Content uploaded by Susan Havercamp
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Susan Havercamp
Content may be subject to copyright.
A Comprehensive Assessment of Human Strivings:
Test–Retest Reliability and Validity of the Reiss
Profile
HAVERCAMPAND REISSTRAIT MOTIVES
Susan M. Havercamp and Steven Reiss
Nisonger Center
The Ohio State University
Sensitivity theory provides an analysis of personality based on what people say motivates their
behavior. After Reiss and Havercamp (1998) confirmed a 15-factor solution to self-reported
human strivings, the Reiss Profile of Fundamental Goals and Motivation Sensitivities (Reiss &
Havercamp, 1998) psychometric instrument was standardized. In 3 studies, the Reiss Profile
was shown to possess good test–retest and internal reliability and concurrent and criterion va-
lidity. Ten independent samples of adults (n = 764) and a comparison group (n = 737) partici
-
pated in these studies. Pearson product–moment correlations between the Marlowe–Crowne
Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) and the Reiss Profile ranged in absolute
value from .01 to .39 (M = .16). How people self-reported their trait motives correlated with
how they behaved in the “real world.” The Reiss Profile can be used to study motivational traits.
Many influential analyses of human motivation were based
on theoretical reasoning, observations of patients, or on per-
sonal experiences but not on what people say motivates their
behavior. Plato’s idea that social justice and knowledge are
ultimate goals
1
was based on his personal, introspective ex-
periences. Aristotle’s argument that friendship is an ultimate
goal was based on a philosophical analysis of self-interest.
Darwin’s (1859) theory that survival and reproduction are the
prime directives was based on the study of animals. Freud’s
(1916/1963) thesis that all human psychodynamics are moti
-
vated by sexual energy was based on his interpretations of
what patients said in his office.
We do not know of any researcher who asked people
about their strivings to develop a theory of personality; no in
-
fluential personality theory has been based on what large
numbers of people reported to be the driving forces in their
lives. James (1890/1950), McDougall (1926), Allport
(Vernon & Allport, 1931), Murray (1938), and Maslow
(1943, 1970) were among the most influential motivational
personality theorists of the last century. None of them con
-
ducted large scale surveys of what people said were their life
goals or most important strivings.
Recently, Reiss and Havercamp (1998) asked thousands
of people from diverse stations in life to rate lists of hundreds
of possible ultimate goals. How people answered these ques
-
tions—the interrelatedness among self-reported goals—dif
-
fered significantly from what might have been expected
based on rational analysis. Consider, for example, the idea
that humanitarians care about people. Rational analysis sug-
gests that people who care about others, treat others kindly,
and are sensitive to the needs of others are likely to be con-
cerned about social justice, helping the needy, and promoting
world peace. When Havercamp (1998) asked people about
their goals, however, self-reported caring about people had
only a .23 correlation with self-reported motivation to pro
-
mote social justice. Apparently, some humanitarians care
deeply about justice or society as abstract entities but do not
care very much about the people they actually know. Al
-
though these individuals may devote themselves to causes
that help “the downtrodden,” they may treat badly the people
they actually meet, including the poor people they meet. This
example shows how difficult it is to guess which trait mo
-
tives are largely unrelated to each other and represent distinct
sources of motivation. If a clinician evaluates a client who is
concerned about both society and personal friends, two
largely unrelated motives are shown (caring about social jus
-
tice and caring about people), not one motive (caring beyond
self). To learn the number and nature of the motivational
sources expressed by examples of various behaviors,
researchers need to ask large number of people about their
motives and empirically determine interrelatedness of goals
through mathematical techniques such as factor analysis.
Reiss and Havercamp (1998) submitted self-reported mo
-
tivation data to a series of four factor studies (three explor
-
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 81(1), 123–132
Copyright © 2003, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
1
Ultimate goals are desired for their own sake.
atory studies and one confirmatory study), each with a
different sample of participants. The combined total of 2,554
people included people of diverse ages (12 to 76 years) and
stations in life (e.g., high school students, college students,
military people, fast food workers, seminary students, human
service providers, nursing home residents). The results of the
confirmatory factor study supported a 15-factor solution.
These factors, along with Reiss’s (2000b) interpretations, are
shown in Table 1. Each of the 15 factors is considered a mea
-
sure of a basic human striving or desire. The factors are cate
-
gories of correlated ultimate goals.
2
Theoretically, the 15 strivings are regarded as genetically
distinct sources of motivation. These desires seem to moti
-
vate all people, occur automatically, and motivate certain an
-
imal behaviors. As shown in Table 1, these strivings have
different survival implications, suggesting the possibility of
different evolutionary histories. Although we believe that the
15 basic desires are at least partially genetically determined,
we also believe that the manner people choose to satisfy
these motives is learned through culture and experience. For
example, parents instinctively love their children, but how
they express that love and rear their offspring depends signif
-
icantly on their culture and learned habits.
The satisfaction of each human striving is associated with
a unique joy (also called intrinsically valued feeling), as
shown in Table 1. For example, people experience wonder-
ment when they gain knowledge, fun when they socialize,
and freedom when they satisfy their desire for independence.
Loosely speaking, our theory of trait motivation, called sen
-
sitivity theory, holds that people behave as if they are trying
to maximize their experiences of 15 intrinsically valued joys.
Each basic desire motivates everybody but not to the same
extent. How strongly or weakly an individual usually experi
-
ences each of the 15 strivings determines the individual’s pri
-
orities. A desire profile (or individual hierarchy)isa
person’s unique prioritization of the 15 strivings. Generally,
the most important strivings for explaining a person’s behav
-
ior are those that are unusually strong (high) or unusually
weak (low) compared to appropriate norms.
