An analysis of the job disposition questionnaire and its possible utilisation in New Zealand : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Psychology at Massey University

(1)

Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for

a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and

private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without

the permission of the Author.

(2)

An Analysis of t.h<'

Job Di sposit ion Qu<'sCionnaire and i ts Possibl e Ut.i 1i sal.ion

in !'kw Zt·a land

A t., h <' s i s pres c n t <' d i n par Li a l

ful filment of the r equirements for the degree of Mast Pr of Arts

Psychology at Massey Univf!rsity

*~*

Full Name: Co 1 in McGregor Year: 198 2

(3)

Ac know] f'dgcmf'nt.s

Comp] et ion of this thf~si s would not. have bP.E'n possi b 1 f' wi t.hout the assistance of Mr. Mike Smith. Thanks are also due to my parcnt.s for their support throughout my years at university, and Miss M.

McQuai d for deciphering and typing the comp] eted manuscript.

11

(4)

ABSTRACT

ThP Job Disposjtjon Q u est, j on n a i r P , in t.hP Unjted Kingdom to assjst. jn vocatjonal guidance, has also been successfully applied 1n the selecti on of job appli- cants. An advantage

over other guidance

of the Job Disposition Questionnaire aids is j ts emphasis on the average and below average ability individuals. The present study was designed to examine the Job Dispositjon Questj onnaire ' s potentia 1 use j n New Zealand. A sample of 515 subjects, consisting of 270 school students and 245 members of six occupational groups was analysed . Factor analysis indicated t hat the Job Di sposition Questionnaire was based on a 1 i mi ted number of spPc if i c factors rather t han the more general factors out] inPd by the designers of the questionnaire. Discriminant analysis indicated that the questionnaire discriminates successfully among nurses, chefs, electricians, horticultural workers, forestry workers and secretaries . Investi- gation r elated to reliability gave mixed results, sug- gesting the need for further examinat jon. A study inves- tigating effects over a five year period indciated no significant changes in response pattern t o t he questionnaire . These results suggest that the Job Disposi tj on Questionnaire could be applied in New Zealand. However, reservations exist with r egard to its reliability and the limited number of occupational groups studied.

iii

(5)

Contf:nt.s

l.ist of Tablf~S and Figur·<'S v, vi

Chapter One Work

Chapter Two Interf~st.s . . . S Chapter Three Vocat i ona 1 Gui dance, Se 1 ect. ion and l.ei sure. . 1 7

Chaptf~r Four Chapter Five Chapter Six Chapter Seven Chapter Eight Chapter Nine References Appendices

Hypot.heses and General Method ... . Factor Analysis .. ... . Discriminant Analysis . . . . Reliability Analysis . . . . Longitudinal Analysis . . . . Conclusions and Recommendations ... .

iv

2.5

30

47

70 81 86 91-95 96- 110

(6)

List of Tables and Figures Table Title

I Composition of School Student Sample ... . . 27 II Composition of Occupational Group Sample ... . 27 III Assessment of Suitable Fact.or Analytic TPchniques .. 30 IV Main Features of PAl, PA2 and Image Analysis 31

v

PA2 Ana lys i s Factors One and Two with Factor I .oad i ngs 3 5 VI PA2 Analysis Factors Three, Four and Five with

respective Factor Loadicgs;. . . 36 VII Percentage of Variance Accounted for by Factors in

PA2 and Image Analysis . . . 37 VIII Image Analysis. Factors One and Two with Factor

Loadings . . . . . . 39

IX Image Analysis. Factors Three, Four and Five with

respective Factor Loadings . . . 40

x

Comparison between Factor Five in PA2 Analysis and

Factor Three in Image analysis ... ... .. 41 XI Factor Label for Image and PA2 Analysis . . . 42 XII Subjects and Occupational Groups in Discriminant

Ana] ysi s . . . 50 XIII Discriminant Function Co-efficients and Variables

for Function 1 . . . 51 XIV Discriminant Function Co-efficients and Variables

for Function 2 . . . 52

xv

Discriminant Function Co-efficients and Variables

XVI Discriminant Function Co-efficients and Variables

for Function 4 . . . 54 XVII Discriminant Function Co-efficients and Variables

XVIII Division of Variables in Function

5 ... ... ... ...

57

v

(7)

Li st, of Tab h !S and Fi guPs (cc >nt, 'd) Table

XIX

xx

XXl

XXII XXIII

XXIV

xxv

XXVI XXVII

XXVIII XXIX

xxx

Figure

Ti 1.l ^f'

Relat,j onshi ps between Predi ct.ed and Actual Group Membership. All Occupational Groups Inc1udf'd ..

Second Highest Probabi l i t.y Group for Nurse~ Sampl <'

Second Highest Probability Group for El cct,ri cj an Sample .. ... . . . ... ... ... . . Second Highest Probability Group for Chef SamplP ..

Second Highest Probability Group for Forestry Workers Sample ... .. . . ... .... ... . Second Highest Probability Group for Horticultural Workers Sample ... ... ... . Second Highest Probability Group for Secretaries

Sample . . . .... ... .. . . Reliability - Swnmary Table ... .... ... . Pearson Product Moment Correlations for

Reliabi] j ty Study .. .. ... .... ... ... . Copy of the Job Disposition Questionnaire ... . Analysis of Variance between 1975 and 1981 Sample The Workforce Occupational Percentages

1971 and 1976 . . . ... ... .. ... . .

-~--~-~

Title

58 59 60 61

61

62 62 72

75 76-78

82 84

Scree Test for PA2 and Image Analysis .... ... .... .. 34

VJ.