Psychological Reports, 1975, 36, 655-658. @ Psychological Reports 1975
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCUS OF CONTROL AND CHRONOLOGICAL AGE RICHARD M. RYCKMAN AND MARIA X. MALIKIOSI
University o f Maine at Orono Silmmary.-A study was conducted to replicate and extend the findings of Lao ( 1 9 7 4 ) which showed nn increasing sense of personal efficacy from youth to adulthood, a stabilized sense of internal control through middle age, and no decrease in internality among elderly Ss. Current findings (100 college srudents, an occupational survey sample of 3 8 3 ) generally replicate these outcomes. Also, elderly Ss believed they were personally competent, and not ac the mercy of powerful others or a capricious environment. Such findings question stereotypes of elderly as powerless and dependent o n others to subsist in a threatening and unreliable environmenr.
Lao ( 4 ) assessed changes in locus of control orientation from youth through adulthood and old age, since previous work (6, 8 ) had indicated a progressive sense of personal efficacy as a function of increases in age with samples of children only. In her extension of this work, Lao predicted an increase in internality from youth to adulthood (15 to 30-39 yr.); a stabilized sense of internal control in middle age (30 to 59 yr.) ; and a decrease in internality in old age (60 yr. and older). Her data indicated support for the first two hypotheses but not for the third, although there was a slight tendency for belief in internal control to decrease after 60 yr. The present study was partially designed to replicate Lao's findings because of the restrictiveness of her sampling procedures. Specifically, she was able to secure data from only 55 older Ss, and they were recruited from a particular locale, namely, a nursing home and a government housing project in eastern North Carolina. Since previous research ( 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 11) has indicated that the construct of locus of control is multi-dimensional and that Rotcer's scale does not provide an adequate measure of all components, a new scale ( 5 ) was used to measure feelings of personal efficacy among the elderly (cf. 4 ) and responses to two other components, beliefs that powerful others control their outcomes and that their reinforcers occur randomly.
METHOD One hundred college students i n an introductory course listed their ages and anonymously fille'd out a baccery of personality tests, which included Levenson's I-E scale ( 5 ) . Her measure is an adaptation of the Rotter scale (10) and has three separate components, a Personal Scale which taps an individual's perceived personal control over events, a Powerful-others Scale which measures the degree to which others control the person's reinforcers, and a Chance Scale which measures the extent to which a n individual believes his reinforcers occur randomly. Scores on each of the subscales could range from 8 to 48. with high scores indicating an internal orientation. The remaining Ss ( 2 1 to 7 9
R. M. RYCKMAN B M. X. MALIKIOSI
656
yr.) were recruited from a national sample of people who responded to a larger mail survey dealing with occupational stereoryplng These Ss were obtained from a variety of sources, including directories of national organ~zationsand the advertising pages of various city telephone books. Some of the directottes used were the American Psychological Association 1970 Biographical Directory, the American Architects' Directory, the American Dental Directory, and the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory. From the advertising pages of telephone books, members of worker occupations from Boston, Chicago, New York Ciry, Cleveland. Newark, Nashua (New Hampshire), San Francisco and Los Angeles. among other cities, were selected. The percentage of returns was approximately 20%. indicating that a strong self-selection bias operated. Nevertheless, the general ranges of locus of control scores across the three dimensions for the various age groups suggest that self-selection on the various locus of control dimensions was probably not the source of bias. The ranges were as follows: college snidents ( 1 9 to 48). ages 20 to 29 ( I 8 to 4 7 ) . ages 30 to 39 (14 to 4 8 ) . ages 40 to 49 (12 to 4 8 ) . ages 50 to 59 ( 1 6 to 4 8 ) , ages 60 to 69 (16 to 4 7 ) , and ages 70 to 79 ( 1 5 to 4 8 ) . Finally, the current findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the limitations of the sampling procedures. Due to research costs, it was impossible to collect data from a representative national sample. Besides the strong self-selection bias which operated and which limits the generalizabiliry of the findings, the sample was drawn from sources which included disproportionare numbers of Ss of higher socio-economic background. Some support for this contention can be found by examining the levels of the mean I-E scores for Lao's sample and the current one in Table 1 below. For each age group, current Ss tended to be more internal than Ss in Lao's sample; however, the pattefn of findings is similar, despite probable differences in socio-economic status between two samples.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results are shown in Table 1. A n analysis of variance for unequal N s showed significant differences between the various age groups on Personal Control ( F = 5.28, df = 6/476, fi < .01). Duncan's multiple-range tests were then performed, indicating significant differences ( p = .05) between the college scudents and each of the remaining groups, with the exception of the 70- to 79TABLE 1
MEAN 1-E SCORES FOR SEVEN AGE GROUPSFOR LAO'S SAMPLEAND CURRENTONE Lao's Sample
Group
Age(yt.)