Sensitivity theory holds that people go through life seek
-
ing to satisfy the 15 trait motives, concentrating on those that
are strongest and valued most highly (which depends on indi
-
viduality). For example, curious people devote much of their
time to satiating their desire for knowledge; power-hungry
people seek dominant roles; and vindictive people are con
-
sumed by a need for revenge. The satisfaction of a fundamen
-
tal desire is always partial and temporary; within hours of
satisfaction, the desire reasserts itself and needs to be satis
-
fied anew. Hours after we eat, for example, hunger
reemerges. After we socialize, the desire for social contact
reasserts itself within a day or less.
124 HAVERCAMP AND REISS
2
Table 1 does not include the desire to survive because this mo
-
tive is not considered to be an ultimate goal. These issues are dis
-
cussed elsewhere (Reiss, 2000b).
TABLE 1
Motives, Animal Behavior, and Intrinsic Feeling
Motive Name Motive Animal Behavior Intrinsic Feeling
Power Desire to influence (including leadership,
dominance)
Dominant animal eats more food Efficacy
Curiosity Desire for knowledge Knowledgeable animal finds food more
efficiently and learns to avoid prey
Wonder
Independence Desire to be self-reliant Motivates animal to leave nest, searching for
food over larger area
Freedom
Status Desire for social standing (including desire for
attention, wealth)
Attention in nest leads to better feedings Self-importance
Social contact Desire for peer companionship (including desire
to play, party)
Safety in numbers for animals in wild Fun
Vengeance Desire to get even (including desire to compete,
to win)
Animal fights when threatened Vindication
Honor Desire to obey a traditional moral code Animal runs back to herd when stared at by
prey
Loyalty
Idealism Desire to improve society (including altruism,
desire for justice)
? Altruism in animals Compassion
Physical
exercise
Desire to exercise muscles Strong animals eat more and are less
vulnerable to prey
Vtality
Romance Desire for sex (including courting) Reproduction essential for species survival Lust
Family Desire to raise own children Protection of young facilitates survival Love
Order Desire to organize (including desire for ritual) Cleanliness rituals promotes health Stability
Eating Desire to eat Essential for survival Satiation (avoidance
of hunger)
Acceptance Desire for approval ? Self-concept in animals debatable Self-confidence
Tranquility Desire to avoid anxiety, fear, and pain Animal runs away from danger Relaxation
Note. ? = indicates doubt—some authorities question if animals show true altruism.
The Reiss Profile of Fundamental Goals and Motivation
Sensitivities (Reiss & Havercamp, 1998) is a 120-item,
self-report instrument that assesses the 15 basic strivings.
Each item was designed to measure the strength of an indi
-
vidual’s intrinsic attraction or intrinsic aversion to a spe
-
cific life goal. The item stems consist of the phrases “I
like,” “I enjoy,” “I am happiest when,” “I love,” “I try,” “I
must have,” “I hate,” “I am proud of,” “I want,” and “is im
-
portant to me.” Examples of items include “I love to eat”;
“Sex is very important to me”; and “I am happiest when I
am physically active.”
As was noted, the 15 strivings were identified based on
factor studies (e.g., Reiss & Havercamp, 1998) of
self-reported life goals. The results of these studies have
shown that the Reiss Profile has factorial validity. The inves
-
tigation we report here was designed to evaluate the 4-week,
test–retest reliability, internal reliability, concurrent validity,
and criterion validity of the Reiss Profile. Do people consis
-
tently report the same life goals when asked after a period of
4 weeks? To what extent do people tend to self-report the life
goals they think other people value rather than the ones they
believe actually motivates them? Does self-reported motiva-
tion correlate with real-world behavior?
STUDY 1
Previously, evaluation of the test–retest reliability of the
Reiss Profile was limited to a small sample of 31 undergradu-
ates who were retested after an interval of 2 weeks (Reiss &
Havercamp, 1998). The r values for the 15 motivational
scales ranged from .72 to .96 (M = .83). The purpose of Study
1 was to evaluate test–retest reliability over a 4-week interval
with a larger sample of participants.
Method
Participants.
The participants were 123 undergraduate
students, 44 men and 79 women aged 17 to 31 (M = 19) who
volunteered for the study as one of many ways to fulfill a
course requirement. No person who participated in Study 1
had participated in any previous study we conducted.
Procedure.
The participants completed the Reiss Pro
-
file twice over a 4-week interval. Participation was anony
-
mous except that participants supplied the last four digits of
their social security number so that the Time 1 and Time 2
profiles could be paired.
Results and Discussion
As shown in Table 2, Pearson product–moment correlations
ranged from .69 to .88 (M = .80). These results can be com
-
pared to those reported for other personality tests. For exam
-
ple, Hjelle and Bernard (1994) reported 3-week test–retest
reliabilities ranging from .32 to .78 (M = .60) across
subscales of the Jackson (1984) Personality Research Form
(PRF). Test–retest reliability coefficients over the course of a
1-week interval were reported for the Minnesota Multiphasic
Personality Inventory–2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham,
Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) scales as ranging from .58 to
.92 with an average of .79.
STUDY 2
In this study, we evaluated the internal reliability of the Reiss
Profile; the social desirability of the Reiss Profile; and the con
-
vergent validity of the three Reiss Profile scales for Power, Or-
der, and Tranquility. The Reiss Profile Power and Order scales
should correlate moderately with the PRF scales for Domi
-
nance and Order, respectively because the scales tap similar
constructs and item domains. They may correlate only mod
-
estly, however, because all items on the Reiss Profile refer to
motives, whereas some items on the PRF refer to motives (“I
would enjoy …”); others refer to nonmotivational traits
(“When I am with someone else, I do most of the …”); and still
others to abilities (“I am quite good at …”). The Reiss Profile
scale for tranquility should correlate with the Anxiety Sensi
-
tivity Index (ASI; Peterson & Reiss, 1992) because they both
measure similar constructs. The Reiss Profile Tranquility
scale assesses sensitivity to anxiety and pain, whereas the ASI
assesses only sensitivity to anxiety.
