
54) and men (M = 55), reflecting a slight preference style
for directing, leading, and persuading others.
Risk taking. The Risk Taking scale measures a respon-
dent’s general comfort with taking risks across a variety
of circumstances. Interestingly, there is a significant dis-
crepancy in the scores of the prototypical male rehabili-
tation counselor (M = 58) and the prototypical female
rehabilitation counselor (M = 39). These findings tend to
be consistent with the general representative sample,
where men tend to be more spontaneous and independent
and women tend to take a more cautious approach by
reducing risks on the job. For men, this may reflect a
stronger need for autonomy and independence in their
work setting.
Team orientation. The Team Orientation scale “distin-
guishes between people who like to work as part of a
team and those who prefer to work independently”
(Grutter & Hammer, 2004, p. 20). Both prototypical
rehabilitation counselor profiles show a consistency in
scores (women, M = 53; men, M = 53) reflecting a pref-
erence for providing independent contributions to the
work setting while at the same time expressing a will-
ingness to succeed in team settings as well. Individuals
“with this style are likely to respond best to activity and
incentives that recognize their individual accomplish-
ments as well as achievement of team or organizational
goals” (Donnay et al., 2004, p. 140).
Comparison of the Male and Female
Rehabilitation Counselor Prototypes
This article has examined the prototypical interest
profiles of male and female rehabilitation counselors. To
understand these rehabilitation counselor prototypes, it
may be useful to explore the similarities and differences
in the male and female profiles. In this section, Holland’s
secondary constructs (i.e., differentiation, congruence,
consistency, and commonness; Holland, 1992) will be
used to facilitate these comparisons.
Differentiation
The concept of differentiation refers to the degree of
separation within an individual’s Holland RIASEC code
types (Holland, 1992). The greater the separation among
code types, the clearer and better defined the individuals
interests are thought to be. Both prototypical male and
female rehabilitation counselors have well-differentiated
GOTs that closely resemble the Social–Artistic subtype.
These highly differentiated profiles suggest that rehabil-
itation counselors who are satisfied with their jobs are
very predictable with respect to their interests, values,
and personalities. Interestingly, the female profile is
more differentiated than the male profile. In other words,
the difference in score between the lowest type, which is
Realistic, and highest, which is Social, is 28 points for
women. In comparison, the difference in score for men
between the lowest type, which is Conventional, and
highest, which is Social, is 19 points. This finding might
suggest that female rehabilitation counselors in general
are a more homogenous group than male rehabilitation
counselors, at least in terms of interests.
Congruence
Holland’s concept of congruence refers to the simi-
larity between a person’s work personality and his or
her work environment (Holland, 1992). The prototypi-
cal subtype for both male and female rehabilitation
counselors, Social–Artistic, appears reasonably congru-
ent with the rehabilitation counseling work environ-
ment (although the Holland code for this work
environment has not been empirically established). The
congruence between individual interests and work envi-
ronments affects the degree of continuity in occupa-
tional decisions, which in turn influences satisfaction
on the job (Holland, 1992). The rehabilitation counselor
prototypes reported here indicate congruence with their
work environment, which in turn is likely to promote
job satisfaction.
Consistency
Another aspect of Holland’s theory is the construct of
consistency, that is, the proximity of an individual’s
codes types on Holland’s hexagon (Holland, 1992).
Because the first two letters of the rehabilitation coun-
selor Holland code, Social and Artistic, are adjacent on
the RIASEC hexagon, their Holland codes would be
considered highly consistent. A high level of consis-
tency, such as in this case, is positively correlated with a
stable work history and career path (Reardon & Lenz,
1998).
Commonness
Holland’s theory includes the secondary construct of
commonness (Holland, 1992). Commonness is the fre-
quency with which a given code is observed in the popu-
lation. Although there is an uneven frequency of various

persons across the RIASEC types, the social occupations
are very common. Reardon, Bullock, and Meyer (2005)
found approximately 18 million people in the United
States in social occupations. However, this type is far
more common for women (24%) than for men (8%).
Interestingly, this is the approximate ratio of men to
women that was found in the current study, in which there
was more than twice the number of women participating
than men. In addition, this ratio is consistent with the
student recruitment experience of the authors of this arti-
cle. The low number of male social types nationally sug-
gests that it will continue to be more difficult to attract
men to rehabilitation counseling. Perhaps it would be
possible to focus on other aspects of rehabilitation coun-
seling, such as more entrepreneurial or realistic activities,
to attract individuals with other interest patterns.
