An Investigation of Holland Types

and the Sixteen Personality Factor

Questionnaire-Fifth Edition

Dale R. Pietrzak
Betsy J. Page

The authors investigated the stability of the published Sixteen Personality Fac-
tor Questionnaire-Fifth Edition (16PF; S. Conn & M. Rieke, 1994) predictors
in predicting Holland types as measured by the Self-Directed Search (SDS; J.
Holland, B. Fritzsche, & A. Powell, 1994). Because the majority of the pub-
lished regression equations contained unstable predictors, the authors devel-
oped modified multiple regression equations using the more stable predictors.
However, these equations, although statistically significant, shared less than
50% of the variance with the criterion variable, suggesting limited practical utility
or support for the domain overlap of the 16PF and the SDS. The authors rec-
ommend that the SDS be used when a measure of SDS types is needed.

The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire-Fifth Edition (16PF; Conn

& Rieke, 1994) is consistently rated as one of the most used and re-
searched personality tests (Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1970; Walsh & Betz,
1995). It contains 16 bipolar scales (called "primary factors") and several
validity scales, with 15 of the factors measuring personality traits and 1
factor measuring cognitive abilityor reasoning ability(Conn & Rieke, 1994).
One reason the 16PF has been such a popular measure is that validated
special scores greatly expand the utility of the 16PF for the counselor.
These scores allow the instrument to assessthe role of personality structure
in leadership, creativity, and specific occupations. Thus, the instrument not
only allows the client's interests and abilities to be examined but also allows
his or her personality to be taken into consideration during occupational
decision making. For example, a client may have interests that are similar
to those of a surgeon but may have a score on the 16PF that indicates a
great degree of impulsivity and impatience. Of course, this characteristic
would need to be addressed during the career decision-making process
with this client. Although certainly not all clients would benefit from such a
discussion, many occupations (e.g., police officer, clergy, or airline pilot)
do require that the personality of the applicant be taken into consideration.
One set ofspecial scores obtained from the 16PF, available by computer
scoring, is the prediction of Holland's occupational types. The intent of

Dale R. Pietrzak is an assistant professorin the Department ofCounseling and

Psychology in Education at the University ofSouth Dakota, Vermillion. Betsy].
Page is an assistant professorin the Department ofCounseling and Human De-
velopment Servicesat Kent State University, Kent, Ohio. Correspondence regarding
this article should be sent to Dale R. Pietrzak, University of South Dakota, 414
East Clark Street, Vermillion, SD 57069 (e-mail: dpietrza@usd.edu).

The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50 179

these special scores is to allow the career counselor to explore the client's
interests and personality structure in the career counseling process (Conn
& Rieke, 1994). Using the 16PF and the Self-Directed Search (SDS;
Holland, Fritzsche, & Powell, 1994) in career counseling requires un-
derstanding the overlap of personality and interests, in general, and the
ability of the 16PF to predict the SDS codes, in particular.
The field of career counseling continues to examine the relationship
between personality and interests and to debate whether there is an over-
lap of personality and interests or whether these constructs are largely
separate domains (Holland, Fritzsche, et al., 1994; Janda, 1998; Oliver,
Lent, & Zack, 1998; Young & Chen, 1999; Zunker, 1994). Because the
16PF is one of the most commonly used personality measures that has
application to career counseling, the overlap of the 16PF and interests
may be ofparticular importance to career counselors (Oliver et al., 1998;
Young & Chen, 1999; Zunker, 1994). The proposed overlap ofinterests
may be important for several reasons, but arguably one of the more
important reasons for the career counselor may be the utility of making
assumptions about the personality of the client from interest inventory
results or of making assumptions about interests given a client's personality
structure. Ifempirical support for the overlap of the personality and inter-
est domains can be demonstrated, then the career counselor may be able
to discuss the client's personality characteristics that may be important for
a specific career, given the results of an interest inventory. Without the
establishment ofempirical support for the overlap ofthese domains, making
any assumptions about personality from interests, or interests from person-
ality, is risky, at best.
An additional possible benefit of empirical support for the overlap of
interests and personality domains, especially in today's HMO-styled mar-
ket where assessment time is often limited, is a reduction in testing time
in situations when information about personality and interests is benefi-
cial. It can certainly be argued that not all career decisions would benefit
from data on personality and interests; however, for situations in which it
would be beneficial, a substantial reduction in resources may be possible.
The Holland types were likely choices to examine the overlap of more
general personality and occupational types because Holland conceptual-
ized these occupational types as "personality types" (Holland, Fritzsche, et
al., 1994, p. 1). He contended that there are six occupational personality
types, found in both people and the environment, that can be described
using a hexagonal model (Holland, Fritzsche, et al., 1994). Holland further
contended that the better the match between a person's personality type and
his or her work environment, the more likely the individual is to find the
occupation satisfying. Because Holland conceived of his model as a person-
ality model, we believed that it seemed logical to examine the overlap of
interests and personality traits.
The authors of the 16PF have attempted to examine the possible over-
lap of the personality domain with interests (Conn & Rieke, 1994). In
doing so, they used 16PF scores to predict Holland types that would be
obtained from the SDS (Karol, 1994). In the development of regression
equations, one of the most critical aspects is the cross-validation process.
Cross-validation demonstrates that the predictor variables are stable across
various samples from the target population. The stability of the predic-

