Campbell Interest and Skill Survey (CISS): A Critical Review

Introduction to the CISS Assessment

David P. Campbell created the Campbell Interest and Skill Survey. The tool's purpose is self-reporting by individuals whose occupational interests relate to a specific job. It is a 25–30 minute test in which the scales are developed so that an individual's aptitude for a certain occupation — based on his or her ability to complete tasks with confidence — can be evaluated. Employment specialists and hiring officers use this tool to assess whether an applicant is suited for a particular job. Career development in new avenues becomes possible for the individual, and personal counseling is also offered based on the instrument so that skills needed for a certain profession can be built. Even the displacement of employees due to lack of specific skills is traced by this tool so that transitioning into outplacement programs can be made more convenient.

The CISS tool's creation and development began several decades ago when David Campbell started working on improving another tool called the Strong Interest Inventory (SII) (Taylor & Donnelly, n.d.). SII is still regarded as one of the strongest foundational instruments for the same purpose; however, David Campbell's involvement in its development became justified when E. K. Strong fell ill. The research and development for Strong's assessment tool were at risk. Campbell assisted and published a new, improved version in 1974 named the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory (SCII). This early version incorporated single-sex norms within the scales, which soon changed as the gender equality argument gained prominence.

The publishers recognized that gender composition for the assessment tool was essential, and modification was required for fair evaluation of interests across both genders. The inclusivity of female-focused occupations needed to be incorporated into the survey, and advancements were initiated in the 1980s. Unfortunately, a legal conflict between Campbell and Stanford University Press over intellectual property rights for the SCII arose, and the University succeeded in obtaining those rights. Campbell then decided to pursue his own differentiated development and continued building the CISS, retaining its rights and shaping its developmental direction.

The reputation of any instrument depends heavily on its reliability. CISS is considered an effective tool for measuring college students' propensity for entering the workforce, since that is typically when they begin thinking seriously about their careers. Based on the educational degrees they are completing, their skills and knowledge are carefully tested by this assessment, including procedural checks to avoid possible miscalculations. It has also proven effective in addressing employers' misconceptions about new applicants' actual skills relative to the jobs they are pursuing. Human resources officials can benefit from this measurement by exploring occupational and college choices in fields where gender stereotyping has been predominant.

The instrument is sometimes described as relatively new, although its latest version was released in 1995. Following criticism related to its scales, the tool was continually edited to become as inclusive as possible of both genders and a wide range of occupations. The new skill measurement component was presented as a significant advancement. The scales are standardized and can be used in contemporary evaluations of a person's tendency to possess the skills needed for a chosen career. Combined gender scoring and testing accumulated over many years make it a valuable and knowledge-rich tool that can be integrated with assessments of modern occupational fields.

Survey Items and Scales

There are 320 questions in the survey: 85 related to occupations, 43 related to school subjects, and 72 pertaining to activities of interest (Taylor & Donnelly, n.d.). An additional 120 questions assess the skills required for specific jobs. A six-point Likert scale is used throughout the survey, which is designed for individuals aged 15 and above. The test can be taken either with pen or pencil or online. Colored interpretation features enhance the readability of results. The scales are easily understood and align with present-day job placement requirements. The reading level is approximately sixth grade, making it accessible to college students exploring career options (Boggs, 1999; Hansen & Leuty, 2007). The test items do not discriminate based on gender, religion, race, or nationality. A wide variety of occupations is represented in the survey, enabling skill matching without difficulty.

A variety of scales are provided for accurate computation of results. These include interest and skill scales, orientation scales, occupational scales, procedural scales, and special scales. The basic interest and skill scales assess individuals' orientations such as influencing, organizing, helping, creating, analyzing, adventure-seeking, and producing (Taylor & Donnelly, n.d.). The orientation scales help determine whether a particular capacity would be beneficial in a given job and whether the individual would feel confident performing certain tasks and naturally drawn to a designated area of expertise. For instance, someone who scores high on "influencing" would be well suited for enterprising roles. This matching of skills orientation helps hiring officers and vocational psychologists find the best alignment between an individual's abilities and industry job requirements.

The occupational scales assist in identifying suitable careers that match applicants' job interests. Specific occupational profiles are examined so that abstract and conceptual terms can be better understood. Again, if the individual scores high on an orientation such as influencing, appropriate job matches would include leadership, negotiation, and marketing roles (Pearson Assessments, 2009). Special scales include extraversion and academic focus: a high score on extraversion indicates comfort in contacting people and forming new interactions, while a high score on academic focus suggests aptitude for studying, conducting research, and working as a lecturer in academic institutions. The procedural checks consist of two scales designed to verify that the individual did not make errors while responding to the survey. This "double-check" identifies instances where inattentiveness or distraction may have produced unusual responses that could mislead the evaluator about the individual's occupational orientations, allowing modifications to be made as needed.

The scales are coherent — they are logical and consistent throughout the survey and measure what they were designed to measure from the outset. The problem they aim to assess is addressed in a comprehensive manner, as the scales are broadly formulated with consideration for skills, expertise, and aptitude levels relative to the jobs individuals are interested in. The initial criticisms related to gender discrimination and gender-focused job classifications have also been addressed. As a result, the survey now constitutes a comprehensive analysis inclusive of both genders and their job preferences, forming a unified and internally consistent whole.