The similar work personality demonstrated by proto-
typical male and female rehabilitation counselors is fur-
ther demonstrated in the BISs. There is a significant
relationship in the BIS ranking of men and women (r =
.69, p < .0005). Even with this general similarity, exam-
ination of Table 2 indicates that women may be more
interested in the teaching aspect of the profession,
whereas men may be more interested in aspects of the
profession that are more legal in nature.
The SA personality subtype of the prototypical male
and female rehabilitation counselor can also be seen in
the distribution of Dissimilar, Midrange, and Similar
classifications of the occupations of the OSs. For men,
the highest percentages of occupations scored as Similar
were in the Social (81.0%) and the Artistic (77.3%)
Holland types. For women, the SA preference was even
more dramatic, with more than 80% of the occupations
in the Social (84.2%) and Artistic (85.7%) scoring in the
Similar range. It is interesting to note that although the
three-letter GOT for the male rehabilitation counselor
prototype is SAR, men had their greatest percent of dis-
similar occupations in the Realistic occupational type.
This is consistent with the interpretation proposed earlier
that any Realistic GOT theme evidenced by the male
rehabilitation counselor is mostly likely avocational
rather than vocational.
Implications for Rehabilitation Counselor
Recruitment and Practice
The data and ideas from this interpretation can be used
to improve the selection and recruitment of rehabilitation
counselors. Both male and female rehabilitation counselor
prototypes are congruent, differentiated, and consistent.
By facilitating comparison of an individual’s interests to
Leierer / The Newly Revised Strong Interest Inventory 83
the rehabilitation counselor prototypes, the newly revised
SII can serve as an efficient tool for selecting and recruit-
ing people with profiles similar to rehabilitation coun-
selors. In addition, because “rehabilitation counselor” is
one of the OSs added to the newly revised SII, those indi-
viduals interpreting the SII may frequently be asked to
explain the occupation of rehabilitation counselor to their
clients. This increased level of awareness of rehabilitation
counseling by vocational counselors and individuals seek-
ing careers should be helpful in attracting individuals who
are a good fit for the profession.
These results may also be useful in understanding
issues related to rehabilitation counseling work environ-
ments. Supervisors can more fully understand employ-
ees’ job satisfaction, or lack of satisfaction, by evaluating
the congruence between their organization’s work and
the rehabilitation counselor prototype. Furthermore,
supervisors may be able to understand and support the
task preferences of their employees. For example, most
rehabilitation counselors are likely to enjoy counseling
clients and developing creative strategies to facilitate
their clients’ job search and adjustment to disability. Yet
not surprisingly based on this interpretation, these coun-
selors may view time spent on administrative tasks
related to clerical/record keeping activities negatively
because those activities reduce the time available for
helping others via human interaction. Finding ways to
emphasize tasks consistent with counselor interests, and
to make those tasks that counselors will naturally find
less interesting more tolerable and time efficient, will go
a long way toward improving employee satisfaction and
morale.
Finally, it maybe useful to empirically generate
Holland work environment profiles for the various types
of rehabilitation work settings. It seems likely that the
work environment found for counselors in a state agency
is quite different than the environment in hospital or pri-
vate practice settings. These differences may suggest tar-
geting individuals with other types of interest profiles for
certain types of rehabilitation counseling positions.
Summary
Using aggregate scores from 281 female and 133 male
rehabilitation counselors, prototypical SII profiles were
developed. Rehabilitation counselor profiles draw heavily
on people skills, verbal abilities, the ability to listen and
understand, and a preference for settings that allow for
the expression of creativity. These results can help
explain the interests, work activities, potential skills, and
values of rehabilitation counselors. Finally, these findings
84 Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin
can help career counselors predict which students and
workers will be interested in the field of rehabilitation
counseling.
Note
1. The aggregated demographic information for the female
rehabilitation counselors in this sample is 44 years of age, 14 years
working as a rehabilitation counselor, 7.5 years working in current
employment setting. In addition, the females in this study typically
had a master’s degree and worked approximately 40 hours per
week. In comparison, the aggregated demographic information for
male rehabilitation counselors is 47 years of age, 17 years working
as a rehabilitation counselor, 9 years working in current employ-
ment setting. The male rehabilitation counselors in this study typi-
cally had a master’s degree and worked approximately 41 hours
per week.