180 The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50

tors is vital to any use of the derived scores, because the applicability of
the equations beyond the sample used to develop them is not known
without cross-validation research (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black,
1998; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Despite the recommendation for
continued cross-validation of regression equations, to date, limited data
on the cross-validation of these equations are available (Conn & Rieke,
1994; Karol, 1994). Therefore, additional cross-validation research re-
garding these special scores is needed.
The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the stability of the
published 16PF predictor variables used in the regression equations to
estimate SDS Holland types when a different sample of adults was sur-
veyed. A secondary purpose of this study was to examine the domain
overlap of the 16PF and SDS.

Method
Participants
The sample used in this study consisted of the responses from 234 volun-
teers. Of these volunteers, 109 (47%) were from southern Indiana, southern
Illinois, or northern Kentucky; 59 (25%) were from northeastern Ohio or
northwestern Pennsylvania; and 65 (28%) were from southern Florida.
Participants ranged in age from 18 to 69 years old. One person was not
clear regarding location. The mean age was 27.9 years (SD = 10).
Of the participants, 29% (n = 67) were men and 71 % (n = 167) were
women. To obtain as representative a sample as possible, minority
community and university organizations in several locations were con-
tacted and their members were invited to participate. The reported
racial heritages of the participants were 83% Whites (n = 194),9%
Blacks (n = 20), 6% Hispanics (n = 14),2% Asians (n = 5), and 0.4%
Native American (n = 1). The participants' mean educational level
was 14.9 years (2 years of college; SD = 2.5). One participant did not
report his or her educational level.
There were 58% (n = 135) undergraduate and graduate students and 42%
(n = 98) community members (persons not enrolled in classes) in the sample.
One participant's group membership was not indicated. To expand the
diversityofinterests in the sample, universityparticipants were solicited from
programs in art, music, accounting, business management, counseling,
elementary education, secondary education, and special education.
Instruments
The16PF. The 16PF is designed to measure normal personalitytraits (Cattell
et aI., 1970; Conn & Rieke, 1994). It has been revised several times over
the years, primarily to update norms, but more recently to update
language and to improve the psychometric qualities of the tool. The 16PF
contains 16 bipolar scales (called "primary factors"), 5 global factor scales,
and several validity scales. Fifteen of the primary factors and the 5 global
factors measure personality traits; 1 factor measures cognitive ability.The
stability coefficients for the personality factors and validity scales range
from r = .69 to r .91 for 2 weeks, with the range of r = .56 to r = .82 for
2 months. The internal consistency of the primary factors and validity
scales ranged from ex = .66 to ex = .87 (Conn & Rieke, 1994).