M,-E* N
Group
Age(yr.)
Current Sample M Personal M Powerful Control Others
Chance
*The higher the mean, the more internal. +All means on the Levenson scale have been transformed to make them directly comparable to Lao's data which were based on Rorter's scale.
LOCUS OF CONTROL AND AGE
657
yr.-olds. None of the other comparisons was significant. This result indicated that the college students were less internal than all of the other age groups, with the exception of the oldest Ss. While Lao found that her youths did not differ from the 20- to 29-yr.-olds, the youth in the current study did differ significantly from this same group, i.e., from the 20- to 29-yr.-olds. Of course, a direct comparison between the findings in the two studies is impossible since the two youth groups differed somewhat in age and responded on different scales. Nevertheless, Lao's finding of a stabilized sense of internal control in the middle years was replicated. Current data also confirmed Lao's finding of no decline in internality in old age. In general, the data for the Personal Control dimension are comparable to Lao's findings and allow us to place greater confidence in the generality of her outcomes. Analyses of variance also yielded significant differences between the age groups on the Powerful-others ( F = 3.05, df = 6/476, p < .01) and the Chance ( F = 3.61, df = 6/476, p < .01) dimensions. Duncan's tests ( p = .05) indicated no differences between the college students and the other groups with the exception of the 50- to 59-yr.-olds. This result suggested that the students perceived powerful others as having less control over them than the 50to 59-yr.-olds. In fact, Ss in the 40- to 49- and 70- to 79-yr.-old categories had similar perceptions. N o other comparisons were significant. It is interesting that the oldest Ss were the most convinced that they were free of control by powerful others. In terms of perceptions that their reinforcers occur randomly, Duncan's tests ( p = .05) indicated thac people in the 30- to 39-yr.-old category perceived their environments as more predictable than college students and people in the 20- ro 29-, 50- to 59-, and 60- to 69-yr.-old categories. The 30- to 39-yr.-olds did not differ significantly from the 40- to 49- or 70- to 79-yr.-olds on this dimension. The 20- to 29- and the 50- to 59-yr.-olds also perceived their environments as less predictable than the 40- to 49-yr.-olds. Perhaps perception of stability during the 30s and 40s is a function of people in this age group being more secure in their family lives and careers than they were during their 20s or than they will be after 50. In any event, people in their 70s again perceived themselves as living in predictable environments. Ic is clear thac the elderly in both studies believed they have conuol over outcomes in virtually every sphere of their lives. One may question the negative stereotypes of the elderly as "doctering old codgers" who spend much of their time in rocking chairs reliving the past and waiting passively and helplessly for death. REFERENCES I . GURIN.P., GURIN,G., LAO, R., & B E A T ~ EM. , Internal-external control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth. Journal of Social Issuer, 1969, 2 5 . 29-53. 2. KATZ, G. A. Aspects of locus of control in perceptions of psychotherapy. Unpub-
lished paper delivered to the Eastern Psychological Association, 44th Annual Meeting, Washington, D. C., 1973.
658
R. M. RYCKMAN & M. X. MALIKIOSI
3. LAO,R. C. Internal-external control and competent and innovative behavior among Negro college students. Journal of Personaliq and Social Psychology, 1970, 14, 263-270. 4. LAO,R. C. The developmental trend of the locus of control. Unpublished paper presented at the meetings of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, 1974. H. Activism and powerful others: distinctions within the concept of 5. LEVENSON, internal-external control. Journal o f Personality Assessment, 1974, 38, 377-383. 6. MILGRAM,N. A. LOCUSof control in Negro and white children at four age levels. Psychological Reports, 1971, 29, 459-465. 7. M ~ E L SH. , L. Dimensions of internal versus external control. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical P~gchology,1970, 34, 226-228. 8. PENK, W. Age changes :~nd correlates of internal-external locus of control scale. Psychological Reports, 1969, 25, 856. 9. REID, D. W., & WARE,E. E. Multidimensionality of internal-external control: implications for past and future research. Canrrdian Journal of Behavioral Science, 1973, 5, 264-271. 10. ROTTER,J. B. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 1966, 80, No. 1 (Whole No. 609). 11. THOMAS,L. E. The I-E scale, ideological bias, and political participation. Journal o f Personality, 1970, 38, 273-286. Accepted February 14, 1975.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCUS OF CONTROL AND CHRONOLOGICAL AGE RICHARD M. RYCKMAN AND MARIA X. MALIKIOSI
University o f Maine at Orono Silmmary.-A study was conducted to replicate and extend the findings of Lao ( 1 9 7 4 ) which showed nn increasing sense of personal efficacy from youth to adulthood, a stabilized sense of internal control through middle age, and no decrease in internality among elderly Ss. Current findings (100 college srudents, an occupational survey sample of 3 8 3 ) generally replicate these outcomes. Also, elderly Ss believed they were personally competent, and not ac the mercy of powerful others or a capricious environment. Such findings question stereotypes of elderly as powerless and dependent o n others to subsist in a threatening and unreliable environmenr.
