Rokeach M. -1973-. The Nature Of Human Values. New York Free Press 'link'

Milton Rokeach's " The Nature of Human Values " (1973), published by the Free Press, is a seminal psychological text that defines a value as an enduring belief that a specific "mode of conduct" or "end-state of existence" is personally or socially preferable to an opposite one.

The book introduced the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS), a widely used tool for assessing human priorities by asking individuals to rank 36 values. These are divided into two distinct categories: 1. Terminal Values (End-States)

These represent the ultimate goals or "ends" an individual hopes to achieve during their lifetime.

Examples: A comfortable life, an exciting life, a sense of accomplishment, a world at peace, a world of beauty, equality, family security, freedom, happiness, inner harmony, mature love, national security, pleasure, salvation, self-respect, social recognition, true friendship, and wisdom. 2. Instrumental Values (Modes of Conduct)

These represent the "means" or preferred behaviors used to achieve terminal goals.

Examples: Ambitious, broad-minded, capable, cheerful, clean, courageous, forgiving, helpful, honest, imaginative, independent, intellectual, logical, loving, obedient, polite, responsible, and self-controlled. Key Themes & Contributions Employees | Springer Nature Link

The Nature of Human Values (1973): Milton Rokeach’s Framework Published in 1973 by The Free Press, Milton Rokeach’s The Nature of Human Values is a landmark text in social psychology. It

presents a comprehensive, structured theory of how human values are formed, how they function, and how they can be measured to predict social and political behavior

Rokeach argued that values are the "central position" for understanding behavior, bridging diverse disciplines like psychology, sociology, and political science. 1. Defining Values and Value Systems Rokeach defined a value as an enduring belief

that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite mode of conduct or end-state.

Key to his theory is that values are not isolated, but rather arranged hierarchically in value systems Hierarchical Structure:

Individuals rank values in order of importance, creating a stable system of priorities. Functional Purpose:

These systems act as internal standards for self-evaluation, behavior, and decision-making, allowing individuals to decide which value to sacrifice for another. 2. The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS)

To measure these systems, Rokeach developed the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS), which is often considered the most influential part of the work. The survey asks participants to rank two sets of 18 values in order of importance: A. Terminal Values (Desired End-States)

These are goals a person would like to achieve in their lifetime.

A world at peace, equality, family security, freedom, happiness, self-respect, true friendship, wisdom. B. Instrumental Values (Modes of Conduct) Milton Rokeach's " The Nature of Human Values

These are preferable behaviors or means to achieve terminal values.

Honest, ambitious, courageous, forgiving, helpful, intellectual, loving, responsible, self-controlled. 3. Core Principles and Findings Small Number of Core Values:

Rokeach believed that all human values could be encapsulated by a relatively small number of "terminal human values" that act as reference points for all attitudes. Predictive Power:

RVS rankings can predict a wide variety of behaviors, including voting patterns, religious beliefs, and interpersonal attitudes. Value-Attitude-Behavior Connection:

Values form the basis of attitudes, which in turn drive behavior. Value Self-Confrontation:

Rokeach developed techniques for changing values, demonstrating that if individuals are shown that their values are inconsistent (e.g., valuing freedom but not equality), they will reorder their priorities to reduce self-dissatisfaction. 4. Significance and Application Environment & Society White Horse Press

This is as true of environment-human interactions as it is of any other area of human behaviour. As Rokeach (1973, p. 3) observed: Environment & Society Portal

1.4 Individual Differences: Values and Personality - FlatWorld

Milton Rokeach's seminal work, The Nature of Human Values (1973), published by the Free Press, revolutionized social psychology by repositioning "values" as the most central and indispensable construct for understanding human behavior. Rokeach argued that while attitudes are specific to objects or situations, values are enduring, transcendental beliefs that serve as the internal "source code" for our actions, political affiliations, and religious beliefs. The Rokeach Definition of Values

In this foundational text, Rokeach defines a value as an "enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode". He posits that human values are organized into a hierarchical value system, where each value is ranked by its relative importance. The Two-Fold Classification: Terminal vs. Instrumental

The core of Rokeach’s theory is the distinction between two types of values, which are measured using the widely adopted Rokeach Value Survey (RVS):

Terminal Values: These represent desirable "end-states of existence"—the ultimate life goals an individual strives to achieve.

Examples: A comfortable life, world peace, equality, family security, freedom, happiness, and wisdom.

Instrumental Values: These are "preferable modes of conduct"—the behavioral means used to reach terminal goals.

Examples: Ambition, broad-mindedness, capability, honesty, imagination, independence, and self-control. Impact on Research and Society Part 7: Legacy and Modern Relevance Why should

Rokeach’s 1973 work moved psychology beyond the laboratory and into applied settings. By measuring the relative ranking of these 36 values (18 terminal and 18 instrumental), researchers have been able to:

Values Evolution in Transitional China: An Institutional Perspective

Milton Rokeach's 1973 work, The Nature of Human Values, argues that values are enduring, hierarchical beliefs that act as the foundation for attitudes. The text introduces the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS), dividing values into 18 terminal (end-state) and 18 instrumental (behavioral) values to map human belief systems and analyze ideological structures.