The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50 181

 There are extensivesupportive validitydata reported in the technical manual
for the 16PF. Data on the factor structure, item analysis, and relationships of
the 16PF to other measures are also included in the manual (Conn & Rieke,
1994. Using data from a sample of 194 individuals, Karol (1994) devel-
oped equations, using a multiple regression procedure, for predicting SDS
Holland codes from 16PF data.
The SDS. The SDS is a widely used interest inventory, developed by
Holland, that was designed to aid in the career decision-making process
(Holland, Fritzsche, et al., 1994; Holland, Powell, & Fritzsche, 1994; Walsh
& Betz, 1995). The SDS has sixscalesthat are based on Holland's theory of
career decision making. Holland described the six scales using a hexagonal
model that symbolizes the relationship between the personality types
(Holland, Fritzsche, et al., 1994; Holland, Powell, et al., 1994).
The stability of the six SDS scales ranged from r = .76 to r= .89 over 4 to
12 weeks. Considerable validity data are reported in the manuals, including
examinations of the content, relationship to other interest measures, rela-
tionship to personality measures, and prediction ofoccupational satisfactions
and fit (Holland, Fritzsche, et al., 1994; Holland, Powell, et al., 1994).
Procedure
Data for this study were coUected as part of a group of studies on the
16PF being conducted by the first author. Sample size was preestab-
lished, using procedures recommended by experts in the application of
this methodology (Hair et al., 1998; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
The administration packets included the 16PF, SDS, demographics sheet,
and other instruments, which were placed in an envelope in counter-
balanced order. A description of the study was either handed to or read
to participants before they opened the envelope. Approximately 60% of
the participants completed the inventory in a group setting, and the other
40% took the packet home to complete it. Two hundred and sixty packets
of materials were distributed; 234 were returned with completed 16PFs
and SDSs, yielding a return rate of90%.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was performed using SYSTAT 9.0 for Windows (SPSS, 1999).
The 16PF raw scale scores were converted to sten scores, using the com-
bined population norms provided by the publisher (Conn & Rieke, 1994).
Because this study was designed to examine the effect of sampling error
(or bias) on the stability of predictors in multiple regression equations, an
established procedure to detect error in regression formulas was applied;
the procedure was first developed by Cleary (1968) and further refined by
others (Hair et al., 1998; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Sampling bias
(error) is suggested if the predictors proposed to make up the regres-
sion equation do not meet two criteria in the cross-validation sample. The
first criterion is that the predictor variable must significantly enter into the
regression equation when using the cross-validation sample. Second, the
predictor variable must enter into the regression equation from the cross-
validation sample in the same direction (positive or negative) as in the devel-
opmental sample (Hair et al., 1998; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
Two regression procedures (models) were calculated to evaluate whether
the predictor variables that were reported by Karol (1994) met the two

182 The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50

cross-validation criteria. The first regression model (free model) was
calculated using a forward stepwise procedure with the entry and re-
moval criterion set to .10 as was done during development (Karol, 1994).
Stability of the predictors was supported if the predictor entered into
the free model as it had in Karol's study. The second regression model
(forced model) was constructed by using the published predictors for
each Holland type to calculate a multiple regression equation. This forced
all the prior established predictors into a model to determine whether, if
they had entered into the equation, they would have done so in the
same direction, using data from the sample of individuals who partici-
pated in this study. Correct entry into the forced model provided less
support for the stability of the predictors than did entry into the free
model. Stability of the predictors was best supported if the predictor
variables entered into the free model equation and did so in the same
direction as found in Karol's study (Hair et al., 1998; Nunnally &
Bernstein, 1994).
A cross-validated equation was calculated using predictors that were
considered stable from Karol's (1994) study and the free model. These
represent the cross-validated models (Cleary, 1968; Hair et al., 1998;
Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). The cross-validated model was consid-
ered statistically significant if it provided a prediction that was sub-
stantially greater than chance, as determined by the Fstatistic having
a p <.05.
Domain overlap can be considered an issue of practical significance
because two tools or procedures are attempting to measure a common
construct or domain in regression models (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
The practical utility of two measures being considered interchangeable
has been examined using a number of methods, but most commonly by
examining alternate form reliability (Cicchetti, 1994; Janda, 1998;
Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Two tools or procedures are accepted
as sharing adequate domain, or seen as alternate forms, if they have
50% or more shared variance. This provides initial evidence of do-
main overlap. The shared variance of regression models is best esti-
mated by examining the adjusted R 2 • The cross-validated multiple
regression equations were considered practically significant if they
shared 50% or more variance (adjusted R 2 ~ .50) with the SDS scale
they were predicating.

Results
The means and standard deviations for the 16PF and the SDS are pro-
vided in Table 1. The results of examining the stability of the predictors
from the primary and global factor models are summarized in Table 2.
These data supported the stability of the global factor predictors for the
SDS Realistic, Artistic, and Conventional scales. These data supported
the primary factor model for the SDS Enterprising scale as being com-
posed of stable predictors.
Table 3 presents the adjusted R2S for both the 16PF global factor and
16PF primary factor cross-validated multiple regression equations. None
of the multiple regression equations met the criteria for practical signifi-
cance in predicting the SDS scales from 16PF factors ofadjusted R2 ~ .50.

