興趣衡鑑與量表測量的差別複現與探索

Replication and Exploration of Differences between Interest Assessment and Scale Measurement

在後現代思潮影響下，諮商者愈來愈可能採用晤談方法來衡鑑案主的生涯興趣，但興趣衡鑑與量表測量的結果會有差別嗎？在哪些維度差別較大？哪些較小？造成差別的可能來源為何？Barclay與其同儕的研究顯示，興趣衡鑑與量表測量的結果為弱相關、中剖面相關。本研究以208位大學生為樣本進行調查，研究結果亦複現出類似現象：本研究的剖面相關亦為雙峰分布，約四分之一個案在兩種評量方法有高度相似結果，惟整體而言，訪談衡鑑與量表測量的相關係數屬弱相關範疇，A與S維度兩方法亦有顯著相關，E與C亦無顯著相關。除複現Barclay與其同儕的研究外，本研究進一步採用文字分析與內容分析嘗試探索這些差別現象，探索結果一方面支持了Savickas主張的量表測量與晤談衡鑑之評量標的是有所差別的看法，晤談衡鑑的是人們已經外現出興趣，量表測量的則是人們對量表題項清單喜好態度，二者不僅是方法的不同，評量標的也是彼此有異。另一方面，本研究提出差別現象的另一影響來源—一詞多屬性，並指出一詞多屬性在心理學與自然語言處理遭逢時的重要性與潛在研究需求。

Under the influence of postmodern trends, counselors are increasingly likely to use conversational methods to assess clients’career interests. However, are there differences between interest assessment and scale measurement? Which dimensions have larger differences, and which dimensions have smaller differences? What are the possible sources of these differences? Research by Barclay and her colleagues have shown weak correlations and moderate profile correlations between interest assessment and scale measurement. In this study, a sample of 208 college students was investigated, and similar phenomena were found in the research results. The profile correlations in this study also exhibited a bimodal distribution, with approximately one-fourth of the cases showing highly similar results between the two methods. However, the correlation coefficients between interview assessment and scale measurement were weak. The A and S dimensions showed significant correlations between the two methods, while the E and C dimensions did not exhibit significant correlations. In addition to replicating the research by Barclay and colleagues, this study further employed text analysis and content analysis to explore these differential phenomena. The results of the exploratory analysis support Savickas’claim that there are differences in the appraisal targets between scale measurement and interview assessment. The interview assessment captures the external manifestation of individuals’expressed interests, while the scale measurement measures individuals’preference attitudes towards the items of the scale. These differences not only stem from methodological variations but also indicate distinct assessment targets. Furthermore, this study proposes another influencing factor for the differential phenomenon, namely,“one word, multiple attributes,”and highlights the importance and potential research needs of this concept in the intersection of psychology and NLP.