Differences between how internally- and externally-oriented people perceive things

Question

Critically discuss the nature and consequences of perceptual differences to emerge from the ‘locus of control’ and draw out implications for behavioral strategies used to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity in working life.

Answer

Name of student:

Course name:

Class name:

Date assignment due:

Differences between how internally- and externally-oriented people perceive things

In psychology, locus of control is considered an essential aspect of a personality. Locus of control is critical in finding a solution to the question of whether one’s destiny is controlled by external forces such as god and fate, or by oneself. Perceptual differences that emerge among people of different personality traits are influenced, to a certain extent, by people’s beliefs with regard to locus of control. Locus of control should best be conceptualized as referring to a continuum that ranges from internal influences to external ones.

ORDER A PSYCHOLOGY PAPER NOW

It appears that everyone who is psychologically healthy perceives that he has control over all those things that he is capable of influencing(Ydewalle, Bertelson &Eelen, 1999). Internal locus of control, therefore, is generally considered highly desirable. This is because of its relationship with personal control, self-agency, and self-determination (Deci, 1991). Many researchers have pondered over the question of the validity of many assertions made with respect to the locus of control(Lefcourt,1982, ). These researches have led to various assertions. For instance, males are considered to be more internal than females. Additionally, people are expected to become more and more internal as they grow older. Additionally, people who are higher up within organizational structures are often highly internal.

            However, judging perceptual differences on the basis of locus of control implies that an overly simplistic concept has been adopted. There are essential complexities and subtleties to be considered before any value judgments are made with respect to the locus of control. The perceptual differences between people of these two personalities may be critical in evaluating whether internals is more psychologically unstable and depraved than externals. It can also accelerate the quest for answers on whether externals spend relaxed, carefree and happy lives(Harrison & Lewis, 1984).

In spite of all these cautions, an internal locus of control seems to be better than an external locus of control. This is because it tends to produce many achievements. However, thoughts regarding causality should be put into consideration before this view can be fully embraced(Heckhausen &Dweck, 2004). Additionally, all individuals always wonder whether environmental factors such as disadvantage and privilege lead to the locus of control beliefs or it is beliefs that create the situation.

At times, locus of control is considered a stable, underlying construction of personality. This is misleading since according to research, individuals need to learn about either internal or external locus of control. In this regard, locus of control can be considered to be a response to one’s circumstances. Some educational and psychological interventions have been seen to result in significant shifts towards an internal locus of control, for example, outdoor education programs.

Locus of control brings about perceptual differences with regard to matters of choice and responsibility. It is also a dominant factor in determining the manner in which people respond to stressful situations and how accurately and timely they react under these circumstances. An interactive relationship exists between the type of stress and expectancy for control in issues that influence behavioral reactions to stress (Wolk & Bloom, 1977). The types of stress considered by Wolk and Bloom are a threat to instrumental performance versus the threat to the ego. One intriguing question that remains unresolved relates to locus control as a determinant of personality and behavior with regard to assumptions regarding determinism and volition (Wolk & Bloom, 1977, Peterson&Stunkard, 1992).  Workplace behaviors are strongly influenced by the existing environmental support, which shapes the perceptual differences among different people (Ajzen, 2006).

The perceptual differences resulting from the locus of control have a significant impact on the assumptions made regarding determinism and volition. Researchers have tended to focus on both environmental variables and individual differences when analyzing people’s responses to volition and determinism issues.

Koltko-Rivera (2004) points out that in a psychoanalytic worldview, a distinction can be made on several components. One of them is the difference between ‘caused’ and ‘random’ mental events. According to Freud, no psychical events can be as a result of pure chance, or in other words, ‘free will’. The beliefs emerging from these considerations suggest that different beliefs about human agency are a representation of a crucial dimension of locus of control and worldview.

Sappington (1990) indicates that many concepts of determinism exist. These include soft determinism, hard determinism, beliefs about conscious control, conscious choice, actual personal control, and volitional behavior. All these concepts exemplify the existence of a continuum with regard to different aspects of locus of control that relate to determinism. Sappington (1990) considers different theories as appropriate in creating a proper understanding of free will and determinism.

Commentators of volition studies tend to create the impression that various technological and scientific movements are wholly independent of various modes of thought and cultural conditions (Hershberger, 2008). This does not appear to be the case as far as issues of locus of control and the resulting perceptual differences are concerned. Human beings are motivated by their environments to make different inventions. They do this in order to bring about a positive influence on their lives. Technological inventions are considered by many as an indication that mankind is on the path of progress and development. Both internally- and externally-oriented people feel the need for scientific developments in order to make life easier and more bearable. The resulting influences have an impact on individuals’ ability to deal with their daily problems. When endeavors to bring more changes to the world of work are successful, people tend to become more and more internally oriented. They, therefore, feel an irresistible urge to pursue success. On the other hand, failure of a certain undertaking may discourage the participants into thinking that the outcomes were occasioned by circumstances over which they had no control.