The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50 183

 TABLE 1

Means and Standard Deviations for 16PF-5th Edition and SDS

Scale/Factor n M SO

16PF-5th Edition
A Warmth 230 6.3 1.B
B Reasoning 229 6.2 1.7
C Emotional stability 230 5.6 1.B
E Dominance 230 5.2 2.0
F Liveliness 230 6.0 1.9
G Rule-consciousness 229 5.4 1.9
H Social boldness 230 5.7 2.0
I Sensitivity 230 6.4 1.B
L Vigilance 230 5.3 2.0
M Abstractness 230 5.6 1.9
N Privateness 230 5.0 2.1
o Apprehension 230 5.B 1.B
Q1 Open to change 230 5.7 2.2
Q2 Self-Reliance 230 5.3 1.B
Q3 Perfectionism 230 5.0 2.1
Q4 Tension 230 5.5 1.B
Extroversion 230 6.1 1.9
Anxiety 230 5.5 2.0
Tough mindedness 230 4.B 2.0
Independence 230 5.4 1.9
Self-Control 229 5.1 1.B
Self-Directed Search
Realistic 234 17.2 10.7
Investigative 234 21.9 10.6
Artistic 234 24.2 12.0
Social 234 36.3 B.9
Enterprising 234 25.9 9.0
Conventional 234 21.7 10.8
Note. 16PF-5th Edition = Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire-Fifth Edition; SDS
= Self-Directed Search. For the standardization sample, M = 5.5 and SO = 2.0.

Djscussjon
The primary purpose of this study was to investigate, using a different
sample ofindividuals than had been used in previous studies, the stability
of the 16PF predictor variables in predicting Holland types, as measured
by the SDS. If the stability of the predictor variable could not be demon-
strated, the application of the equation in a real-life situation would not
be supported. This would mean that any equation would be different for
various groups of adults and that no consistent prediction of SDS types
would be possible.
The results of this study indicate that the published global factor mul-
tiple regression equations for the Realistic, Artistic, and Conventional
scales were constructed from stable predictor variables. Three of the
published global factor multiple regression equations contained predic-
tors that failed to be supported as stable in this study. Of the six published
multiple regression equations using the 16PF primary factors to predict
SDS scores, only the Enterprising equation was found to be constructed

184 The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50

 TABLE 2
Regression Results of 16PF-5th Edition for SOS

Holland Type" F R 16PF Factors b

Global Factors
Realistic (n = 229)
Predicted- 10.7** .43 -.47 TM+, IN+, AX-, EX-, SC-
Freed 12.9** .47 IN+, TM+, EX-, AX-, sc-
Forced" 12.9** .47 IN+, TM+, EX-, AX-, SC-
Investigative (n = 230)
Predicted- 5.7** .30 - .36 EX-, sc-, IN+', TM+, AX-'
Freed 7.2** .30 EX-, IN+, AX-
Forced" 4.6** .31 EX-, IN+, AX-, TM-lI, SC+g
Artistic (n = 230)
Predlcted- 70.9** .51 - .52 TM-
Freed 38.9** .59 TM-, EX-, IN+
Forced" 106.7** .57 TM-
Social (n = 229)
Predlcted- 27.2** .53 - .55 EX+, TM-, SC+'
Freed 23.6** .54 TM-, EX+, IN+, SC+
Forced" 28.9** .53 TM-, EX+, SC+
Enterprising (n = 230)
Predicted- 27.0*· .52 - .55 IN+. TM+'. EX+
Freed 24.7** .42 IN+,TM+
Forced" 16.6** .43 IN+, TM+, EX+ g
Conventional (n = 229)
Predicted- 19.7** .39-.41 SC+, TM+
Freed 6.9*· .24 SC+, TM+
Forced" 6.9** .24 SC+, TM+
Primary Factors
Realistic (n = 229)
Predicted- 18.2·* .57 - .54 1-, A-, 0-, 01+, 04-
Freed 26.8** .61 1-,01+, A-, G+, H+
Forced" 25.4*· .60 )-, 01 +, A-. 04-g, o-g
Investigative (n = 229)
Predicted- 12.8** .57 - .52 A-, I-, B+, 04-, M+, N-J, 01+
Freed 11.3** .48 A-, 01+, B+, 0+, 04-,1-
Forced" 8.4*· .46 A-, 8+,01+,04-, I-, N+g, M+g
Artistic (n = 230)
Predicted- 21.4·* .56 - .53 1+, M+, H+, 01 +
Freed 24.1** .59 1+, 01 +, M+, 02+, E+
Forced" 27.7·* .57 1+, 01 +, M+, H+g
Social (n = 229)
Predlcted- 21.5*· .60 - .57 A+, H+, G+'. C-', 01 +
Freed 21.2** .60 A+, 01+, H+, E+, N+, 1+
Forced" 22.7** .58 A+. 01+. H+, c-g. G+g
Enterprising (n = 230)
Predicted- 20.7** .60 - .57 A+, E+, H+, 1-. N+'
Freed 9.4*· .51 E+,A+,I-, H+, e-, N+, 03+-, 01+
Forced" 12.1·* .46 E+, A+, )-, N+, H+
Conventional (n = 222)
Predicted- 16.6** .46 -.43 M-, 03+,)-
Freed 6.9·* .29 M-, L+, H-
Forced" 5.4*· .26 03+,1-, M-g
Note. See Table 1 Note.
"Scales in order of magnitude of standardized beta weights; + or - = direction scale entered
equation. bLetters = scale names (Conn & Rieke, 1994). ceonn & Rieke (1994). dModel
developed from sample when forward stepwise procedure and .10 entry/removal criteria
used."When predictedscales placedinto model and regression equationestimated. 'Indicates
prediction that scale acts as suppressor variable (Karol, 1994). gns, p > .10.
"p « .05. **p< .01.

