The TIVI and TwIVI are a 10- and 20-item measures of Schwartz’s values.
**WANT TO USE THE TIVI or TwIVI? GO AHEAD. ANYONE CAN USE IT FOR ANY PURPOSE. NO NEED TO ASK ME FOR PERMISSION.**
Carson J. Sandy, Samuel D. Gosling, Shalom H. Schwartz & Tim Koelkebeck (2016): The Development and Validation of Brief and Ultrabrief Measures of Values, Journal of Personality Assessment, DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2016.1231115
Values are a central personality construct and the importance of studying them has been well established. To encourage researchers to integrate measures of values into their studies, brief and ultrabrief instruments were developed to recapture the 10 values measured by the 40-item Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ; Schwartz, 2003). Rigorous psychometric procedures based on separate derivation (N = 38,049) and evaluation (N = 29,143) samples yielded 10- and 20-item measures of values, which proved to be successful at capturing the patterns and magnitude of correlations associated with the original PVQ. These instruments should be useful to researchers who would like to incorporate a values scale into their study but do not have the space to administer a longer measure.
The TwIVI and TIVI are composed of short verbal portraits of individuals. It is the job of the respondent to rate on a scale from 1 (“not at all like me”) to 6 (“very much like me”) how similar or dissimilar they are to the person being protrayed.
“She likes to take risks. She is always looking for adventures.”
We recommend creating a branching logic at the beginning of the survey so that participants may be presented with their preferred pronouns (e.g., he, she, they).
There is no reverse scoring. For each value, take the average of the items. For the TIVI, there is only one item per value.
Conformity: 1, 11; Tradition: 2, 12; Benevolence: 3, 13; Universalism: 4, 14; Self-Direction: 5, 15; Stimulation: 6, 16; Hedonism: 7, 17; Achievement: 8, 18; Power: 9, 19; Security: 10, 20.
Conformity: 1, Tradition: 2, Benevolence: 3, Universalism: 4, Self-Direction: 5, Stimulation: 6, Hedonism: 7, Achievement: 8, Power: 9, Security: 10.
People systematically differ in their ratings of value importance. Some people rate only a few values highly, others rate most values highly, and some sit in the middle. It is critical to control for these differences in order to retain accuracy of the values measurement when comparing individuals or groups (Schwartz, 2004). Values priorities (or the relevant tradeoff between values) have a strong effect on behavior and attitudes and must therefore be captured accurately.
Researchers may use one of two approaches to control for response differences.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advantages and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (2003). A proposal for measuring value orientations across nations. In Questionnaire development report of the European Social Survey (pp. 259–319).
Schwartz, S. (2004). Evaluating the structure of human values with confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 230–255.