Methods
Participants.
The participants were 171 undergraduate
students, 86 men and 84 women (1 missing gender data) be
-
tween the ages of 18 to 34 (M = 20) who volunteered for the
TRAIT MOTIVES 125
TABLE 2
Reiss Profile Test–Retest Reliability, Social
Desirability, and Cronbach’s Alpha
Reiss Profile
Scale
4-Week
Test–Retest
a,b
MCSDS
cd
Social Contact .81** .04 .86**
Curiosity .84** .24** .85**
Honor .77** .39** .79**
Family .79** .19* .87**
Independence .72** –.08 .89**
Idealism .69** .31** .86**
Eating .82** –.16* .87**
Power .84** –.07 .88**
Order .81** .09 .89**
Status .88** –.08 .90**
Vengeance .86** –.35** .94**
Romance .87** –.26** .93**
Exercise .82** .01 .89**
Acceptance .80** –.18* .87**
Tranquility .74** –.02 .92**
Note. MCSDS = Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale.
a
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (r values).
b
n = 123.
c
n =
171.
d
n = 311.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
study as one of many ways to fulfill a course requirement. No
personwhohadparticipated inStudy 1participated inStudy 2.
Measures.
Participants completed the Reiss Profile,
the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSDS;
Crowne & Marlowe, 1960), the PRF scales for Dominance
and Order, and the ASI. The MCSDS measures a tendency to
endorse items that are culturally sanctioned and approved
(Crowne & Marlowe, 1960). The PRF scale for Dominance
predicts social behavior (Jaccard, 1974) and student activism
(Pierce & Schwartz, 1971). Both the Dominance and Order
scales have been shown to correlate with other personality
measures and with the Strong Vocational Interest Blank. The
ASI has been shown to be a valid predictor of panic and fear
(McNally, 1999, 2002).
Procedure.
The measures were administered to small
groups of participants in randomized order. Participation was
anonymous and participants were kept blind to the purpose
and hypotheses of the study.
Results and Discussion
Data from Studies 1 and 2 were combined to compute inter-
nal reliability for each of the Reiss Profile scales. As shown
in Table 2, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from .79 to
.94, with an average of .88. These coefficients were similar to
those previously reported (Reiss & Havercamp, 1998) and
demonstrated good internal reliability.
As shown in Table 2, Pearson product–moment correla-
tions computed between the MCSDS and the Reiss Profile
ranged in absolute value from .01 to .39 (M = .16). For sake
of comparison, Jackson (1984) reported correlations be-
tween his desirability scale and his content scales as ranging
from .01 to .44 (M = .22).
Although the Reiss Profile scales were minimally affected
by social desirability, social desirability was positively cor
-
related with the Reiss Profile scales for Honor and Idealism,
and negatively correlated with the scale for Vengeance.
These findings suggest that the desire to respond in a cultur
-
ally sanctioned manner is associated with certain other mo
-
tives. Social desirability may reflect a motive, such as the
desire for social approval, which is itself an interesting per
-
sonality trait (Anastasi, 1988; Nunnally, 1978). The role of
social desirability, whether a response set or itself a motive,
warrants further investigation. With respect to the Reis Pro
-
file, evidence suggests that the role is minimal.
The Reiss Profile Powerand Orderscales correlated .55and
.60, respectively, with the Dominance and Order scales of the
PRF. The Reiss Profile Tranquility scale correlated .58 with
the ASI. In contrast, the Reiss Profile Power, Order, and Tran
-
quility scales were largely unrelated to each other (the rs
ranged from .13 to .25), arguably providing some evidence for
discriminant validity. These findings provided evidence for
the convergent validity of the three Reiss Profile scales.
STUDY 3
In this study, we assessed the criterion validity of nine
Reiss Profile scales. The hypothesis was that strivings in
-
fluence free-choice participation in various groups and
clubs. A person for whom social contact is a particularly
strong striving, for example, should be motivated to join so
-
cial groups such as sororities and fraternities (called
“Greek” clubs). If we test Greeks, therefore, we should see
above-average strivings for social contact. Under sensitivity
theory, a person who is strongly striving for honor is moti
-
vated to experience loyalty to traditional values (see Table
1); such a person should be motivated to join groups that
give emphasis to honor codes such as military officer train
-
ing groups (Reserve Officer’s Training Corps [ROTC]). If
we test ROTC students, we should see above-average
scores for honor.
Method
Participants.
As shown in Table 3, the participants
were 470 members of one of eight criterion groups and 737
members of a comparison group. No person who had partici-
pated in Study 1 or 2 participated in Study 3. The participants
in the criterion groups were recruited based on their affilia-
tion with our university with the following exceptions. Some
participants in the volunteer group were recruited through
Habitat for Humanity organizational meetings and through
the Peace Corp electronic mail listserv. Nutritionists at two
community weight loss centers recruited the participants for
the dieters group. The participants in the comparison group
consisted of the combined samples of scale development
Studies 3 and 4 previously published by Reiss and
Havercamp (1998). In total, the comparison participants rep-
resented 20 samples from six Midwestern states plus Canada.
They were recruited from high schools, colleges, church
groups, human service employee groups, secretaries working
at law firms, nursing homes, and other diverse sources re
-
ported by Reiss and Havercamp (1998). As shown in Table 3,
the demographics for the criterion and comparison groups
were similar, with the exception of gender imbalances and
some age variances discussed following.
Procedure.
The participants completed the Reiss Pro
-
file anonymously.
Data analysis.
