The complicated pig speaks: a reply to Gore and Brown and Tinsley.
J Career Assess 2006 May; 14(2):289-291
I cannot help but begin this response with the admission that I stand surprised that the editor of this journal solicited comments from vocational psychologists of the stature of Steven Brown, Paul Gore, and Howard Tinsley on what I thought of as a modest methods paper. However, I have long since learned not to question the judgment of journal editors - at least not publicly or in print. I am even more surprised that this paper served as a starting point for a debate regarding the ongoing worth of the Holland RIASEC model. Despite being sorely tempted to wade into this debate myself, I will resist the urge to do so and will limit myself to responding to comments regarding the modified C index proposed in Eggerth and Andrew (2006 [this issue]). It must surely be clear to readers that the comments offered by Gore and Brown (2006 [this issue]) are far more congruent with my own views than are those of Tinsley (2006 [this issue]). Consequently, I will address Gore and Brown first.
Models; Mathematical-models; Personality-traits; Demographic-characteristics; Statistical-analysis
Donald E. Eggerth, Training Research and Evaluation Branch, CDC/NIOSH, 4676 Columbia Parkway, C-10, Cincinnati, OH 45226
Journal of Career Assessment