Rokeach Value Survey (RVS)

Abstract

The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) is a widely utilized psychological instrument designed to measure an individual’s fundamental human values. Developed by Milton Rokeach, the survey contains 36 values, divided equally into 18 terminal values (end-states of existence) and 18 instrumental values (modes of conduct). The instrument requires subjects to rank order these values according to their personal importance as guiding principles in life. The selection of the 36 items was based on extensive literature review and empirical testing, ensuring the values were maximally distinct, culturally relevant, and manageable for a rank ordering task, with 18 items being judged as the maximum cognitive load for accurate sorting.

Keywords

Human values, Terminal values, Instrumental values, Milton Rokeach, Value system, Rank ordering, Cross-cultural psychology, Social psychology.

Authors

Milton Rokeach

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) is to provide a standardized measurement of an individual’s core value system. It is designed to capture the relative importance of 36 distinct values, assessing both religious and nonreligious beliefs, making it applicable across various cultural and demographic settings.

The RVS is particularly effective for generating comparative group data or for studying changes in value priorities over time within cohorts. Because the ranking procedure inherently creates interdependence among items, the survey is less frequently recommended for detailed individual assessment or evaluation.

Construct

The RVS operationalizes the construct of human values, which Rokeach defined as a prescriptive or proscriptive belief that a specific mode of behavior or end-state of existence is preferred to an opposite. This definition reflects Rokeach’s critical distinction between two basic categories of values:

• Terminal Values: These 18 values represent desired end-states of existence (goals in life), such as a comfortable life, wisdom, or salvation.
• Instrumental Values: These 18 values represent desirable modes of conduct (means to achieving the end-states), such as being honest, independent, or self-controlled.

Collectively, these two categories represent a psychological distinction between means and ends. While Rokeach estimated that the total possible universe of human values is extensive, the RVS narrows the focus to 36 values deemed sufficiently diverse and important for cross-cultural comparison.

Validity

The RVS possesses high face validity, meaning the items appear conceptually sound and directly relevant to the measurement of personal values. Given its unique rank-ordering methodology, the RVS is not easily compared with other traditional value measures, and Rokeach primarily offered comparative data rather than classical validity coefficients.

Empirical research has demonstrated convergent findings with other psychological constructs. For instance, correlations were observed between specific RVS rankings and variations in needs measured by the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), suggesting a conceptual similarity between measured values and underlying needs. Furthermore, studies linking the RVS to the evaluative factor of Osgood’s semantic differential analysis indicated that the RVS effectively captures fundamental evaluative dimensions of meaning.

Reliability

There has been extensive research on the test-retest reliability of the RVS, with reliability estimates varying depending on the format administered. Rokeach identified two forms, D and E, as the most reliable.

• For Form D (the removable sticker version), median test-retest reliabilities for college students over a 3-to-7-week interval range from .78 to .80 for terminal values and .70 to .72 for instrumental values. Longer intervals (2 to 4 months) typically result in a slight drop of .03 to .05 points.
• For Form E (the standard paper-and-pencil version), reliabilities are slightly lower, registering .74 for terminal values and .65 for instrumental values.

Rokeach recommended Form D whenever possible, hypothesizing that its higher reliability stems from the subject’s ability to physically re-sort the values until completely satisfied with the final ranking, a freedom not afforded by the more rigid paper-and-pencil format. In all reported cases, the reliability coefficients for terminal values are consistently higher than those for instrumental values.

Factor Analysis

The RVS utilizes a rank-ordering methodology, which means that the ordinal data generated are ipsative—each rank is dependent on the others, creating an interrelated system where changing one value’s rank shifts all others. This methodological feature complicates the application of standard linear factor analysis techniques typically used for interval data.

For reporting results, Rokeach (1973) primarily utilized non-parametric statistics appropriate for ordinal measures, including medians and composite rank orders, alongside frequency distributions. Other statistical tests, such as t-tests, ANOVAs, and the Kruskal-Wallis test, have also been successfully employed, demonstrating a high level of consistency in comparative group analyses.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report Value Inventory (Psychometric Scale)

Format: The RVS consists of 36 values divided into two lists of 18 items each, requiring the respondent to perform a rank ordering task. Two primary forms exist: Form D (using removable stickers for easy reordering) and Form E (standard paper-and-pencil ranking). Responses are ordinal data (ranks 1 through 18).