To minimize gender effects arising from
unequal gender distributions across some of the criterion
groups, we computed average scores for male and female par
-
ticipants separately and then computed the mean of these two
scores. The result are called gender-balanced means. To give
readers an idea of the significance of the means, we “standard
-
ized” the gender-balanced means of the criterion groups using
the corresponding gender-balanced means and standard devi
-
ations from the full comparison group(N =737). Thestandard
-
126 HAVERCAMP AND REISS
ized, gender-balanced mean for the full comparison group is 0
and the standard deviation is 1.
Planned comparisons were made between each criterion
group and the comparison group of 737 participants. Cohen’s
d was used to estimate effect size. Table 4 reports these Co-
hen’s d scores. After we computed these statistics, which we
report herein, we compared each of the four college student
criterion groups—Greeks, philosophers, ROTC, and ath-
letes—to an age-selected subgroup, namely, participants in
the comparison group under the age of 30 (N = 287), and we
gender balanced (used average of male and female means.)
The t values and effect sizes (d) for these planned compari-
sons are reported herein directly after those based on the full
comparison group to provide information on how age might
have influenced effect sizes.
We conducted a multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA) that compared the criterion groups to each
other; this analysis did not include the comparison group.
We computed univariate ANOVAs across groups. These
results provided additional evidence that age was not an al
-
ternative explanation of our results: Where a criterion
group had been predicted to score high (or low) for a par
-
ticular motivational scale, the group scored significantly
higher (or significantly lower) than all or nearly all other
criterion groups, including those with equivalently aged
participants, and the higher (or lower) scores were statisti
-
cally significant. These statistics are not included in this re
-
port but are available on request.
3
In conclusion, we would
like readers to know that age and gender differences do not
explain the significant effects we report.
Results and Discussion
Table 4 shows the Cohen’s d scores for the eight criterion
groups on the nine Reiss Profile scales on which at least one
prediction was made.
Greeks.
The promise of fellowship is a common “sell-
ing point” used to recruit people to join fraternities and soror-
ities, and Greeks are known for their weekend parties. Be-
cause both fellowship and parties fall under the Reiss Profile
motive of social contact, we predicted that Greeks would
score high on this motive. In other words, the greater the im-
portance a person attaches to his or her social life, the greater
the person’s motivation to join clubs designed to facilitate so-
cializing and the more likely it is that the person will become
a member of such clubs. As shown in Table 4, the Greeks had
the highest effect size for social contact as compared with the
seven other criterion groups in this study. The mean score for
the Greeks for social contact was .54 SDs above the norm
(i.e., d = .54). This mean was higher than that for the full
comparison group, t(800) = 4.18, p < .001, and higher than
that for the similar age comparison subgroup, t(350) = 2.95, p
< .001, d = 41.
Because Greek clubs aim to recruit popular people (see
Fitzgerald, 1962; Robson, 1970), on average their members
should show a high motivation for status. The rationale for
this prediction was as follows. The human psyche reasons we
as people are important when others pay attention to us and
we are unimportant when ignored. In America, social popu
-
larity and wealth command attention, elevate status, and
make people feel self-important. Because status-oriented
people are theoretically considered to have a higher than av
-
erage motivation to feel self-important (see Table 1), these
people should find Greek clubs appealing, and therefore,
Greeks should score above average for status on the Reiss
Profile. The mean standard score for Greeks for status was
.92 SDs above the norm. This mean was higher than for the
TRAIT MOTIVES 127
TABLE 3
Demographic Data on Research Participants
Samples
Variables Greeks Philosophers ROTC Volunteers Dieters Athletes Seminary Culinary Comparison
a
N 65 52 65 66 44 71 49 58 737
Male (%) 32 56 83 30 20 46 53 59 35
Age range 18 to 23 18 to 41 18 to 30 18 to 76 18 to 71 18 to 24 19 to 53 18 to 47 12 to 75
Average age 20 24 21 30 31 20 29 25 29
African American (%) 0 0 3 8 20 9 2 7 7
Asian American (%) 2 2 2 6 0 0 2 0 1
White (%) 95 92 94 86 78 83 90 86 80
Hispanic (%) 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 5
Lower class (%) 0 2 5 2 9 1 4 10 NA
Middle class (%) 92 96 94 94 84 95 94 88 NA
Upper class (%) 8 2 2 3 4 4 2 0 NA
Note. N = 1,207. ROTC = Reserve Officer’s Training Corps; NA = not available.
a
Although we did not collect socioeconomic data for this group, the group was overwhelming middle class.
3
Copies of the MANOVA and ANOVAs can be obtained from
Susan M. Havercamp.
full comparison group, t(800) = 7.11, p < .001, and higher
than that for the similar age comparison subgroup, t(350) =
3.43, p < .001, d = .47.
Recruitment manuals suggest that Greek clubs should seek
campus leaders (see Fitzgerald, 1962; Robson, 1970). On the
Reiss Profile, leadership falls under the desire for power. To
the extent that Greek clubs are successful in attracting campus
leaders, Greeks should score high for power on the Reiss Pro-
file. Cohen’s d for power was.78 forthe Greeks.The meanwas
higher than for the full comparison group, t(350) = 6.01, p <
.001, and higher than that for the similar age comparison sub-
group, t(350) = 3.23, p < .001, d = .44. People who say on the
Reiss Profile that leadership and influence are important to
them are more likely than average to join Greek clubs.
The motivational profile for Greeks was consistent with
expectations based on what we know about how these orga-
nizations recruit prospective members. They advertised im-
proved social life, enhanced status on campus, and
leadership, and they attracted disproportionate numbers of
people who have elevated Reiss Profile trait motivational
scores for social contact, status, and power. The results pro
-
vided evidence for the criterion validity of these three scales.
Philosophers.
