{"id":33901,"date":"2021-09-03T16:19:27","date_gmt":"2021-09-03T16:19:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hoozoocomm.co.za\/cognadev\/?p=33901"},"modified":"2026-06-29T09:43:16","modified_gmt":"2026-06-29T09:43:16","slug":"cognadevs-value-orientations-compared-with-schwartz-onet-hogan-and-other-discrete-score-models","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hoozoocomm.co.za\/cognadev\/2021\/09\/03\/cognadevs-value-orientations-compared-with-schwartz-onet-hogan-and-other-discrete-score-models\/","title":{"rendered":"Cognadev\u2019s Value Orientations compared with Schwartz, O*NET, Hogan, and other discrete-score models"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_empty_space height=”20px”][vc_custom_heading text=”Cognadev\u2019s Value Orientations compared with Schwartz, O*NET, Hogan, and other discrete-score models” font_container=”tag:h1|font_size:35pt|text_align:left|color:%23049EB3″ google_fonts=”font_family:Arvo%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700%2C700italic|font_style:700%20bold%20regular%3A700%3Anormal” css=””][vc_custom_heading text=”” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:20px|text_align:left” google_fonts=”font_family:Lato%3A100%2C100italic%2C300%2C300italic%2Cregular%2Citalic%2C700%2C700italic%2C900%2C900italic|font_style:400%20regular%3A400%3Anormal” css=””][vc_empty_space height=”10px”][vc_custom_heading text=”By Cognadev” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:20px|text_align:left” google_fonts=”font_family:Lato%3A100%2C100italic%2C300%2C300italic%2Cregular%2Citalic%2C700%2C700italic%2C900%2C900italic|font_style:700%20bold%20regular%3A700%3Anormal” css=””][vc_empty_space height=”10px”][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=””]Most psychologists and assessment publishers who work with values have adopted the familiar psychometric-category descriptive approach, constructing discrete sum-score scales of \u2018value magnitude\u2019 generated via descriptive statistical analysis of self-report Likert- type item scales; producing taxonomies of \u2018values\u2019 (or motivations) that are similar to the usual sum-score trait models of personality e.g., Saville WAVE SHL OPQ, Big Five, HPI etc.<\/p>\n

An exception is Richard Barrett\u2019s Personal Values Assessment<\/a>, which has evolved over time into a more formal 7-levels of consciousness model based upon Don Beck\u2019s Spiral<\/strong> Dynamics (levels of consciousness), integrated with Barrett\u2019s own seven levels of consciousness<\/a> model and Ken Wilber\u2019s four Quadrants.<\/p>\n

Another is Shalom Schwartz\u2019s revised theory of basic values. From the abstract to the article (Schwartz et al, 2012)<\/a>:<\/p>\n

“Values form a circular motivational continuum. The theory defines and orders 19 values on the continuum based on their compatible and conflicting motivations, expression of self-protection versus growth, and personal versus social focus”.<\/p>\n

In Figure 1, we show the Schwartz 19-value model representation (reprinted from Rajiani & Kot, 2019)<\/a>:[\/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”33903″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” css=””][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=””]In Figure 2, we show the discrete values\/constructs assessed within a selection of the various assessments which are advertised as assessing values or have the word \u201cvalues\u201d in their title.[\/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”33904″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” css=””][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=””]Note:<\/b>
\nThose values with scale names in-common to two or more questionnaires are color-coded accordingly. Values in light-grey are unique to a particular questionnaire.<\/p>\n