Lao ( 4 ) assessed changes in locus of control orientation from youth through adulthood and old age, since previous work (6, 8 ) had indicated a progressive sense of personal efficacy as a function of increases in age with samples of children only. In her extension of this work, Lao predicted an increase in internality from youth to adulthood (15 to 30-39 yr.); a stabilized sense of internal control in middle age (30 to 59 yr.) ; and a decrease in internality in old age (60 yr. and older). Her data indicated support for the first two hypotheses but not for the third, although there was a slight tendency for belief in internal control to decrease after 60 yr. The present study was partially designed to replicate Lao's findings because of the restrictiveness of her sampling procedures. Specifically, she was able to secure data from only 55 older Ss, and they were recruited from a particular locale, namely, a nursing home and a government housing project in eastern North Carolina. Since previous research ( 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 11) has indicated that the construct of locus of control is multi-dimensional and that Rotcer's scale does not provide an adequate measure of all components, a new scale ( 5 ) was used to measure feelings of personal efficacy among the elderly (cf. 4 ) and responses to two other components, beliefs that powerful others control their outcomes and that their reinforcers occur randomly.
METHOD One hundred college students i n an introductory course listed their ages and anonymously fille'd out a baccery of personality tests, which included Levenson's I-E scale ( 5 ) . Her measure is an adaptation of the Rotter scale (10) and has three separate components, a Personal Scale which taps an individual's perceived personal control over events, a Powerful-others Scale which measures the degree to which others control the person's reinforcers, and a Chance Scale which measures the extent to which a n individual believes his reinforcers occur randomly. Scores on each of the subscales could range from 8 to 48. with high scores indicating an internal orientation. The remaining Ss ( 2 1 to 7 9
R. M. RYCKMAN B M. X. MALIKIOSI
656
yr.) were recruited from a national sample of people who responded to a larger mail survey dealing with occupational stereoryplng These Ss were obtained from a variety of sources, including directories of national organ~zationsand the advertising pages of various city telephone books. Some of the directottes used were the American Psychological Association 1970 Biographical Directory, the American Architects' Directory, the American Dental Directory, and the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory. From the advertising pages of telephone books, members of worker occupations from Boston, Chicago, New York Ciry, Cleveland. Newark, Nashua (New Hampshire), San Francisco and Los Angeles. among other cities, were selected. The percentage of returns was approximately 20%. indicating that a strong self-selection bias operated. Nevertheless, the general ranges of locus of control scores across the three dimensions for the various age groups suggest that self-selection on the various locus of control dimensions was probably not the source of bias. The ranges were as follows: college snidents ( 1 9 to 48). ages 20 to 29 ( I 8 to 4 7 ) . ages 30 to 39 (14 to 4 8 ) . ages 40 to 49 (12 to 4 8 ) . ages 50 to 59 ( 1 6 to 4 8 ) , ages 60 to 69 (16 to 4 7 ) , and ages 70 to 79 ( 1 5 to 4 8 ) . Finally, the current findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the limitations of the sampling procedures. Due to research costs, it was impossible to collect data from a representative national sample. Besides the strong self-selection bias which operated and which limits the generalizabiliry of the findings, the sample was drawn from sources which included disproportionare numbers of Ss of higher socio-economic background. Some support for this contention can be found by examining the levels of the mean I-E scores for Lao's sample and the current one in Table 1 below. For each age group, current Ss tended to be more internal than Ss in Lao's sample; however, the pattefn of findings is similar, despite probable differences in socio-economic status between two samples.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results are shown in Table 1. A n analysis of variance for unequal N s showed significant differences between the various age groups on Personal Control ( F = 5.28, df = 6/476, fi < .01). Duncan's multiple-range tests were then performed, indicating significant differences ( p = .05) between the college scudents and each of the remaining groups, with the exception of the 70- to 79TABLE 1
MEAN 1-E SCORES FOR SEVEN AGE GROUPSFOR LAO'S SAMPLEAND CURRENTONE Lao's Sample
Group
Age(yt.)