Because many philosophers have re
-
ported being motivated by a driving curiosity (Russell,
1945/1972), we predicted that graduate and undergraduate
majors in philosophy should score high on the Reiss Profile
Curiosity scale. On this scale, the philosophers scored 1.03
SDs above the norm. This mean was higher than for the full
comparison group, t(787) = 7.20, p < .001, and higher than
that for the similar age comparison subgroup, t(337) = 7.04, p
< .001, d = 1.06. The results provided evidence for the crite
-
rion validity of the curiosity scale.
ROTC.
Based on the high value military officers place
on honor codes, we predicted that ROTC members (college
students who were training to be military officers) would
score high on the Reiss Profile scale for honor. The ROTC
students scored .14 SDs above the norm. This small differ
-
ence was not statistically significant compared with the total
comparison group, t(800) = 1.09, ns, but it was statistically
significant compared with the similar age comparison sub
-
group, t(350) = 4.91, p < .001, d = .68. The ROTC group was
83% male; when the ROTC male participants were compared
to male participants in the full comparison group, the results
were statistically significant, t(306) = 2.66, p < .01, d = .40,
and the same was true when male participants only compari-
sons were made for the similar age comparison subgroup,
t(161) = 5.42, p < .001, d = .91. These results supported the
criterion validity of the honor scale for male participants but
not for female participants.
Because university students must be fit to qualify for
ROTC, they should value strenuous physical activity or ex-
perience it as enjoyable, which implies a high score on the
Reiss Profile scale for Intrinsic Enjoyment of Physical Exer-
cise. Cohen’s d for physical exercise was .81 for the ROTC
group. This result was statistically significant when com-
pared to the full comparison group, t(800) = 6.26, p < .001,
and when compared to the similar age comparison subgroup,
t(350) = 3.15, p < .001, d = .43.
ROTC recruits students interested in military leadership.
The more enthusiasm a person shows in endorsing statements
that he or she is motivated to lead, the greater should be the stu
-
dent’s attraction to becoming a military officer, all other sig
-
nificant factors being equal.Because leadershipfalls underthe
Reiss Profile motive of power, the ROTC students should
score high on this scale. They scored .90 SDs above the norm
on the Power scale. This result was statistically significant
when compared to the full comparison group, t(800) = 6.92, p
< .001, and when compared to the similar age comparison sub
-
group, t(350) = 4.10, p < .001, d = .56.
The ROTC profile pattern has face validity based on what
is emphasized (honor, fitness or physical prowess, and lead
-
ership) when the military recruits students for ROTC. The
profile provided evidence for the criterion validity of Physi
-
cal Exercise and Power scales, but the evidence was mixed
concerning the Honor scale.
Athletes.
Because the intrinsic joy of physical exercise
is an apparent motive for playing sports, we predicted that
128 HAVERCAMP AND REISS
TABLE 4
Gender Controlled Cohen’s
d
Scores for Criterion Groups Relative to the Control Sample
Reiss Profile
Scale
Criterion Groups
Greeks Philosophers ROTC Athletes Dieters Volunteers Culinary Seminary
Social .54H –.47 .29 .50 .18 .09 –.01 –.06
Curiosity .22 1.03H .42 .18 .56 .52 .31 .50
Honor –.14 –.41 .14H –.22 –.16 –.35 –.55 –.20H
Idealism –.08 –.13 –.06 –.11 –.28 .43H –.36 .77
Eating .40 –.24 .30 .50 .71H .24 .47H –.13
Exercise .50 –.10 .81H 1.21H –.21L –.12 –.17 –.38
Independence .27 .14 .15 –.10 –.48 –.50 .13 –.70L
Power .78H –.07 .90H .69 –.01 –.02 .26 .18
Status .92H –.46 .39 .64 .13 –.72L .21 –.68
Note. ROTC = Reserve Officer’s Training Corps; H = predicted to be high (above zero); L = predicted be low (below zero).
varsity athletes would score high for the motive of physical
exercise. Cohen’s d for the Reiss Profile Physical Exercise
scale was 1.21 for varsity athletes. This result was statisti
-
cally significant when compared to the full comparison
group, t(806) = 9.71, p < .001, or to the similar age compari
-
son subgroup, t(356) = 6.39, p < .001, d = .85.
The athletes also scored above average for status, which
suggests that being a varsity athlete at this university may
convey status on the student. Under the sensitivity theory of
sports (Reiss, 2000b), this result may be sport specific. The
high score for social contact may mean that young people
join teams in part as a means of socializing or making
friends; again, this issue is regarded as sport specific (Reiss,
2000b).
Dieters.
Many obese people have strong appetites and
are physically inactive. As shown in Table 4, the dieters
scored higher for the motive of eating than did any other
group (indicating that dieters report above-average appe
-
tites), and they had one of the lower scores for physical exer
-
cise (suggesting that dieters report below-average intrinsic
enjoyment of workouts). Cohen’s d for eating was .71 for the
dieters, t(779) = 4.55, p < .001. Cohen’s d for physical exer-
cise was –.21 for the dieters, t(779) = –1.32, ns. The results
provided evidence for the criterion validity of the eating scale
but not for the physical exercise scale.
Volunteers.
The Peace Corp and Habitat for Humanity
are two volunteer service organizations that have as their cen-
tral purpose helping people in need. Because humanitarian ef-
forts fall under the motive of idealism, we predicted that the
volunteer group would score high on this motive. The mean
score for the volunteers was .43 SDs above the norm for ideal
-
ism, t(801) = 3.31, p < .001. The more enthusiastic a person
was in endorsing Reiss Profile statements of concern for soci-
ety’s welfare,the morelikelywas the person to be a volunteer.
