Table Of ContentVOCATIONAL INTERESTS OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION
WORKERS AS RELATED TO SELECTED ASPECTS
OF WORK ADJUSTMENT
By
ROWLAND RAY PIERSON
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Division of Education
1951
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness to
the many persons who have aided him in the completion of
this study. He desires especially to express his gratitude to
the chairman of his guidance committee, Dr. Clifford E. Erick
son, and to the remaining committee members, Dr. Carl H.
Gross, Dr. Leonard L. Luker and Dr. Cecil V. Millard for
their assistance in formulating the study, their suggestions
during the investigation and their critical reading of the com
pleted manuscript. Special gratitude is expressed to Mr. Ken
neth G. Nelson for his constant interest, patient guidance and
constructive criticisms in his capacity as technical advisor to
the study. Sincere thanks are extended to Dr. Walter F. John
son for his many helpful suggestions, and critical reading of
the manuscript.
Grateful acknowledgment is expressed to the following
persons who provided valuable assistance through their co
operative efforts in the larger research project of which this
study is one phase: Dr. Duane L. Gibson, Dr. Charles R.
Hoffer, Mr. John T. Stone, Mr. Joseph L. Locke, Mr. Paul A.
Miller, Mr. Robert O. Hatton, Mr. A. Conrad Posz, Mr. Donald
G. Curry, Mr. Claude Courtway, Jr. , Mr. Norman E. Drayton,
and the Cooperative Extension workers in Michigan who pro
vided the basic data for the study. The statistical advice and
assistance provided by Dr. Paul L. Dressel and Mr. Robert A.
Jackson is also gratefully acknowledged.
The writer sincerely appreciates the financial assistance
provided for this study by the United States Department of Ag
riculture and the Office of Naval Research of the United States
Navy.
Finally, full credit should be given to my wife, Kathryn
Stultz Pierson, for encouragement, inspiration, and uncounted
hours of clerical assistance.
iv
Rowland Ray Pierson
candidate for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Final Examination: November 26, 1951, 12:30 P.M ., Room 116,
M orrill Hall.
Dissertation: Vocational Interests of Agricultural Extension
Workers as Related to Selected Aspects of Work
Adjustment.
Outline of Studies:
Major Subject: Education.
Minor Subject: Psychology.
Biographical Items:
Born, December 21, 1913, Millerstown, Pennsylvania.
Undergraduate Studies, Muskingum College, New Concord,
Ohio, 1931-1935.
Graduate Studies, Ohio State University, 1935-1938, Mich
igan State College, 1946-1951.
Experience:. Field Representative, Muskingum College, 1934-
1940 (part and full time), Area Youth Personnel
Supervisor, National Youth Administration in Ohio,
1940-1942, Pre-College Counselor, Muskingum Col
lege, 1942-1943, Classification Specialist, United
States Army, 1943-1946, Instructor-Counselor,
Michigan State College, 1946-1948, Assistant Pro-
fessor-Counselor, Michigan State College, 1948-
present.
Member of Kappa Delta Pi.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER Page
I. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT
OF PROBLEM ................................ 1
Overview of the S tudy............................................. 1
Need for the S tu d y .................................... 9
Origin of the S tudy.................................... 19
II. DEFINITION OF TERMS ANDD ESCRIPTION
OF INSTRUMENTS 26
Definition, of Terms . . . . . . . . 26
Description of Instruments Used . . . . 31
S u m m a ry ...................................................................... 51
III. RELATED R E S E A R C H ............................................ 53
Related Summaries of Research . . . . 53
Research Concerning the Relationship
of Interests to Work Effectiveness . . 57
The Relationship of Inventoried
Interests to Job Satisfaction . . . . 75
IV. THE SAMPLE, PROCEDURES, AND
TECHNIQUES................................................................ 89
•*
vi
CHAP TER Page
The S a m p l e ................................................................ 89
Collection of Data and Their Preparation
for A n a ly s is .. 102
Techniques of A n a ly s is ....................................... Ill
V. THE VARIABLE WORK ADJUSTMENT
G R O U P S ............................................ 120
Problems in Rating Agents' Work
E ffectiveness.......................................................... 120
The Michigan Extension Service
Rating S y s t e m ‘ . 124
Rating Method Used in This Study . . . 134
Rating of Job S a tis fa c tio n ................................. 147
VI. THE FINDINGS OF THE S T U D Y ........................... 183
Description of the Agents' Interests . . . 183
Relationship Between SVIB Scores
and Work E ffe c tiv e n e ss.........................................204
Relationship Between SVIB Scores
and Job S a tis fa c tio n ...............................................244
VII. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND SUG
GESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH . . 275
VI1
CHAPTER Page
Summary .' ................................................................ 275
C o n c lu sio n s................................................................ 291
Suggestions for Further Research . . . 295
BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................• . 299
APPENDIX A .................................................. 309
APPENDIX B .......................................................................................... 320
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE Page
1. Percentage of Agents in Each Life Insurance
Interest Rating Who Produce $0 to $400,000
and Up A n n u a lly ............................................................... 60
2. Mean Ages and Number of Years of Expe
rience in the Michigan Extension Service
for County Agentsa nd 4 H Club Agents
as of May 1, 1951 . 99
3. Summary of Ratings of County Agents and
4 H Club Agents by "Quartile" Groups . 137
4. Analysis of Variance of the Ratings of
Seven Judges on the Work Effectiveness
of County Agents ( N - 8 1 ) ....................................... 140
5. Analysis of Variance of the Ratings of
Seven Judges on the Work Effectiveness
of 4 H Club Agents (N-48) 140
6. Comparison of Means (X) and Variances
2
(<r ) of Ages and Years of Experience
for Various "Quartile" Work Effectiveness
* ; ,u
ix
TABLE Page
Rating Groups of County Agents and
4 H Club Agents 145
7. Comparison of Means (X) and Variances
2
( cr ) of Raw Job Satisfaction Questionnaire
Scores for Various ’’Quartile" Work Ef
fectiveness Groups of County Agents and
4 H Club Agents 148
8. Proportion of County Agents and 4 H Club
Agents Answering the Various Categories
on the Seven Items on the Job Satisfaction
Blank 156
9. Dichotomization of Job Satisfaction Item
Response Categories Used for Test
of Scalability 161
10. Scale Analysis of the F irst Trial Ranking
of the Six Item Job Satisfaction Ques-
, tionnaire for County Agents and 4 H
Club Agents 163
11. Illustration of the Scale Analysis of the
Dichotomized Six Item Job Satisfaction
Mm
TABLE Page
Questionnaire for the Second Trial
Ranking of County A g e n ts ......................................164
12. Illustration of the Scale Analysis of the
Dichotomized Six Item Job Satisfaction
Questionnaire for the Second Trial
Ranking of 4 H Club Agents . . . . . 166
13. Intensity Analysis of the Scaled Job
Satisfaction Questionnaire for County
Agents ............................................................... 174
14. Intensity Analysis for the Scaled Job
Satisfaction Questionnaire for 4 H
Club A g en ts.......................................................................... 175
15. Comparison of Means (X) and Variances
( «^) of Ages and Years of Experience
for Variable Satisfaction Groups of
County Agents and 4 H Club Agents . . . 179
16. Mean Standard Scores, Standard Devia
tions, and Letter Scores for 81
County Agents and 48 4 H Club
Agents on 44 SVIB S c a le s ........................................... 184