185
~

g:

TABLE 3
Cross-Validated Regression of 50S From 16PF-5th Edition

SOS Scale A-fl2(R)O M 50 5EE 16PF Equation b

Global factor score equations**

Realistic (n = 229) .21 (.47) 17.6 5.1 9.53 (-1.9*EX) + (-1.9*AX) + (1.9*TM) + (3.2*IN) + (-0.8*SC) + 17.37
Investigative (n = 230) .08 (.30) 21.7 3.1 10.19 (-1.9*EX) + (1.4*IN) + (-1.2*AX) + 32.36
Artistic (n = 230) .32 (.57) 24.5 6.7 9.86 (-3.3*TM) + 40.20
Social (n = 229) .27 (.53) 36.2 4.6 7.66 (1.4*EX) + (-1.7*TM) + (0.5*SC) + 33.14
Enterprising (n = 230) .17 (.42) 25.9 9.0 8.18 (0.6*TM) + (2.2*'N) + 11.20
Conventional (n = 229) .05 (.24) 21.7 2.6 10.61 (0.7*TM) + (0.9*SC) + 13.71
Primary factor score equations**
Realistic (n = 230) .35 (.60) 17.1 6.5 8.65 (-3.0*1) + (-1.1*A) + (1.7*01) + 33.66
Investigative (n = 229) .19 (.46) 21.4 4.9 9.55 (-1.8*A) + (-0.4*') + (1.4*8) + (-0.7*04) + (1.2*01) + 23.64
Artistic (n = 230) .32 (.57) 24.3 6.8 9.84 (2.1*1) + (1.2*M) + (1.4*01) - 3.92
Social (n = 230) .32 (.58) 36.7 9.0 7.36 (2.0* A) + (0.8*H) + (1.0*01) + 13.85
Enterprising (n = 230) .20 (.46) 26.0 4.2 8.06 (1.0* A) + (1.6*E) + (0.55*H) + (-0.8*') + (O.7*N) + 9.87
Conventional (n = 222) .03 (.19) 22.0 1.9 10.70 (-1.0*M) + 27.63

Note. See Table 1 Note. SEE = Standard Error of the Estimate.

