his concept of “a lot of money” and what amount that actually rep-
resents for him. A key aspect of reviewing K’s SDS results would be
to look at his items on the individual scales (Reardon & Lenz,
1998). It would be important to know which scales contributed to
his top three high point codes and how the high point scores on the
scales that deal with interests (Activities and Occupations) differ
from the high point scores on the scales that deal with abilities
(Competencies and Self-Estimates). Given the likelihood that K has
experienced some negative thinking relative to his career plans, Eva
discussed with him how his career thoughts may have influenced his
responses on the SDS. Having K talk through his responses on indi-
vidual scales provided a window into how his thinking affected his
view of himself and his options, as reflected in his SDS results. It
would be useful to compare K’s educational self-efficacy ratings with
his ratings on the SDS Self-Estimates section to look for any pat-
terns. Using the client version of the pyramid, Eva helped K see how
this information related to the self and occupational knowledge
domains. It is likely that K’s score on the Conventional scale has
been heavily influenced by his work history, which has included a
number of C-type jobs. A comparison of K’s high point code on the
Occupations scale in relation to the high point code for his day-
dreams summary could yield some valuable information.
No data were provided on K’s SDS Enterprising scores. This
would be important to know, given K’s interest in making money
and the fact that several of his occupational daydreams include or
could potentially include an E. For instance, K’s interest in “some-
thing with computers and a lot of money” could include the follow-
ing options: computer systems hardware engineer (RIE), scientific
programmer (IRE), and Internet consultant (IER). Looking at the
SDS total scores provides only a partial window into a person’s per-
sonality types and how that has been influenced by his or her life
experience to date.
Define Problem and Analyze Causes. From a CIP perspective, K’s
“gap” could be described as a need to determine his course of study
A COGNITIVE INFORMATION PROCESSING APPROACH 347