La question centrale de cet article traite du lien entre les actions et le systeme de valeurs. Pour ce faire, il faut differencier plusieurs types de valeurs et plusieurs domaines de l'existence. On met l'accent sur deux grandes classes de valeurs: ce qui est considere comme important pour le bien-etre personnel (les moyens en vue d'une fin) et ce qui releve de principes directeurs (qui valent pour eux-memes). Pour ce qui est des domaines de l'existence, on a retenu des realites etudiees dans bien d'autres recherches: le travail, la famille, la religion, l‘economie, le social. Les valeurs liees aux domaines peuvent etre egotistes (“devenir riche”) ou altruistes (“etre volontaire”, “dispenser de l'amour”, “etre un excellent ami”). Un autre classement de ces valeurs renvoie a l'opposition permissivite’ autoritarisme. On distingue aussi les comportements internes et externes. On s'est apercu que toutes les facettes jouaient un role legitime (lawful role) dans la structure des correlations de l'ensemble des variables (valeurs et actions). Dans tous les secteurs de la vie, les actes correlent plus fortement avec les valeurs renvoyant aux moyens en vue du bien-etre personnel qu'avec les valeurs definies comme principes directeurs.
The central problem of this paper is how well does what people do relate to their value system. To do this requires differentiating between different kinds of values and different areas of life. We focus on two major classes of values: what is regarded as important to one's personal well-being (means to an end) and what is regarded as guiding principles (ends-in-themselves). For areas of life were chosen topics studied in many other researches: work, family, religion, economy, social, etc. Values for the areas could be further classified as being either egotistic (e.g. “to get rich”) or altruistic (e.g. “to volunteer”, “give love”, “be a good friend”, etc). A further classification of the area values is permissive versus authoritarian. A distinction is also made between internal and external behaviour. All these facets were found to play lawful roles in the structure of the correlations of all the variables together: values and deeds. In all areas of life personal doing tends to correlate more strongly with values which are means to personal well-being than with values which are guiding principles.
[1]
Louis Guttman,et al.
An Outline of Some New Methodology for Social Research
,
1954
.
[2]
Louis Guttman,et al.
A STRUCTURAL THEORY FOR INTERGROUP BELIEFS AND ACTION
,
1959
.
[3]
Maurice Lorr,et al.
An interpersonal behavior circle.
,
1963
.
[4]
L. Guttman.
A general nonmetric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points
,
1968
.
[5]
J. Lingoes.
The Multivariate Analysis Of Qualitative Data
,
1968
.
[6]
Louis Guttman,et al.
On the Multivariate Structure of Wellbeing
,
1975
.
[7]
Shlomit Levy,et al.
Use of the mapping sentence for coordinating theory and research: A cross-cultural example
,
1976
.
[8]
Z. Maimon.
Business studies and the development of managerial skills
,
1980
.
[9]
Louis Guttman,et al.
Facet Theory, Smallest Space Analysis, and Factor Analysis
,
1982
.
[10]
Louis Guttman,et al.
12 – “What Is Not What” in Theory Construction1
,
1982
.
[11]
R Guttman,et al.
The Structure of Spatial Ability Items: A Faceted Analysis
,
1982,
Perceptual and motor skills.
[12]
L. Guttman,et al.
A Faceted Cross-Cultural Analysis of Some Core Social Values
,
1985
.
[13]
S. Levy,et al.
Lawful Roles of Facets in Social Theories
,
1985
.
[14]
S. Schwartz,et al.
Toward A Universal Psychological Structure of Human Values
,
1987
.