kinesiology multi-part question and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.
The goal of this assignment is to help you become familiar with categorizing locus of control (Internal versus External), defining if the individual is being influenced by their perceptions of a powerful other, and analyze if there are motivational or external constraints present in each case study.
The format of the assignment will be:
150 to 200 words per case study answer
12 point, times new roman font
APA citation and referencing were appropriate
For this assignment you will label each case study related to locus of control in the following areas:
What locus of control is the client demonstrating (internal or external)?
Are powerful others available to influence behavior positively or negatively?
What internal and external constraints are these clients observing?
CASE STUDY 1
Tammy works for the restaurant, Arnaud’s in the French Quarter. She has noticed lately that she has not felt like going into work or serving with her normal lively style. A promotion promised to her was not awarded and she felt like she could do nothing to change that. Although she perceives her work ethic to be stellar, she is often late for her shift, sometimes texts on her phone during her shift, and sometimes has a wrinkled uniform. Her boss has spoken to her about this but she feels like he will lighten up when he gets to know her better. Tammy feels mistreated and hopeless about her prospect of getting a promotion.
CASE STUDY 2
Jerry has been working out all summer for his big shot at college swimming. He focuses on his technique in the pool and his times have steadily been going down. Lately, he has noticed his body feeling strong and more ready for the challenge of each workout. His coach has asked that he not overtrain this summer but he is feeling ready to start increasing his mileage in the pool. Mastering each phase of his swim has motivated Jerry to drive to the pool at 5:00 a.m. and begin workouts before all other swimmers are in the pool. His teammates think he is crazy, his significant other encourages his drive, and his parents are concerned that he might hurt himself.
CASE STUDY 3
Alice is a mother of 5 children with a heart condition. She often discusses with her friends that she is worried about dying before her children reach college. Her friends are extremely supportive and she has doctor’s visits regularly when she is not shuttling the children. Sometimes she feels like just driving away from everything and sparing the children the agony of her death, which she perceives as inevitable. Currently, she has started dating a younger man, Antonio, and he has stated he would like to meet the children.
Requirements: 800 words max, APA format
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.Who Is in Control? The Role of Self-Perception, Knowledge, and Income …Perry, Vanessa G;Morris, Marlene DThe Journal of Consumer Affairs; Winter 2005; 39, 2; ProQuestpg. 299
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107Locus of Control and Health:A Review of the Literature*Barbara Strudler Wallston, Ph.D.**George Peabody College for TeachersNashville, TennesseeKenneth A. Wallston, Ph.D.Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Tennessee*This research was subsidized in part by Grant NU00426 from the Division of Nursing, PublicHealth Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; and Grant R01-HS 02638 fromthe National Center for Health Services Research, Public Health Service, Department of Health,Education, and Welfare.**Dr. Barbara Wallsion is an Associate Professor and Chair, Faculty of Psychology, Box512, George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville, TN 37203; Dr. Kenneth Wallsion is anAssociate Professor of Psychology, School of Nursing, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN37240.Address requests for reprints to either author.Locus of control, qn individual difference construct from sociallearning theory, has shown some promise in predicting and explainingspecific health-related behaviors. Research is reviewed on the utility ofthe locus of control construct in understanding smoking reduction,birth control utilization, weight loss, information-seeking, adherence tomedication regimens, and other health or sick-role behaviors.Implications for health educators are presented.Locus of control, a construct derived from Rotter’s social learningtheory 40’-42 has received a significant amount of attention in behavioralresearch. A thorough review of this research is beyond the scope of this paper,but numerous other general reviews are available.18,26,27,35,38,.u This reviewfocuses on measurement of internal-external locus of control and the relationof this individual difference dimension to health-related behaviors.Health-related behavior has been conceptualized by Kasl and Cobb2t asbehavior related to prevention, termed health behavior; behavior oncesymptoms appear, termed illness behavior; and behavior following diagnosis,termed sick-role behavior. This review is primarily concerned with healthbehavior and sick-role behavior, since published research on illness behaviorand locus of control was not available.