Locus of control is a critical factor for the managerial attitudes that are adopted in different aspects of working life. Although the belief on whether one has control over his life differs from one individual to the other, an element of determinism appears to be characteristic of every human being(Blunt & Pychyl, 2005). People may create the circumstance in which they find themselves, mainly through poor choices, ignorance, exploitation, ill fate, and bad luck. In this regard, locus of control becomes a crucial point of understanding why people hold certain views with regard to determinism and avoidance of responsibility. For instance, an individual’s negative attitudes, choices, behaviors, and decisions could be motivated by a negative outcome that had a devastating effect on his working life.

Through locus of control, human behavior can be predicted. These behaviors are crucial indicators of an individual’s approach to the life-management system. These approaches are a representation of the underlying perceptual differences. In order for one to relate the aspect of responsibility avoidance to the locus of control, there is a need for the existing relationship between human actions and the basic principles that are integral to life management to be asserted. The decisions that people make, either individually or in a family setting, are clear indicators of whether they are avoiding the responsibility of bowing to the forces of determinism. On the contrary, a positive approach to working life is often associated with an individual whose mindset is firmly grounded on his ability to determine the course of his life’s events.

ORDER A PSYCHOLOGY PAPER NOW

Ozmete (2007) indicates that one’s beliefs about his extent of control on his working life are core elements of understanding of his circumstances. Individuals will always be crucial actors in life. If they believe that their control of life is unshakable, they will always work towards changing things and instead of avoiding responsibility. The managerial attitudes adopted in various aspects of working life are a manifestation of either avoidance of either external or internal locus of control.

In Ozmete’s (2007) research, college students who had a strong external locus of control believed that their grades were a result of bad or good luck. Hence, they were less likely to work harder in order for their grades to improve. In this regard, Ozmete identified a positive relationship between locus of control and academic achievement. Responsibility avoidance among externals was motivated by their perceptions about hard work and the role of fate and luck. On the other hand, the internals was noted to be motivated towards working hard, and they were rewarded with excellent grades (Ozmete’s, 2007).

There are many consequences of being at each end of the locus of control continuum. During the 1970s and 1980s, many studies were done in an attempt to assess the extent of influence that one’s culture influences his locus of control. The researchers found out that an individual’s culture tends to be largely a function of the externality and internality possessed by the individual (Ozmete’s, 2007).

The manner in which individuals perceive their respective loci of control is highly critical to the culture that they nurture in their immediate societies. For instance, in many families of internals, the emphasis is always put on effort, responsibility, education and critical thinking. In sharp contrast, the families of externals are often associated with a low socioeconomic status. This is because people who live in abject poverty have little, if any, control of their own lives. In societies where social unrests are perennial experiences, people tend to be on the extreme end of the external locus of control continuum.

Every individual’s life management system is a function of his approach. In general terms, the internal locus is often considered beneficial while external locus has been seen to be detrimental to human life. According to research, the benefits of internal locus of control are associated with opportunities, fulfillment in life and a positive outlook (Ozmete, 2007, Hershberger, 2008). For children, an internal locus of control leads to an increased ability for control of impulses, regulation of attention within classroom settings and delay of gratification(Ackerman & Ackerman, 1989).

In conclusion, the perceptual differences evident in people with both internal and external locus of control are crucial in understanding the personality of different individuals. People are motivated by their circumstances in order to choose whether to adopt an internal or external locus of control. This motivation forces individuals to adopt coping strategies for dealing with uncertainty and ambiguity in working life.

References

Ackerman, L. & Ackerman, P. (1989) Generational differences and parent-child resemblance in achievement motives and locus of control: A cross-sectional analysis, Personality and Individual Differences, 10(12), 1237-1242

Ajzen, I. (2006) Perceived Behavioral Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and the Theory of Planned Behavior, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665 – 68.

Blunt, A. & Pychyl, T. (2005) Project systems of procrastinators: a personal project-analytic and action control perspective, Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1771-1780

Deci, E. (1991) Motivation and Education: The Self-Determination Perspective, Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 325 – 346

Harrison, W. & Lewis, G. (1984) Locus of control, choice, and satisfaction with an assigned task, Journal of Research in Personality, 18(3), 342-351

Heckhausen, J. & Dweck, C. (2004) Motivation and self-regulation across the life span, New York: Cengage Learning.

Hershberger, W. (2008) Volitional action: conation and control, New York: Macmillan.

Koltko-Rivera, M.  (2004) The Psychology of Worldviews, Review of General Psychology, 8(1), 3–58

Lefcourt, H. (1982) Locus of control: current trends in theory and research, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Ozmete, E. (2007) An evaluation of locus of control as a system related to life management: A case study on youth. World Applied Sciences Journal, 2(8), 691-698.

Peterson, C. & Stunkard, A.(1992) Cognates of personal control: Locus of control, self-efficacy, and explanatory style, Applied and Preventive Psychology, 1(2), 111-117

Sappington, A. (1990) Recent psychological approaches to the free will versus determinism issue, Psychological Bulletin, 108(1), 19-29

Wolk, S. & Bloom, D. (1977) The interactive effects of locus of control and situational stress upon performance accuracy and time, New York: Routledge.

Ydewalle, G. Bertelson, P. & Eelen, P. (1999)International perspectives on psychological science, Volume 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press.