°A-R2 is the adjusted R2 for the equation with the multiple R in parentheses. bLetters represent scale names (Conn & Rieke, 1994).
**p< .01.
completely from stable predictors. These data indicate that if a prediction
of SDS scale scores from the 16PF is needed, the cross-validated mul-
tiple regression equations reported in Table 3 contain predictors known
to be more stable, and, as such, are preferable to Karol's (1994) equations.
Because there were statistically significant regression equations that could
be constructed from the 16PF, this provided some support for the poten-
tial of the 16PF to have utility in exploring SDS types. However, before
such a potential can be considered meaningful and as having practical util-
ity in career counseling, the establishment of alternate form reliability also
needs to support such a procedure. Furthermore, these results suggest the
need to continue to refine the regression models using other samples and
further research into the relationship of the Holland types and the 16PF.
In order to examine the practical utility of the regression equations for
the SDS that were constructed from the 16PF, one method is to examine
adequate alternate form reliability. When the alternate form reliability of
the two procedures was examined, no support was found for the inter-
changeability of the two procedures. The results of this study suggest
that statistically significant and stable regression models that predict SDS
scale scores can be constructed from 16PF scores. This finding provides
evidence that there is some shared domain between the SDS and the
16PF. However, neither Karol's (1994) results nor the results from this
study provided support for the practical significance of any model. Thus,
although there is likely some shared domain between the two measures, it
is insufficient to equate them as alternate forms for one another. This
suggests that although the overlap may be of interest to researchers, the
application of these equations by the career counselor in a real-life setting
was not supported by these data. Thus, when measures of interests and
personality are important to the career decision-making process, both
the 16PF and the SDS would need to be administered.
To ensure that the lack of utility of the 16PF in measuring SDS scores
was not an artifact of the statistical procedure of multiple regression,
classical item analysis was used to examine these data. These results fur-
ther supported the finding that although some degree of content overlap
was present, it was insufficientto havepracticalutility (Nunnally & Bernstein,
1994). The lack ofdomain overlap was most evident in the prediction of
the SDS Conventional scale score. There was less than 5% shared vari-
ance between the cross-validated multiple regression equations and the
SDS Conventional scale score. The low predictive power of the cross-
validated multiple regression was consistent with the general lower pre-
dictive power of the SDS Conventional scale in this study and with the
results reported by Karol (1994).
In summary, these results have implications for the practitioner and for
future researchers. For the practitioner, these results suggest that al-
though the 16PF may have some domain overlap with the SDS, the over-
lap is too small to be of utility in an applied setting.
Researchers may note, however, that cross-validated statistically signifi-
cant regression equations could be constructed. This suggests that at
least some of the domain ofpersonali ty, as measured by the 16PF and the
SDS, was present. These data were consistent with Karol's (1994) find-
ings that the Realistic, Enterprising, Social, and Artistic types had the
largest overlap with personality, whereas the Conventional type had the

The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50 187

least overlap. This suggests that although some Holland types may have
overlap with 16PF personality traits, others may have little overlap. Addi-
tional research should examine the possibility that, perhaps as we have
defined personality and interests, the overlap is only in some areas.
This study was limited in several ways. Although this sample was more
representative of the general population of the United States than the
sample used in previous research, the study needs to be replicated using
more representative samples. Furthermore, it is important to remember
that as with any assessment tool, application and interpretation of the
16PF and SDS need to take place on the basis of sound clinical practice
and an understanding of assessment.

References
Cattell, R., Eber, H., & Tatsuoka, M. (1970). Handbook for the 16PF. Champaign, IL:
Institute for Personality and Ability Assessment.
Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed
and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. PsychologicalAssessment, 6,
284-290.
Cleary, A. (1968). Test bias: Prediction of grades of Negro and White students in in-
tegrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 43-56.
Conn, S., & Rieke, M. (Eds.). (1994). 16PF fifth edition: Technical manual. Champaign,
IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis
(5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Holland, 1., Fritzsche, B., & Powell, A. (1994). Self-Directed Search: Technical manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Holland, 1., Powell, A, & Fritzsche, B. (1994). Self-Directed Search: Professional user's
guide. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Janda, L. (1998). Psychokgicaltesting: Theory and application. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Karol, D. (1994). Holland occupational typology and the 16PF. In S. Conn & M. Rieke
(Eds.), 16PFfifth edition: Technicalmanual (pp. 213-235). Champaign, IL: Institute fur
Personality and Ability Testing.
Nunnally, 1., & Bernstein, 1. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-HilI.
Oliver, L., Lent, E., & Zack, 1. (1998). Career and vocational assessment 1995-1996:
A biennial review. Journal of Career Assessment, 6, 231-268.
SPSS. (1999). SYSTAT 9: Statistics 1. Chicago: Author.
Walsh, W., & Betz, N. (1995). Tests and assessment (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Young, R., & Chen, C. (1999). Annual review: Practice and research in career counsel-
ing and development-1998. The Career Development Quarterly, 48, 98-141.
Zunker, V. (1994). Career counseling: Applied concepts of life planning (4th ed.). Pa-
cific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

188 The Career Development Quarterly December 2001 • Volume 50