108SmokingSeveral studies have shown that internals (those who believe thatreinforcement is contingent upon the individual’s behavior) are more likely toengage in behaviors that facilitate physical well-being. James et al‘6 replicatedStraits and Sechrest’s47 finding that nonsmokers were more likely to beinternal than smokers. In addition, they found that males who believed theSurgeon General’s Report and quit smoking were more internal than thosewho believed the report but did not quit smoking. Platt39 (summarized inStrickland 41) found internals able to change smoking behavior to a greaterextent than externals (those who believe reinforcement is controlled byoutside forces such as fate, luck, chance or powerful others). Steffy et al46found internals more likely to reduce their smoking; Williamss4 found greatercigarette smoking among external ninth-grade subjects. Some studies,however, have failed to corroborate the relationships among smoking andlocus of control.6’28 Phares3$ points out that these relationships might beimproved with systematic consideration of values, needs, other expectancies,and prior learning history. However, even without consideration of theinfluence of other factors, locus of control can significantly differentiatesamples.Recent studies 4’s have shown type of treatment to interact with locus ofcontrol in determining treatment outcome. Evidence suggests that it may beuseful to tailor treatments to individual differences in locus of control,although the treatment groups did not perform significantly better than theno-treatment group. Thus, the results are suggestive only.Birth ControlResearch on locus of control and use of birth control has produced similarresults. MacDonald32 showed that among single female college students, 62%of the internals reported practicing contraception, while only 37% of theexternals did so. Data on married females were in the same direction but werenot statistically significant. Among a sample of single college females,Lund Y31 found that sexually active contraceptive users were more internalthan sexually active nonusers. Phares3g studied three samples of females; girlsattending a compulsory industrial school were less likely to use contra-ceptives, although they reported a high degree of sexual activity. Thesesamples also differed in age, socioeconomic status, and education. Withineach sample, where the variability was small, locus of control was not relatedto use of contraceptives.Harkey and King 14 collected data, using the Health Locus of Control(HLC) scale, for unwed mothers, abortion patients, and users of some form ofbirth control. Analysis showed no difference in locus of control betweenabortion patients and users of birth control, with both groups scoring slightlymore internal than female norms. The sample of unwed mothers, who
109obviously failed to use effective birth control methods, were more external,but this group also differed from the others in age and socioeconomic status.More recent research has failed, however, to confirm these findings on locusof control and contraceptive use. Seeley~4 tried to differentiate successful fromunsuccessful family planners. There were no differences among five groups ofwomen (which were not clearly defined) on locus of control. Among poor,black women, Fisch&dquo; found no significant differences in locus of controlbetween effective and ineffective family planners; family planning categorieswere based on interview data. In general, these women were highly external.Harveyl5 found differences in locus of control between individuals usinghighly effective and those using less effective methods of contraception;however, diaphragm, foam, and condom were categorized with rhythm andno contraceptive in the less effective category. Gough, 12 using factor analysisto classify contraceptives into coitus-dependent, surgical coitus-inhibiting,and coitus-independent, found no significant correlation between locus ofcontrol, and rated acceptability of contraceptives for any of the four factors;however, subjects were not asked actual usage questions, so it is not clear thatdifferences in locus of control would be expected to relate to these attitudestoward contraceptive data. Darrow,9 in a study of prophylactic use forvenereal disease prevention, found that perceptions of control were relativelypoor predictors of condom acceptance.Using concepts similar to locus of control, Bauman and Udry~ foundpowerlessness to be a relatively strong predictor of failure to regularly practicecontraception among a sample of black, married, recent fathers; and Keller etal22 found with male and female subjects, that contraceptive users were morelikely to have high feelings of efficacy than nonusers.Weight LossStudies of weight loss have found locus of control to be a relevant factor.Manno and Marston33 found, in their control group, that externally orientedsubjects weighed more initially but lost less weight, although heavier subjectsgenerally lost more weight; thus, among control group subjects, internals weremore successful. However,, for their two treatment groups there was norelation between locus of control and weight loss. Bellack et ae failed to find asignificant correlation between locus of control and weight loss, but it isn’tclear from their presentations whether they calculated separate correlationswithin treatment and control groups, which was necessary to replicate theManno and Marston33 findings.O’Bryan36 found overweight women to be more external. Althoughexternals and internals in her sample differed on a variety of self-reportmeasures, they did not differ on behavioral indices, including information-seeking and learning. Since all subjects were involved in the TOPS weightreduction program, they are somewhat comparable to treatment groups inother studies reported. Jeffrey and Christensen&dquo; found, within their&dquo;willpower&dquo; treatment group that subjects with greater weight loss were more