People who are motivated by status should be oriented to
serve or affiliate with the wealthy. Volunteers serve the
needy, not the wealthy, and often they do so for little or no
pay. According to how sensitivity theory defines the concept
of a fundamental human striving or motive, volunteers
should score below average for status.
4
The mean score for
the volunteers for status was .72 SDs below the norm, t(784)
= –5.58, p < .001. The results provided evidence for the crite
-
rion validity of the Reiss Profile Idealism and Status scales.
Culinary students.
People with stronger than average
appetites may be more likely than average to develop an in
-
terest in becoming a professional cook. Culinary students
scored .47 SDs above average for eating, t(795) = 3.43, p <
.001. This finding provided evidence for the criterion validity
of the Eating scale.
Seminary students.
Based on conversations with
campus ministers who told us that Protestant seminary
schools attract many young people interested in the social
gospel, we predicted that a group of students from Protestant
seminary schools would score high on the motive of ideal
-
ism. As shown in Table 4, the seminary students had the high
-
est effect size for this motive of the eight criterion groups.
Cohen’s d for idealism was .77 for the seminary group, t(784)
= 5.18, p < .001.
Although seminary students may no longer take vows of
poverty, the desire to become wealthy is not a common mo
-
tive for joining the clergy. Because the desire for wealth falls
under the Reiss Profile motive of status, we predicted low
scores for status. The seminary students’ mean score for sta-
tus was .68 SDs below the norm, t(784) = –4.63, p < .001.
The religious literature worldwide is unusual in the extent
to which it describes the need for psychological support as an
intrinsic joy (Armstrong, 1993). Reiss (2000b) suggested
that God images are especially well suited to satisfy the de-
sire for psychological support: All a believer need do to ex-
perience psychological support is to believe that God is on
his or her side. In the system of 15 fundamental strivings, the
desire for psychological support is expressed as a be
-
low-average desire for independence. (Sensitivity theory,
which has been used to generate a comprehensive theory of
spirituality, stipulates that being in need of others or a greater
reality is the psychological opposite of wanting to be on
one’s own—see Reiss, 2000b, 2000c). Based on this reason
-
ing, as well as some previous findings (Evans, 1960), the
seminary students were expected to score low for the desire
for independence. They scored .70 SDs below the norm for
independence, t(784) = –4.72, p < .001.
We expected seminary students to show an above-average
interest in traditional morality, which falls under the Reiss
Profile motive of honor. Cohen’s d for honor for the semi
-
nary students was –.20, t(784) = –1.38, ns. These future
clergy people reported only normative interest in morality.
TRAIT MOTIVES 129
4
Under Reiss’s (2000b) sensitivity theory, fundamental human
strivings organize perceptions, values, cognitions, emotions, and be
-
havior into coherent acts. A person with below-average motivation
for order, for example, tends not to notice when dirty dishes are left
in the sink; values flexibility; often thinks that rules and being orga
-
nized are not as important as most people assume; feels uncomfort
-
able when rules are rigidly applied; and introduces ambiguity into
arguments, not because this makes the argument more persuasive,
but rather because he or she likes moderate degrees of ambiguity. A
person with below-average status motivation tends not to notice ti
-
tles and marks of social class, places less value on gaining wealth
than does the average person, may think that social class is a superfi
-
cial characteristic of a person, may be easily embarrassed when per
-
sonally associated with expensive or prestige things, and tends to ig
-
nore what high society thinks. Volunteer work can appeal to people
with low status motivation because it conveys no mark of distinction
that impresses most upper class people and is unlikely to embarrass
the individual by creating an appearance of prestige or wealth orien
-
tation.
This result was inconsistent with the expectation of greater
than average moral motivation.
People join Protestant seminaries because they hope reli
-
gion can make the world a better place for the needy and be
-
cause they experience God in the image of a supportive deity.
Money is not part of the attraction for these idealistic young
men and women. The results provided evidence for the crite
-
rion validity of the Reiss Profile Idealism, Status, and Inde
-
pendence scales. For this group, the Honor (morality) scale
did not perform as initially expected.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Sensitivity theory is a novel approach to the study of person
-
ality because it is based on what people say motivates their
behavior. Although a number of insightful motivational per
-
sonality theories were proposed in the past, none were based
on what large numbers of people from diverse stations in life
said were their ultimate goals. The Reiss Profile was con
-
structed to assess underlying psychological factors derived
from self-reported motivational traits. In this study, we ex-
plored the reliability and validity of self-reported motives:
Do people consistently self-report the same fundamental
strivings? Do they actually behave in ways consistent with
self-reported motivation? The results of the studies reported
here provided affirmative evidence in response to these ques-
tions. With the addition of these results, test development re-
search on the Reiss Profile now encompasses four factor
studies (three exploratory and one confirmatory), two
test–retest reliability studies, two assessments of internal re-
liability, an assessment of the concurrent validity of three
Reiss Profile scales, and an assessment of criterion validity
of nine Reiss Profile scales. Nearly all of the evidence is con
-
sistent with the hypothesis that self-reported trait motives, at
least as assessed by the Reiss Profile, have significant valid
-
ity. The results lend support to the general conclusions
reached by Jackson (1984) and his associates, namely, that
people can validly self-report trait motives. This does not
mean that every self-reported motive is valid or that distor
-
tion and bias processes do not occur; rather, the evidence
shows that when self-reported motives are assessed using
carefully constructed instruments, such as the Reiss Profile,
bias is within acceptable psychometric limits and significant
validity is obtained. When used by trained professionals who
understand the limitations of self-report instruments, the
Reiss Profile assessment of motivation may be a significant
supplement to traditional personality assessments.
