Some measurements of achievement orientation

  • Joseph A. Kahl


A series of interrelated studies of achievement orientation, stemming from theoretical work by Kluckhohn and Parsons, are compared. It is found that this orientation consists of at least four separate components: (1) “activism” or “mastery”; (2) “trust”; (3) “independence of family”; and (4) “occupational primacy” or “accomplishment.” The first three are positively correlated with one another and with socioeconomic status; the fourth is negatively correlated with the others and with status. The findings are interpreted in the light of theoretical problems about achievement orientation, social mobility, and economic development.


Ideal Type American Sociological Review Achievement Motivation Grammar School Achievement Orientation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See, e.g., the recent book by Everett E. Hagen,On the Theory of Social Change. (Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1962).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    David C. McClelland,The Achieving Society (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1961).Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    With reference to class values, see Talcott Parsons, “An Analytical Approach to the Theory of Social Stratification,”American Journal of Sociology, XLV (May, 1940), 841–62; Florence Rockwood Kluckhohn, “Dominant and Substitute Profiles of Cultural Orientations: Their Significance for Social Stratification,”Social Forces, XXVIII (May, 1950), 376–93; and Joseph A. Kahl,The American Class Structure (New York: Rinehart & Co., 1957), chap. vii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 5.
    Florence Rockwood Kluckhohn and Fred L. Strodtbeck,Variations in Value Orientations (Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1961). Kluckhohn and her associates have evolved and ingenious seriesGoogle Scholar
  5. 6.
    Talcott Parsons,The Social System (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1951), chap. ii.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    Joseph A. Kahl and James A. Davis, “A Comparison of Indexes of Socio-economic Status,”American Sociological Review, XX (June, 1955), 317–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 8.
    Joseph A. Kahl and Robert L. Hamblin, “Socioeconomic Status and Ideological Attitudes: A Nonlinear Pattern” (unpublished manuscript, 1961).Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    Ibid. Joseph A. Kahl and Robert L. Hamblin, “Socioeconomic Status and Ideological Attitudes: A Nonlinear Pattern” (unpublished manuscript, 1961)., p. 8.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    See Charles McArthur, “Personality Differences between Middle and Upper Classes,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, L (March, 1955), 247–55.Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    Fred L. Strodtbeck, «Family Interaction, Values and Achievement,” in David C. McClellandet al., Talent and Society (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1958).Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    Bernard C. Rosen, “The Achievement Syndrome: A Psychocultural Dimension of Social Stratification,”American Sociological Review, XXI (April, 1956), 203–11 (also see his “Race, Ethnicity and the Achievement Syndrome,”ibid. American Sociological Review, XXIV [February, 1959], 47–61).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 13.
    Joseph A. Kahl, “Urbanização e Mudanças Ocupacionias no Brasil,”América Latina, V (Outdez de 1962), 21–30;Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    Henrietta Cox, “Study of Social Class Variations in Value Orientations in Selected Areas of Mother-Child Behavior” (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington University, St. Louis, 1964).Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    For studies of acquiesence set as a personality variable, see Arthur Couch and Kenneth Kenniston, “Yeasayers and Naysayers,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LX (March, 1960), 151–74.Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    Alex Inkeles, “Industrial Man,”American Journal of Sociology, LXVI (July, 1960), 2.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Ephraim Harold Mizruchi,Success and Opportunity (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1964), chap. iv.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    For a study of achievement motivation that follows this approach see Harry J. Crockett, Jr., “The Achievement Motive and Differential Occupational Mobility,”American Sociological Review, XXVII (April, 1962), 191–204. For a study of intelligence see C. Arnold Andersonet al., “Intelligence and Occupational Mobility,”Journal of Political Economy, Lx (June, 1952), 218–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1965

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph A. Kahl
    • 1
  1. 1.Washington UniversitySt. Louis

Personalised recommendations