110t internal than subjects with less weight loss. Locus of control, however, failed Ito differentiate between successful and unsuccessful weight loss amongbehavior therapy or control subjects. Balch and Ross,’ using a self-controlweight reduction program, found significant correlations between internalityand completion of the program and between internality and success in theprogram (weight loss greater than the median of eight pounds). Thus, there issome indication that treatments may be differentially effective for internalsand externals.Wallston et als° failed to find significant differences in weight reductionbetween internals and externals using either the I-E scale or the HLC scale tomeasure these traits. However, HLC externals lost more weight in theexternally oriented, group program, while HLC internals lost more weight inthe internally oriented, self-directed program. Subjects in programs matchedto their locus of control expressed greater satisfaction with the program. Thissuggests the value of the locus of control construct in designing programscompatible with individual orientations. Phares3$ suggests future researchshould investigate the effectiveness of applying knowledge of locus of controlin weight loss programs. &dquo;Perhaps internals can be enrolled in moreindependent, self-regulated reduction programs while externals would profitmost from programs that rely on prestige suggestion or support fromothers.&dquo; (p 174) .Other Preventive BehaviorsInternality has been related to other preventive behaviors. Williams foundthat internality was related to greater reported seat belt Use 53 and to preventivedental care.55 Dabbs and Kirscht8 found that college subjects they termedinternal, (using motivational items to measure locus of control), were morelikely to be inoculated against influenza than those they termed external; butusing expectancy items, (the theoretically consistent way of measuring locusof control), internals were more likely not to have taken~he shots. Motivationto control one’s health may be predictive of health behaviors, but cautionmust be exercised not to confuse motivation with locus of control. Kirscht’s2$recent work clarifies this distinction._ SICK-ROLE BEHAVIORVarious forms of compliance have been studied in relation to locus ofcontrol, as have other behaviors aimed at controlling illness. Johnson et al2ofound that among women undergoing abdominal surgery, internal patientsreceived more analgesics than external patients. First-born intemals hadlonger hospital stays than externals, which these women could perceive as adesirable outcome since return home meant a return to household chores. Inan earlier report of this study, Johnson et al’9 interpreted their findings asevidence &dquo;that the belief that one can control one’s environment is associatedwith the ability to influence others so as to achieve one’s own ends.&dquo; (p 26)In a well-controlled experiment, Cromwell et af included participation in
111self-treatment as one of three nursing care interventions. No myocardialinfarction patient in a congruent condition (i.e., internals with highparticipation and externals with low participation) returned to the hospitalwithin 12 weeks (p=.06) or died within 12 weeks (p=.06). Although of marginalstatistical significance (possibly because of the low number of deaths), theimportance of these dependent measures makes the findings worth noting. Nosimilar interaction occurred for non-MI patients. Although an informationmanipulation was also included, the authors failed to report analyses of locusof control by information interactions because they conceptualizedrepression-sensitization as the personality variable relevant to information.On the 14 other recovery-related variables, there were no significantinteractions of locus of control and participation in self-treatment. Therewere, however, main effects of locus of control such that externals spent moredays in the coronary care unit and had higher temperatures and lactatedehydrogenase while in the CCU. While these data lend some weight to theimportance of locus of control, the lack of additional interactions alsoprovides some reason for caution.InformationIn an early study- Seeman and Evans45 found that among tuberculosispatients matched for occupational status, education, and ward placement,internals knew more about their condition, were more inquisitive withphysicians and nurses about tuberculosis and their own situation, andindicated less satisfaction with the amount of information they were gettingfrom hospital personnel than did externals. Similarly, DuCettelo reportedthat among newly diagnosed diabetics, internals knew more about theircondition than did externals; these findings are also reported in Lowery29 andLowery and DuCette.3° For long-term diabetics, however, informationdifferences did not exist between internals and externals. Because of the cross-sectional nature of this study, caution must be used in drawing conclusions.Contrary to his prediction, DuCette’o found that long-term diabetics whowere internal missed an increasing number of doctor appointments and beganto ignore their diets. He hypothesized that the uncontrollable, unpredictableaspects of diabetes leads internals to find that their normal response isinadequate; internals, upon learning that knowledge does not lead to control,respond by relinquishing the degree of control they might maintain. Amongmentally depressed patients DuCette has studied, internals respond to thediagnosis by actively seeking information about the condition.In two studies in which college students were given a mildly threateningmessage about the danger of hypertension and asked to role-play newlydiagnosed hypertension patients, Wallston et al5l found that internals(measured by the HLC scale) with high health values sought moreinformation than any other group. Thus, as suggested by social leamingtheory, prediction of preventive health information-seeking utilizing a health-specific measure of locus of control was enhanced by measuring values also.