Language Available: Primarily English, though its documented use in cross-cultural comparisons implies translation into numerous languages.

Population Group: General population and specific demographic groups (e.g., college students, national samples).

Age Group: Data reported for age groups ranging from 11 to 90 years old.

Population Details: Standardization data were derived from a 1968 national sample of adult Americans (n = 1409) aged twenty-one and older, collected through the National Opinion Research Center (NORC). Detailed normative data are available broken down by social class, race, age, and religious/political values.

Test Methodology: Respondents are instructed to rank the 18 terminal values, and subsequently the 18 instrumental values, based on their importance as guiding principles in life. The survey is quick to administer and score, typically requiring only ten to twenty minutes for completion.

Keywords

Ordinal measurement, Psychometrics, NORC, Social class, Modes of conduct, End-states of existence, Comparative research.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A

Correspondence Address: N/A

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Rokeach Value Survey was first published in 1969, with its definitive theoretical and empirical foundation laid out in Milton Rokeach’s 1973 book, The Nature of Human Values. The instrument has been widely used in academic and psychological research for decades.

The instrument is available online via several academic sources. Note that the following links point to downloadable documents, including PDF files:

• The instrument can be found here: http://faculty.wwu.edu/tyrank/MGMT313/Rokeach%20Value%20Survey.DOC
• The original PDF (personal responses) can be downloaded here: http://www.wec.ufl.edu/faculty/jacobsons/wis6525/rokeach_value_survey%20personal%20responses.pdf
• Another reference PDF is available here: https://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/dis/infoserv/isrpub/pdf/Measuresofsocialpsychologicalattitudes_2928_.PDF

Reference’s

Braithwaite‚ Valerie. (1985). Structure of Human Values. Testing the Adequacy of the Rokeach Value Survey. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology‚ 49(1)‚ 250-263.

Hofstede‚ Geert.‚ Bond‚ Michael H. (1984). Hofstede’s Culture Dimensions: An Independent Validation Using Rokeach’s Value Survey. cross-cultural psychology‚ 15(4)‚ 417-433.

Robinson‚ John P.‚ Shaver‚ Phillip R. (1969). Measures of Political Attitudes. Institute for Social Research‚ University of Michigan/. Ann Arbor‚ Michigan.

Rokeach‚ M. (1968). Beliefs‚ attitudes‚ and values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass‚ Inc. (See Chapter 7‚ Organization and change within value-attitude systems ‚ 156-178.)

Rokeach‚ M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York‚ NY‚ US: Free Press.

Items of the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS)

Instrumental Values

1. Ambitious _____ hardworking and aspiring
2. Broad-minded _____ open-minded
3. Capable _____ competent; effective
4. [Cheerful _____ lighthearted‚ joyful]
5. Clean _____ neat and tidy
6. Courageous _____ standing up for your beliefs
7. Forgiving _____ willing to pardon others
8. Helpful _____ working for the welfare of others
9. Honest _____ sincere and truthful
10. Imaginative _____ daring and creative
11. Independent _____ self-reliant; self-sufficient
12. Intellectual _____ intelligent and reflective
13. Logical _____ consistent; rational
14. Loving _____ affectionate and tender [Loyal _____ faithful to friends or the group]
15. Obedient _____ dutiful; respectful
16. Polite _____ courteous and well-mannered
17. Responsible _____ dependable and reliable
18. Self-controlled _____ restrained; self-disciplined

The response format described in some applications, though the primary RVS method requires rank ordering, utilizes a scale of agreement/disagreement concerning belief in the values:

I believe it very much‚ I believe it quite a lot‚ I believe it slightly‚ I am indifferent to it‚ I disbelieve it slightly‚ I disbelieve it quite a lot‚ I disbelieve it very much