This study examines the relationship between dominant ego states and occupations. For a select number of occupations independently rated as closely associated with specific ego states, respondents employed full-time in these occupations are likely to be dominant in the specified ego state. There is some indication that the tie between occupations (anticipated, in this case) and ego states begins to develop before children enter high school.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerneE. (1966). Principles of group treatment. New York: Oxford University Press.
2.
DoelkerR.Jr.GriffithJ. (1984). Development of an instrument to measure ego state functions and its application to practice. Transactional Analysis Journal, 4, 149–152.
3.
DolliverR.MixonR. (1977). Classifying occupations with ego states. Transactional Analysis Journal, 7, 170–175.
4.
DusayJ. (1977). Egograms. New York: Harper and Row.
5.
DusayJ. (1972). Egograms and the constancy hypothesis. Transactional Analysis Journal, 2, 37–41.
6.
HarrisT. (1967). I'm OK — You're OK. New York: Avon Books.
7.
JamesM.JongewardD., (1971). Born to win. New York: New American Library.
8.
SchreierJ. (1984). Ego state components in help wanted advertising. Transactional Analysis Journal, 14, 83–87.
9.
WilliamsK.WilliamsJ. (1980). The assessment of transactional ego states via the adjective checklist. Journal of Personality Assessment, 44, 120–129.
10.
WoollamsS.BrownM. (1978). Transactional analysis. Michigan: Huron Valley Press.