112Consistent with a great deal of research on locus of control, there is evidenceof greater health information-seeking among internals.AdherenceWeaver52 found that among kidney patients using dialysis machines,internals were more likely to comply with diet restrictions and keep scheduledappointments more regularly than externals. Key,24 however, in a study ofpredominantly black, female, working class hypertension patients, foundmore compliance among externals using independent measures of diet andmedication-taking compliance; but found no relationship between locus ofcontrol (measured by the HLC scale) and compliance measured byappointment-keeping, clinic discontinuance, or self-report of medication-taking.Similarly, Kern23 found, among elderly subjects, that externals used moretotal outpatient physician services, but there were no differences betweeninternals and externals in patient-initiated physician visits. Marston3’ foundno relationship between locus of control and compliance of myocardialinfarction patients. Thus, the relation between compliance with medicalregimen and locus of control is unclear. Failure to include measures ofperceived value of health may account for some discrepancies in thisliterature.Venereal DiseaseDarrow9 (summarized in Strickland48) found that internal females withvenereal disease were more likely to return for treatment with the appearanceof new symptoms than were external females. Olbrisch,37 using the HLC scale,found that female gonorrhea patients were more external than malegonorrhea patients. External subjects had more naive beliefs about venerealdisease and a casual helpless attitude about how it is contracted, but they didnot differ from internal, in plans to take future precautions. While race wasthe best predictor_ of reinfection, HLC scores also discriminated, withreinfected black males more internal. This may correspond with Darrow’sfinding. The relation between sick-role behaviors and locus of control forvenereal disease patients is obviously complex, but again, there is someindication that locus of control is a meaningful variable.SUMMARYthee is evidence that the locus of control construct is relevant to theprediction of health behaviors and sick-role behaviors. Specific behaviorswhere locus of control is relevant include seeking information, takingmedication, making and keeping physician appointments, maintaining a diet,and giving up smoking. Internals generally show more positive behaviors in ;each of these areas, but contradictory evidence has been presented which, insome instances, could indicate that it is more functional to hold externalbeliefs. ’
113 The lack of consistent findings may relate to differences in or problems withthe measurement of locus of control and/or to failure on the part of manyinvestigators to consider other variables which modify the influence of locusof control beliefs. Most of the early studies utilized Rotter’s I-E scale,although in increasing numbers investigators are beginning to turn to health-related measures of locus of control (such as the HLC scale) as the preferredalternative for studying health and sick-role behaviors. However, even withthis more specific measure, it should be recognized that locus of control is onlyone of a complex of factors {e.g.; the value of health; motivation; socialsupports; previous behavior; perceived costs and benefits of special actions),which individually or in interaction with one another explain the variance inhealth-related behaviors. As Phares38 points.out, &dquo;If one tries to predictbehavior by means of an I-E scale alone, that scale will have to be pot~nt andcomplex indeed to do the job. If, on the other hand, one simultaneouslyassesses needs, expectancies for success, and the nature of the situation withother instruments, the grossness of a single score on an I-E scale can partiallybe compensated for.