You really think people know their values? You think that people's associations with a single word are so similar that the same word can mean the exact same thing to even two people, much less to a bunch of people who take a survey? You think people are capable of being honest with themselves about what their values are? I'm not. At best, this measures what people think their values are, and even then, there's the enormous problem of the variable meanings of all of those words. And then, it's people from around the world? So they had to translate
this value-judgment words? Well that sends it all to hell, if it wasn't there before! Then there's the problem of outliers. For something like, say, the length of a person's thumb, there's only going to be so many outliers, and we have firm categories to put all those outliers in (i.e., a number). That is, there is a reasonably small standard deviation. But for something as vague and personal as "values" (which most people don't even think about for more than fifteen minutes at the end of a sermon on Sunday mornings), there will be far more outliers and even people who don't fit into the categories we give them at all; some values don't even have names yet! The standard deviation on something like values is not only large, it's essentially unknowable, since we can't have a category or a word for every single value, maybe not even every type of value.
I'm not saying it's not a perfectly valuable survey, and may even correlate to some degree with reality, but I am saying that doing statistics on the soul has certain affinities with me trying to determine via existential energy wave analysis and psychological guesswork whether or not there's oil hidden under a given field. You need since, statistics, surveys, analysis for something like that. You need something different to try to figure out the "values" of a group of people.