References
Case, J. C., & Blackwell, T. L. (2008). [Review of the Strong Interest
Inventory®]. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 51, 122–126.
Dawis, R. V. (2002). Person-environment-correspondence theory. In
D. Brown & Associates (Ed.), Career choice and development (4th
ed., pp. 427–465). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Donnay, D. A. C., Morris, M. L., Schaubhut, N. A., & Thompson, R. C.
(2004). Strong Interest Inventory® manual: Research, development,
and strategies for interpretation. Mountain View, CA: Consulting
Psychology Press.
Graduate Schools in Rehabilitation Counseling. (1998). U.S. News
and World Report, 57.
Grutter, J., & Hammer, A. L. (2004). Strong Interest Inventory® user’s
guide: Practitioner’s tool for understanding, interpretation, and
use of the Strong Profile and Interpretive Report. Mountain View,
CA: Consulting Psychology Press.
Holland, J. L. (1987). Current status of Holland’s career theory:
Another perspective. Career Development Quarterly, 36, 31–34.
Holland, J. L. (1992). Making vocational choices: A theory of voca-
tional personalities and work environments (2nd ed): Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Janes, M. E., & Emener, W. G (1986). Rehabilitation counselor edu-
cation graduates’ perceptions of their employment and career sat-
isfaction. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 29, 182–189.
Leierer, S. J., Strohmer, D. C., Blackwell, T. L., Thompson, R. C., &
Donnay, D. A. C. (2008). The Rehabilitation Counselor Scale: A
new scale for the Strong Interest Inventory. Rehabilitation
Counseling Bulletin, 51, 68–75.
Lofquist, L. H., & Dawis, R. V. (1991). Essentials of person-environment-
correspondence counseling. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Matkin, R. E., & Bauer, L. L. (1993). Assessing predeterminants of
job satisfaction among certified rehabilitation counselors in vari-
ous work settings. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling,
24(1), 26–33.
Osborn, D. S., & Zunker, V. G. (2006). Using assessment results for
career development (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
View publication stats
Patterson, C. H. (1962). Test characteristics of rehabilitation coun-
selor trainees. Journal of Rehabilitation, 28(5), 15–16.
Prince, J. P., & Heiser, L. J. (2000). Essentials of career interest
assessment. New York: John Wiley.
Reardon, R. C., Bullock, E. E., & Meyer, K. E. (2005). A Holland
perspective on the workforce from 1960 to 2000. Career
Development Quarterly, 55, 262–274.
Reardon, R., & Lenz, J. (1998). The Self-Directed Search: A practi-
tioner’s guide to the SDS and other Holland-based career materi-
als. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Rubin, S. E., & Roessler, R. T. (2001). Foundations of the vocational
rehabilitation process (5th ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006).
Occupational outlook handbook, 2006-07 edition: Human
resources, training, and labor relations managers and specialists.
Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos021.htm
Stephen J. Leierer, PhD, is an associate professor in the
Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and
Research, with a specialization in community agency counsel-
ing, at the University of Memphis. Some of his most recent
work includes univariate and multivariate statistical proce-
dures to analyze discrimination in the workplace, employment
and compensation, and educational policies. He has been con-
ducting research on the Strong Interest Inventory, clinical
judgments of rehabilitation counselors, disability identity, and
college career course interventions.
Terry L. Blackwell, PhD, is a professor in the School of
Allied Health at Montana State University–Billings. His areas
of interest include assessment, forensic rehabilitation, ethics,
and spinal cord injury.
Douglas C. Strohmer, PhD, is a professor in and chair of the
Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and
Research at the University of Memphis. His areas of interest
include clinical judgment, test development, the counseling
process, and attitudes and prototypes about individual with
disabilities.
Richard C. Thompson is the divisional director of research for
Consulting Psychologist Press, Inc. (CPP). His work focuses
primarily on research and revisions of key CPP assessments,
including the Strong Interest Inventory® assessment, the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® assessment, and the FIRO-B®
assessment.
David A. C. Donnay is a private consultant with MDA
Leadership Consulting. Prior to joining MDA, he served as the
divisional director of research for test publisher CPP, where he
led research and development efforts that supported widely
used assessment tools such as the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator, the Strong Interest Inventory, and the California
Psychological Inventory.