&dquo; (p 175)IMPLICATIONSSeveral major implications for health educators may be drawn from theconcept of locus of control. Scales to measure locus of control may be used toevaluate health education programs. Health educators may want to focus ontraining internality. Health educators may also begin to tailor programs toindividuals’ generalized expectancies regarding locus of control.Evaluation Using Loctis of Control ScalesMany health education programs which do not label themselves asinternality training emphasize patient responsibility and internal beliefs. Forsuch programs, health locus of control scales can be used to evaluate programsuccess. Clearly, for evaluation purposes, changes in beliefs or expectanciesare only relevant if accompanied by desired behavior change. However,obtaining behavior change data is not always possible, and expectancy datawill add to understanding of the change or lack of change in behaviors. Thus,use of a health locus of control scale is recommended in conjunction withbehavioral measures to evaluate health education programs.Training InternalityInternals appear more likely to engage in positive health and sick-rolebehaviors. To the extent this is true, health educators need to involvethemselves in training patients to hold more internal beliefs. As recommendedabove, such training should be accompanied by evaluation of changes in locusof control in combination with behavioral change measures.Pilot programs involving some form of internality training have begun toappear in the literature. For example, Green et al’3 included internalitytraining as one phase of a multiple-intervention health education program for
114hypertensive outpatients. Schachat43 found that subjects within a hyper-tension screening situation who received a motivational booster in line withinternal locus of control beliefs were more likely to make an appointment tosee a physician quickly. Tobias and MacDonald49 found a shift in internalityon a weight locus of control scale, but not on Rotter’s I-E scale for subjects in aself-determination group. However, this group did not differ in weight lossfrom the control groups, while subjects assigned to a weight reduction manualtreatment and to a behavioral contract treatment did show significant weightloss and no change in locus of control beliefs. The researchers failed to dividesubjects on locus of control to test the differential effectiveness of theirtreatments, but they did show evidence of successful internality training (theirself-determination group), which might prove more effective when combinedwith some other weight loss program. _The goal of such training programs should be to train responsible internals,people who will recognize the need to use a health professional as anappropriate resource, but who will also see that actions of their own (based onsound medical advice) will be necessary to obtain and maintain health.Tailoring Programs to Locus of ControlThe potential for health education programs tailored to individuals’ healthlocus of control beliefs is also suggested. BeSt4 found an attitude changemanipulation was more effective in decreasing smoking when it was matchedwith subject motivation. Best and ~Steffy5 showed suggestive evidence thattype of treatment interacted with locus of control in determining smokingreduction outcome. Several studies reviewed above&dquo;’33’so also found weightloss programs to be differentially effective for internals and externals. Aninternally oriented program should provide more choice of treatment, moreinvolvement of the patient in making choices and, in general, strong emphasison individual responsibility. An externally oriented program might bedesigned to move individuals who believe in chance to a belief that their healthcan be controlled, even it if is dependent upon powerful others. A belief thatevents can be controlled is preferable to a belief that fate will take its course.Externally oriented programs might also stress reliance on social supportsystems and the importance to the individual of compliance with healthprofessionals’ instructionsCONCLUSIONSThis paper shows that the concept of internal-external locus of control canprovide direction for health education programs and a means of assessingwhether or not the programs are accomplishing what they have set out to do.The research reviewed provides initial evidence of the relationship betweenlocus of control and health-related behaviors. This is increasingly an area ofinvestigation among health researchers; a confident prediction can be madethat further investigations of health-specific locus of control beliefs willincrease understanding of health behavior.
