Locus of control

Locus of control is incurred in connection with behavioral amplifier plans term from psychology, which was introduced by Rotter in 1966 based on his social learning theory. The construct refers to the extent to which a subject believes that the occurrence of an event depends on its own behavior, ie whether the locus of control within or outside the individual is (English: internal external locus of control vs.. ). The concept of " internal locus versus external locus of control of reinforcement " has since shortened in German-speaking terminology " locus of control ".

Inter Nale and external control signals

An internal locus of control beliefs is present if an individual has a positive or negative event as a consequence of their own behavior perceives while an external locus of control belief is present when this event is perceived by its own behavior as independent, that is, as its own control withdrawn. The perception plays a big role: It is irrelevant within this construct, whether an event actually subject to one's control or not, but only if the individual believes this. Rotter (1975 ) points out that this belief is not to be understood as dichotomous, but as a continuum. Closely related to the construct of locus of control that depends of causal attribution.

Locus of control and self-efficacy

It often occurs in the context of " locus of control " to an equation with the term " self-efficacy ". This is wrong in a cognitive paradigm, because there is a difference between the conviction, an event is to control / bring ( locus of control ) and the assumption that one is the subject that can bring about the event ( self-efficacy ) in any way.

It is therefore possible that a subject does have a locus of control, but not self-efficacy. The reverse case is unthinkable: A subject that is convinced that a particular event can not control anyway, will also not accept that it has even control over it.

• Person A believes that it is impossible to pass a certain door because the lock was broken ( no locus of control because no one was able to open the lock ).

• Person B thinks the door is very well to open, only it does not have the matching key ( locus of control " door can be opened! ", But not self-efficacy ).

• Person C believes that the door was open and she also has the matching key ( locus of control and self-efficacy exists).

• Person D also believes that her key fit, but thinks that the lock was broken (no self- efficacy and therefore no locus of control ).

Only Person C will act directly as it has both locus of control and through self-efficacy. Person B might try to move someone else to act. Person A and D make no attempt to pass through the door, because they lack the locus of control.

It is especially pointed out that this is internal / mental processes, which must correspond to reality in any way, but still direct the action of individuals. If you expect that a certain door is broken, they will not use, even if the caretaker has long replaced the lock.

A typical thought which focuses on a non-existent locus of control would be: "That does not help. This is pointless. You can not do anything, " Lack of self-efficacy ." I can not. I do not know how it goes. I will not make it ( but possibly others already ). " The difference is the inclusion of oneself in the considerations.

Locus of control and health

The locus of control is related to health maintenance, rehabilitation after (even severe ) diseases (such as a spinal cord injury ), experiencing stress and mortality, with internal locus of control beliefs correlate with positive developments.