The Nature of Human Values (1973) Milton Rokeach establishes a seminal framework for understanding values as the central, guiding principles of human behavior and belief systems

. He argues that values are more fundamental than attitudes, serving as the "internal reference points" from which attitudes and opinions are formed. Science Publications Core Definition and Assumptions Rokeach defines a value as an "enduring belief"

that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to its converse. His theory rests on five key assumptions: www.emerald.com

Every individual possesses a relatively small number of total values.

All humans possess the same basic values, but in different degrees of importance. Values are organized into an enduring "value system".

Values are influenced by culture, institutions, and personality.

The consequences of value priorities are visible in all social phenomena, such as political or religious affiliation. Science Publications The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) The primary contribution of the work is the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS)

, which classifies human values into two distinct categories, each consisting of 18 items:

In The Nature of Human Values (1973), Milton Rokeach redefined the study of human belief systems by arguing that values, rather than attitudes, are the most central and stable predictors of human behavior. He defined a value as an "enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable" to its opposite. The Core Value Typology

Rokeach divided human values into two distinct categories, which together form a hierarchical value system:

Terminal Values: These are desirable "end-states of existence"—the ultimate goals a person hopes to achieve in their lifetime (e.g., happiness, world peace, freedom).

Instrumental Values: These are preferable "modes of conduct"—the character traits or behaviors used as tools to reach those terminal goals (e.g., being honest, ambitious, or logical). The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) is the engine of intra-psychic conflict.

The book serves as the theoretical manual for the Rokeach Value Survey, a psychological instrument used to measure personal priorities.

Instrumental Value | Definition, Examples & Importance - Lesson

Part 7: Legacy and Modern Relevance

Why should a marketer, a therapist, or a parent read Rokeach’s 1973 book today?

For Politics: The modern "culture war" is a direct manifestation of clashing terminal values. One side prioritizes "National Security" and "Salvation"; the other prioritizes "Equality" and "Freedom." Rokeach predicted that when different value hierarchies occupy the same society, they will not just disagree on policy—they will find each other morally incomprehensible.

For Marketing: Legacy advertising sold features; modern branding sells terminal values. Nike ("A Sense of Accomplishment"), Patagonia ("A World of Beauty"), and Apple ("Freedom/Creativity") are all Rokeachian strategies.

For Psychotherapy: Conflict often arises when a client’s instrumental values clash with their terminal values (e.g., valuing "Ambitious" to achieve "Family Security," but "Ambitious" requires 80-hour weeks that destroy family time). Therapy often involves re-ranking the hierarchy.

For Self-Help: The RVS remains a profound exercise for personal development. Sit down today. Rank the 18 terminal values. Ask: Is the way I spend my time actually moving me toward my #1 terminal value? Most people discover a brutal gap.

7. Values and Behavior

A central argument is that values predict behavior only when relevant values are activated and situational constraints are low. Rokeach reviews studies showing:

• Civil rights activism: People who ranked “equality” high and “social recognition” low were more likely to participate in sit-ins and marches.
• Cheating behavior: Students who ranked “honest” high and “ambitious” low cheated less.
• Religiosity: High rank of “salvation” correlated with church attendance, but also with prejudice (a finding Rokeach later explored as value conflict: “salvation” high + “equality” low → authoritarianism).

8. Value Change Theory and Dissonance

A landmark contribution is the self-confrontation method for value change:

• Subjects rank the RVS, then are shown their own rankings alongside reference group norms (e.g., “typical college student” or “civil rights activist”).
• Perceived discrepancies create self-dissatisfaction (a cognitive dissonance-like state).
• Over time, subjects alter their value rankings to reduce dissonance, and behavior change follows (e.g., joining NAACP, volunteering).

Rokeach reports experiments where a single 30-minute session produced measurable value and behavior shifts up to 3–5 months later.

The Theoretical Foundation: A Cognitive Approach

Before 1973, values were often viewed as nebulous cultural norms or vague personality traits. Rokeach, however, defined a value as an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct (means) or end-state of existence (ends) is personally and socially preferable.

His central thesis was that values serve as standards that guide our behavior. Unlike attitudes, which are focused on specific objects or situations (e.g., "I like this car" or "I dislike that policy"), values are fewer in number and more central to the personality. Rokeach argued that we possess a "value system"—a hierarchical arrangement of values that creates a roadmap for decision-making. When a person is forced to choose between competing options, they unconsciously reference this internal hierarchy.

Instrumental Values (The "Means")

These are the preferred modes of behavior—the vehicles we use to get to our terminals. They are moral or competence-based traits. The 18 instrumental values include:

• Ambitious (hard-working, aspiring)
• Capable (competent, effective)
• Cheerful (lighthearted, joyful)
• Clean (neat, tidy)
• Honest (sincere, truthful)
• Intellectual (intelligent, reflective)
• Loving (affectionate, tender)

The relationship is key: we use instrumental values to achieve terminal values. For example, you might value Honesty (instrumental) because you believe it leads to True Friendship (terminal).

But Rokeach observed a dangerous trap: the means can become ends. A person who values "Ambitious" above all else may achieve a "Sense of Accomplishment" but lose "Family Security" or "Happiness." This clash, Rokeach notes, is the engine of intra-psychic conflict.