115 ’ REFERENCES1. Balch P, Ross AW: Predicting success in weight reduction as a function of locus of control:A unidimensional and multidimensional approach. J Consult Clin Psychol 43:119, 1975.2. Bauman KE, Udry JR: Powerlessness and regularity of contraception in an urban Negromale sample: A research note. J Marr Fam 34:112-114, 1972.3. Bellack AS, Rozensky R, Schwartz JA: A comparison of two forms of self-monitoring in abehavioral weight reduction program. Behav Ther 5:523-530, 1974.4. Best JA: Tailoring smoking withdrawal procedures to personality and motivationaldifferences. J Consult Clin Psychol 43:1-8, 1975.5. Best JA, Steffy RA: Smoking modification procedures for internal and external locus ofcontrol clients. Can J Behav Sci 7:155-165, 1975.6. Best JA, Steffy RA: Smoking modification tailored to subject characteristics. Behav Ther2 :177-191, 1971.7. Cromwell RL, Butterfield EC, Brayfield FM, Curry JJ: Acute Myocardial Infarction:Reaction and Recovery. St. Louis, CV Mosby, 1977.8. Dabbs JM, Kirshct JP: “Internal Control” and the taking of influenza shots. Psychol Rep28:959-962, 1971.9. Darrow WW: Innovative health behavior: A study of the use, acceptance and use-effectiveness of the condom as a venereal disease prophylactic. Diss Abstr Int 34A:2792A,1973. (Univ Microfilms no 73-25:393.)10. DuCette JP: Some thoughts on the current status of locus of control research. Unpublishedmanuscript, 1974.11. Fisch MA: Internal versus external ego orientation and family planning effectiveness amongpoor black women. Diss Abstr Int 35(2-B):1045-1046, 1974.12. Gough HG: A factor analysis of contraceptive preferences. J Psychol 84:199-210, 1973.13. Green LW, Levine DM, Deeds SG: Clinical trials of health education for hypertensiveoutpatients: Design and baseline data. Prev Med 4:417-425, 1975.14. Harkey J, King M: Unpublished research, personal communication, 1976.15. Harvey AL: Risky and safe contraceptors: Some personality factors. J Psychol 92:109-112,1976.16. James WH, Woodruff AB, Werner W: Effect of internal and external control upon changesin smoking behavior. J Consult Psychol 29:184-186, 1965.17. Jeffrey DB, Christensen ER: The relative efficacy of behavior therapy, will power and no-treatment control procedures for weight loss. Paper presented at the Association forAdvancement of Behavior Therapy, New York, 1972.18. Joe VC: Review of the internal-external control construct as a personality variable. PsycholRep 28:619-640, 1971.19. Johnson JE, Dabbs JM, Leventhal H: Psychosocial factors in the welfare of surgicalpatients. Nurs Res 19:18-19, 1970.20. Johnson JE, Leventhal H, Dabbs JM: Contribution of emotional and instrumentalresponse processes in adaptation to surgery. J Pers Soc Psychol 20:65-70, 1971.21. Kasl SA, Cobb S: Health behavior, illness behavior, and sick-role behavior. I. Health andillness behavior. Arch Environ Health 12:246-266, 1966.22. Keller AB, Simms JH, Herry WE, et al: Psychological sources of “resistance to familyplanning.” Merrill-Palmer Q 16:286-302, 1970.23. Kern SP: Differential utilization of health care facilities by an elderly population as afunction of internal versus external locus of control and subject sex. Diss Abstr Int35(B):3022, 1974. 24. Key MK: Psychosocial and education factors surrounding compliance behavior ofhypertensives. Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College, Nashville, Tennessee, 1975.25. Kirscht JP: Perceptions of control and health beliefs. Can J Behav Sci 4:225-237, 1972.26. Lefcourt HM: Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review. Psychol Bull65:206-220, 1966.