The Reiss Profile is suited to study motivational traits. Be
-
cause the 15 basic strivings have broad relevance, the instru
-
ment potentially can be applied to study a wide range of
phenomena. As shown by these results, the instrument is rel
-
evant to studying participation in interest groups such as
choice of college major, membership in social clubs, and in
-
terest in volunteer work. Other studies have shown the rele
-
vance of the instrument or underlying theory for studying
psychopathology (Lecavalier & Tassé, 2002; Reiss &
Havercamp, 1996), romantic love (Engel, Olson, & Patrick,
2002), spirituality and god images (Reiss, 2000c), sport par
-
ticipation (Reiss, Wiltz, & Sherman, 2001), mindfulness
(Reiss, 2000a), and mental retardation (Dykens & Rosner,
1999; Wiltz & Reiss, 2003).
Reiss and Havercamp (1996) put forth the hypothesis that
extreme or unusual patterns of trait motives longitudinally
predict psychopathology. For example, adults who are
strongly motivated by order may tend to show obses
-
sive–compulsive behavior because rituals are orderly (see
Table 1).
5
Evidence from both children and young adults
shows that an extreme desire for tranquility (as indicated by
high anxiety sensitivity) longitudinally predicts panic symp
-
toms (McNally, 2002; Schmidt, Lerew, & Jackson, 1997;
Weems, Haywood, Killerf, & Taylor, 2002). Lecavalier and
Tassé (2002) showed that high scores for eight Reiss Profile
motives were associated with psychopathology for a sample
of adults with “dual diagnosis” (both mental retardation and
psychopathology.)
The Reiss Profile is well suited to supplement the results
of traditional personality tests in clinical cases. A school psy-
chologist, for example, tested two boys who threatened mass
violence in their schools. On the Reiss Profile, both scored
very high for vengeance, very low for honor, very low for
idealism, and high for status. These results suggested that the
adolescents were motivated to get even for perceived of-
fenses and to obtain celebrity status. Morality did not inhibit
their violent proclivities because they did not care about
honor, and justice did not inhibit them because they did not
care about the welfare of the community or society. They
were disconnected emotionally from ancestors (low honor),
parents (low honor), community (low idealism), and school
(low idealism). They cared about their peers (average desire
for social contact). How dangerous is a boy who is out for re
-
venge and attention and undeterred by conscience? To some
extent, the level of danger may depend on the motivational
strength for tranquility. The boy who scored high for tran
-
quility was a coward whose fear of being personally injured
may have been greater than his anger; he may fantasize about
killing people but be too afraid for his personal safety to act
out his fantasy. The boy who scored very low for tranquility
was fearless. He once got so mad he drove his car with pas
-
sengers into a tree. This boy—angry, seeking attention, un
-
130 HAVERCAMP AND REISS
5
Theoretically, the sensitivity point of temporary satiation be
-
yond which continued performance of rituals becomes aversive is
experienced much sooner for people with low versus high order so
that people with low order could not tolerate the amount of ritualistic
behavior in a typical case of obsessive–compulsive disorder, but
people with extremely high order do not satiate easily and thus con
-
tinue to experience ritual after ritual as pleasant, a predisposing con
-
dition that may longitudinally predict symptoms. Similar logic led to
the successful identification of anxiety sensitivity as a significant
risk factor for panic disorder (McNally, 2002).
deterred by conscience, and fearless—may well have been
capable of planned or random murder if the police had not
first caught him.
A particularly important area of research is depression. Is
depression indicated by low scores on all trait motives or by a
pattern in which certain “positive” motives are weak, such as
social contact and romance, and certain “negative” motives
are strong, such as anxiety sensitivity (which falls under the
basic motive of tranquility) and need for approval (which
falls under the basic motive of acceptance.) Whereas the pre
-
viously developed assessment instruments, such as the
Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale (Reynolds & Mazza,
1998), show the level of depression, the Reiss Profile may
supplement this information by showing the extent to which
specific motives are abnormally high or low in clinical cases
of depression.
The Profile also can be used to study motivational traits
longitudinally. Because researchers have shown that aggres
-
sion is stable over time (Eron & Huesmann, 1990), it would
be interesting to evaluate how weak desires for honor and
idealism are related to trait aggressiveness.
To meet the need for mental retardation personality as-
sessments (Spirrison, 1992), we developed a mental retar-
dation version of the Reiss Profile (Reiss & Havercamp,
1998, 2001). The Mental Retardation/Developmental Dis-
abilities version has been used to show links between moti-
vational profiles and genetic developmental disorders
(Dykens & Rosner, 1999) and between extreme motiva-
tional traits and mental health symptoms (Lecavalier &
Tassé, 2002).
A limitation of this research is that the participants were
self-selected. They each volunteered to participate in a study
of motivation. It is possible that the motivational profiles of
persons who volunteer for research studies are somewhat dif
-
ferent from profiles shown by the general population. One
might predict them to be more motivated by curiosity or per
-
haps by a desire to help others (idealism).
The participants in these studies completed the Reiss Pro
-
file anonymously. How well these results apply to situations
in which participants identify themselves may depend on the
reasons for testing and the age and sophistication of the test
taker. Many research applications do not require the partici
-
pants to identify themselves. In many school and some clini
-
cal applications, the person being tested is motivated to
reveal himself or herself. Overall, the Reiss Profile test items
do not seem to elicit much defensiveness—this is a test of
what people most want, and the only way an individual can
produce the profile the individual most values is to answer
straightforwardly. If a person were suspicious about being
tested at the workplace, however, the individual may con
-
sciously decide to provide the answers he or she thinks au
-
thorities want to see. Readers who are interested in issues
pertaining to anonymity and self-report data may find some
novel ideas on the subject in Reiss’s (2000b) theory of how
the 16 basic desires affect human relationships. Reiss’s
(2000b) concept of self-hugging, for example, predicts
circumstances when people assume that their deepest values
reflect human nature (rather than individuality). Under
self-hugging, people are motivated to reveal their true mo
-
tives because they expect others to be impressed or value
them favorably.