The section that stands out most notably is the final section of the survey, where procedural checks are described. These checks are essential for an accurate assessment of the individual and his or her abilities. They verify whether any mistakes occurred throughout the survey, and any indication of error can be corrected on the spot. This feature reduces the likelihood of errors, increases accuracy and validity, and makes the survey a reliable assessment tool for any individual regardless of gender or occupation.

Quantitative Measures: Reliability and Validity

The quantitative measures of CISS include both reliability and validity. Investigated over a 90-day period, the median test-retest reliability coefficients for orientation skills were 0.87, for basic skills 0.83, and for occupational interest scales 0.87 (Statistics Solutions, n.d.). Although the skills scales yielded slightly lower coefficients of 0.81, 0.79, and 0.79, the assessment tool still provides sufficient evidence of construct validity and concurrent validity for the occupational scale. The reliability coefficient (alpha) and test-retest correlations were favorable for this assessment (Taylor & Donnelly, n.d.). Temporal stability was considered good, as test-retest reliability coefficients produced results above 0.80. The instrument therefore demonstrates consistent measurement of vocational orientations over time.

The scale's inter-correlations support the validity of CISS. Examinations of individuals' engagement in occupations that would yield a higher score provided a theoretical explanation of validity. Theoretical relations were further derived from the specific interests and skills associated with satisfaction and success, as the correlation between these two criterion variables was clear. For the scales to be valid, a contrast must be established in professional samples relative to their degree of engagement, and the significant difference in relevant interest and skill distributions must be demonstrated through the CISS scales.

Additionally, CISS was evaluated for construct validity by computing correlations between the interest orientation scales and skill orientation scales (Taylor & Donnelly, n.d.). The correlations were 0.76 and 0.66, with a median of 0.70. This suggests that approximately 50% of the variance is shared, indicating the presence of construct validity. An objective approach for examining construct validity is also recommended — one that involves measurement alongside a well-established, validated instrument (Sullivan & Hansen, 2004).

Fifty-eight different professional samples were used to compute concurrent and predictive validity from the mean scores of interest and skill scales. The mean scores were ranked from highest to lowest so that the occupations attracting the greatest interest could be designated — most commonly represented by the orientation scale in CISS. Professions were mapped against each orientation scale across seven categories so that the best-suited skills for relevant occupations could be clearly identified.

An in-depth analysis of the reliability measures indicates that more than one type of reliability test was used. Test-retest reliability across three scales and the reliability coefficient were both calculated, contributing to the instrument's overall dependability. However, Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was not specifically reported for the assessment tool under discussion. Cronbach's alpha determines internal consistency among all scales within an assessment instrument. In contrast, other measures of validity are present, including construct validity, concurrent validity, and predictive validity. These are powerful validity tests; for instance, concurrent validity demonstrates that when discrimination between two groups is substantially similar, the measures are considered robust.

Conclusion

The Campbell Interest and Skill Survey (CISS) has demonstrated that measuring self-interest can be a strong predictor of the skills and professions that candidates value and intend to pursue. It is suitable for individuals aged 16 and above, and even later in life, when people continue to seek meaningful and financially rewarding work.

College students can easily go online to assess whether they have the required aptitude for the jobs they are interested in, and if not, what other options they might consider. The instrument is also useful for career counseling specialists seeking to interpret job dissatisfaction among potential employees so that career transitions can be well guided.

The statistically designed methodology underlying the scales and evaluative measures is firmly grounded in technology, making CISS readily applicable in contemporary settings. Its simple, approximately sixth-grade reading level makes it easily comprehensible to a wide range of users.

People from different professional backgrounds produce distinct results reflecting their individual interests and abilities. The reliability and validity of this assessment survey are high, and it can be used confidently across the employment industry. It has been tested a significant number of times and has demonstrated psychometric appropriateness and sound construction.

References

Blustein, D. L., Ali, S. R., & Flores, L. Y. (2019). Vocational psychology: Expanding the vision and enhancing the impact. The Counseling Psychologist, 47(2), 166–221.

Boggs, K. R. (1999). Campbell Interest and Skill Survey: Review and critique. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 32(3), 168–182.

Campbell, D. P. (1995). The Campbell Interest and Skill Survey (CISS): A product of ninety years of psychometric evolution. Journal of Career Assessment, 3(4), 391–410.

Hansen, J. C., & Leuty, M. E. (2007). Evidence of validity for the skill scale scores of the Campbell Interest and Skill Survey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71, 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.04.006

Pearson Assessments. (2009, February 7). Individual profile: Sample report. Retrieved from https://www.pearsonassessments.com/content/dam/school/global/clinical/us/assets/ciss/ciss-profile-report-internet.pdf

Statistics Solutions. (n.d.). Campbell Interest and Skill Survey (CISS). Retrieved from https://www.statisticssolutions.com/campbell-interest-and-skill-survey-ciss/

Sullivan, B. A., & Hansen, J. C. (2004). Evidence of construct validity of the interest scales on the Campbell Interest and Skill Survey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(2), 179–202. )00099-X

Tang, M. (2009). Examining the application of Holland's theory to vocational interests and choices of Chinese college students. Journal of Career Assessment, 17(1), 86–98.

Taylor, N., & Donnelly, C. (n.d.). Interest and skill measurement in parallel — The Campbell Interest and Skill Survey. Psychological Assessment in South Africa. Retrieved from https://psychologicalassessmentinsouthafrica.com/2012/09/07/298/