11627. Lefcourt HM: Recent developments in the study of locus of control. In Maher BA: Progressin Experimental Personality Research. New York, Academic Press, 1972, vol 6.28. Lichtenstein E, Keutzer CS: Further normative and correlation data on internal-external (I-E) control of reinforcement scale. Psychol Rep 21:1014-1016, 1967.29. Lowery BW: Disease-related learning and disease control in diabetics as a function of locusof control. Diss Abstr Int 35(6-A):3528, 1974.30. Lowery. BJ, DuCette JP: Disease-related learning and disease control in diabetics as afunction of locus of control. Nurs Res 25:358-362, 1976.31. Lundy JR: Some personality correlates of contraceptive use among unmarried femalecollege students. J Pers 80:9-14, 1972. 32. MacDonald AP Jr: Internal-external locus of control and the practice of birth control.Psychol Rep 27:206, 1970.33. Manno B, Marston AR: Weight reduction as a function of negative covert reinforcement(sensitization) versus positive covert reinforcement. Behav Res Ther 10:201-207, 1972.34. Marston MV: Compliance with medical regimens: A review of the literature. Nurs Res19:312-323, 1970.35. Minton HL: Power as a personality construct. In Maher BA: Progress in ExperimentalPersonality Research. New York, Academic Press, 1967, vol 4.36. O’Bryan GG: The relationship between an individual’s I-E orientation and information-seeking, learning, and use of weight control relevant information. Diss Abstr Int 33B:447B,1972. (Univ Microfilms no 72-19:541.)37. Olbrisch ME: Perceptions of Responsibility for Illness and Health Related Locus of Controlof Gonorrhea Patients. Master’s thesis, Florida State University, 1975.38. Phares EJ: Locus of Control in Personality. Morristown, NJ, General Learning Press, 1976.39. Platt ES: Internal-external control and changes in expected utility as predictions of thechange in cigarette smoking following role-playing. Paper presented at the EasternPsychological Association, Philadelphia, 1969.40. Rotter JB: Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall,1954.41. Rotter JB: Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.Psychol Monogr 80:1 (Whole No. 609), 1966.42. Rotter JB, Chance J, Phares EJ: Applications of a Social Learning Theory of Personality.New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972. 43. Schachat R: Acceptance of Health Recommendations as a Function of Communicator-Audience Similarity and Induced Perception of Personal Control. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, 1975. 44. Seeley OF: Field dependence-independence, internal-external locus of control, and implementation of family planning goals. Psychol Rep 38:1216-1218, 1976.45. Seeman M, Evans JW: Alienation and learning in a hospital setting. Am Sociol Rev 27:772-783, 1962.46. Steffy RA, Meichenbaum D, Best JA: Aversive and cognitive factors in the modification ofsmoking behavior. Behav Res Ther 8:115-125, 1970.47. Straits B, Sechrest L: Further support of some findings about the characteristics of smokersand nonsmokers. J Consult Psychol 27:282, 1963.48. Strickland BR: Locus of control: Where have we been and where are we going? Paperpresented at the American Psychological Association, Montreal, 1973.49. Tobias LL, MacDonald ML: Internal locus of control and weight loss: An insufficientcondition. J Consult Clin Psychol 45:647-653, 1977.50. Wallston BS, Wallston KA, Kaplan GD, Maides SA: Development and validation of thehealth locus of control (HLC) scale. J Consult Clin Psychol 44:580-585, 1976.51. Wallston KA, Maides S, Wallston BS: Health-related informaton-seeking as a function ofhealth-related locus of control and health value. J Res Pers 10:215-222, 1976.52. Weaver R: Internality, Externality, and Compliance as Related to Chronic Home DialysisPatients. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Atlanta, Emory University, 1972.
11753. Williams AF: Factors associated with seat belt use in families. J Saf Res 4(3):133-138, 1972.54. Williams AF: Personality and other characteristics associated with cigarette smokingamong young teenagers. Unpublished research, Boston, Massachusetts, The MedicalFoundation, Inc, 1972. 55. Williams AF: Personality characteristics associated with preventive dental health practices.J Am Coll Dent 39:225-234, 1972.
We are a professional custom writing website. If you have searched a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework.
Yes. We have posted over our previous orders to display our experience. Since we have done this question before, we can also do it for you. To make sure we do it perfectly, please fill our Order Form. Filling the order form correctly will assist our team in referencing, specifications and future communication.
1. Click on the “Place order tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
2. Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER INFORMATION" section and click “PRICE CALCULATION” at the bottom to calculate your order price.
3. Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
4. Click “FINAL STEP” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
5. From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.
Need help with this assignment?
Order it here claim 25% discount
Discount Code: SAVE25