In conclusion, measures of trait motivation have the po
-
tential to stimulate research studies on a broad range of issues
and to supplement traditional personality test results in clini
-
cal cases.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Susan M. Havercamp is now at the University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill.
REFERENCES
Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Aristotle. (1953). The nicomachean ethics. New York: Penguin.
Armstrong, K. (1993). A history of God. New York: Ballantine.
Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A., & Kaemmer,
B. (1989). MMPI–2: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2:
Manual for administration and scoring. Minneapolis: University of Min-
nesota Press.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability in-
dependent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24,
349–354.
Darwin, C. (1859). Origin of species. London: Murray.
Dykens, E. M., & Rosner, B. A. (1999). Redefining behavioral phenotypes:
Personality-motivation in Williams and Prader–Willi Syndromes. Ameri-
can Journal of Mental Retardation, 104, 158–169.
Engel, G., Olson, K., & Patrick, C. (2002). The personality of love: Funda
-
mental motives and traits related to components of love. Personality and
Individual Differences, 32, 839–853.
Eron, L. D., & Huesmann, L. R. (1990). The stability of aggressive behav
-
ior—Even unto the third generation. In M. Lewis and S. M. Miller (Eds.),
Handbook of developmental psychopathology (pp. 147–156). New York:
Plenum.
Evans, B. (1960). A personality inventory. New Orleans, LA: New Orleans
Baptist Theological Seminary.
Fitzgerald, J. (1962). College fraternity: Rushing and pledging. New York:
Obolensky.
Freud, S. (1963). Introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. London:
Hogarth. (Original work published 1916)
Havercamp, S. M. (1998). The Reiss Profile of Motivation Sensitivity: Reli
-
ability, validity, and social desirability. Unpublished doctoral disserta
-
tion, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Hjelle, L. A., & Bernard, M. (1994). Private self-consciousness and the re
-
test reliability of self-reports. Journal of Research in Personality, 23,
180–191.
Jaccard, J. J. (1974). Predicting social behavior from personality traits. Jour
-
nal of Research in Personality, 7, 358–367.
Jackson, D. N. (1984). Personality Research Form manual. Port Huron, MI:
Research Psychologists Press.
James, W. (1950). The problem of psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Dover.
(Original work published 1890)
Lecavalier, L., & Tassé, M. J. (2002). Sensitivity theory of motivation and
psychopathology: An exploratory study. American Journal of Mental Re
-
tardation, 107, 105–115.
TRAIT MOTIVES 131
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of motivation. Psychological Review, 50,
370–396.
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
McDougall, W. (1926). An introduction to social psychology. Boston: Luce.
McNally, R. J. (1999). Anxiety sensitivity and cognitive biases for threat.
Behavior Therapy, 30, 51–61.
McNally, R. J. (2002). Anxiety sensitivity and panic disorder. Biological
Psychiatry, 52, 938–946.
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality: A clinical and experimen
-
tal study of fifty men of college age. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Peterson, R. A., & Reiss, S. (1992). Anxiety sensitivity index revised test
manual. Worthington, OH: IDS.
Pierce, R. A., & Schwartz, A. J. (1971). Personality styles of student activ
-
ists. Journal of Psychology, 79, 221–231.
Plato. (1966). The republic (F. M. Cornford, Trans.). New York: Oxford Uni
-
versity.
Reiss, S. (2000a). A mindful approach to mental retardation. Journal of So
-
cial Issues, 56, 65–79.
Reiss, S. (2000b). Who am I: The 16 basic desires that motivate our actions
and define our personality. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.
Reiss, S. (2000c). Why people turn to religion. Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 39, 47–52.
Reiss, S., & Havercamp, S. M. (1996). The sensitivity theory of motivation:
Implications for psychopathology. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 34,
621–632.
Reiss, S., & Havercamp, S. M. (1998). Toward a comprehensive assessment
of fundamental motivation: Factor structure of the Reiss Profile. Psycho-
logical Assessment, 10, 97–106.
Reiss, S., & Havercamp, S. M. (2001). The Reiss Profile of Fundamental
Goals and Motivation Sensitivities Mental Retardation/Developmental
Disabilities examiner and technical manual. Worthington, OH: IDS.
Reiss, S., Wiltz, J., & Sherman, M. (2001). Trait motivational correlated of
athleticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 1139–1145.
Reynolds, W. M., & Mazza, J. J. (1998). Reliability and validity of the
Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale in young adolescents. Journal of
School Psychology, 36, 295–312.
Robson, J. (1970). Educating for brotherhood: Guidelines to the meaning of
fraternity. Richmond, VA: Sigma Phi Epsilon Fraternity.
Russell, B. (1972). A history of western philosophy. New York: Simon &
Schuster. (Original work published 1945)
Schmidt, N., Lerew, D., & Jackson, R. (1997). The role of anxiety sensitivity
in the pathogenesis of panic. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106,
355–364.
Spirrison, C. L. (1992). Form E and 16PF and adults with mental retardation:
Internal consistency and validity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 58,
525–536.
Vernon, P. E., & Allport, G. W. (1931). A test for personal values. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 26, 231–248.
Weems, C. F., Haywood, C., Killerf, J., & Taylor, C. B. (2002). A longitudi
-
nal investigation of anxiety sensitivity in adolescence. Journal of Abnor
-
mal Psychology, 111, 471–477.
Wiltz, J., & Reiss, S. (2003). Compatibility of housemates with mental retar
-
dation. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 108, 173–180.
Susan M. Havercamp
CB # 7255
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC 27599–7255
E-mail: susan.havercamp@cdl.unc.edu
Received January 20, 2002
Revised January 25, 2003
132 HAVERCAMP AND REISS
