Search

The two-dimensional value structure postulated in Schwartz's (1992) theory has previously found support in samples of teachers and university students, but groups with other professions or low educational level have been understudied. The current study employed the 40-item Portrait Value Questionnaire (PVQ; Schwartz et al., 2001), multidimensional scaling, and transformation analysis to test the universality of the value structures among manual workers (n = 815) and white-collar workers (n = 459) in a Finnish steel company. Also, the validity of the instrument was confirmed by comparing the current PVQ sample of Finnish university students (n = 309) and a previous sample of Finnish university students (n = 615) studied with the original Schwartz Value Survey. The value structures of the steel workers followed Schwartz's theoretical model, regardless of the educational level, except for the security value.

This research identifies major personal values among American university students that predict organ-donation registration with the Department of Motor Vehicles. Participants responded to a factual test of their knowledge about organ donation, indicated whether or not they had registered as posthumous donors, and filled out a personality inventory measuring their personal values (Schwartz, 1992, 1994). The data indicated a high level of factual knowledge about organ donation; and the greater the level of knowledge, the more likely participants were registered to donate their organs. Also, participants higher in benevolence, universalism, achievement, and stimulation were more likely to have registered to donate their organs. The results are discussed in terms of the need to develop more effective health-communication campaigns by using specific health-education messages tailored to students majoring in different disciplines or to people in various occupations as a means of increasing their willingness to donate.

Two studies investigated the efficacy of 3 theoretical models in explaining college students' judgments of peers who cheat and of accomplices who assist cheaters. The value pluralism model predicted that accomplices who acted for money would be judged more harshly than those who acted from friendship; the attributional model predicted that cheaters whose actions were caused by internal controllable factors would be judged more harshly than those whose actions were caused by external uncontrollable factors, and the relative preference model predicted that students who saw themselves as more likely to act as the cheater and accomplice did would make less harsh judgments. Overall, the results provided the best support for the relative preference model.