M,-E* N
Group
Age(yr.)
Current Sample M Personal M Powerful Control Others
Chance
*The higher the mean, the more internal. +All means on the Levenson scale have been transformed to make them directly comparable to Lao's data which were based on Rorter's scale.
LOCUS OF CONTROL AND AGE
657
yr.-olds. None of the other comparisons was significant. This result indicated that the college students were less internal than all of the other age groups, with the exception of the oldest Ss. While Lao found that her youths did not differ from the 20- to 29-yr.-olds, the youth in the current study did differ significantly from this same group, i.e., from the 20- to 29-yr.-olds. Of course, a direct comparison between the findings in the two studies is impossible since the two youth groups differed somewhat in age and responded on different scales. Nevertheless, Lao's finding of a stabilized sense of internal control in the middle years was replicated. Current data also confirmed Lao's finding of no decline in internality in old age. In general, the data for the Personal Control dimension are comparable to Lao's findings and allow us to place greater confidence in the generality of her outcomes. Analyses of variance also yielded significant differences between the age groups on the Powerful-others ( F = 3.05, df = 6/476, p < .01) and the Chance ( F = 3.61, df = 6/476, p < .01) dimensions. Duncan's tests ( p = .05) indicated no differences between the college students and the other groups with the exception of the 50- to 59-yr.-olds. This result suggested that the students perceived powerful others as having less control over them than the 50to 59-yr.-olds. In fact, Ss in the 40- to 49- and 70- to 79-yr.-old categories had similar perceptions. N o other comparisons were significant. It is interesting that the oldest Ss were the most convinced that they were free of control by powerful others. In terms of perceptions that their reinforcers occur randomly, Duncan's tests ( p = .05) indicated thac people in the 30- to 39-yr.-old category perceived their environments as more predictable than college students and people in the 20- ro 29-, 50- to 59-, and 60- to 69-yr.-old categories. The 30- to 39-yr.-olds did not differ significantly from the 40- to 49- or 70- to 79-yr.-olds on this dimension. The 20- to 29- and the 50- to 59-yr.-olds also perceived their environments as less predictable than the 40- to 49-yr.-olds. Perhaps perception of stability during the 30s and 40s is a function of people in this age group being more secure in their family lives and careers than they were during their 20s or than they will be after 50. In any event, people in their 70s again perceived themselves as living in predictable environments. Ic is clear thac the elderly in both studies believed they have conuol over outcomes in virtually every sphere of their lives. One may question the negative stereotypes of the elderly as "doctering old codgers" who spend much of their time in rocking chairs reliving the past and waiting passively and helplessly for death. REFERENCES I . GURIN.P., GURIN,G., LAO, R., & B E A T ~ EM. , Internal-external control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth. Journal of Social Issuer, 1969, 2 5 . 29-53. 2. KATZ, G. A. Aspects of locus of control in perceptions of psychotherapy. Unpub-
lished paper delivered to the Eastern Psychological Association, 44th Annual Meeting, Washington, D. C., 1973.
658
R. M. RYCKMAN & M. X. MALIKIOSI
3. LAO,R. C. Internal-external control and competent and innovative behavior among Negro college students. Journal of Personaliq and Social Psychology, 1970, 14, 263-270. 4. LAO,R. C. The developmental trend of the locus of control. Unpublished paper presented at the meetings of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, 1974. H. Activism and powerful others: distinctions within the concept of 5. LEVENSON, internal-external control. Journal o f Personality Assessment, 1974, 38, 377-383. 6. MILGRAM,N. A. LOCUSof control in Negro and white children at four age levels. Psychological Reports, 1971, 29, 459-465. 7. M ~ E L SH. , L. Dimensions of internal versus external control. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical P~gchology,1970, 34, 226-228. 8. PENK, W. Age changes :~nd correlates of internal-external locus of control scale. Psychological Reports, 1969, 25, 856. 9. REID, D. W., & WARE,E. E. Multidimensionality of internal-external control: implications for past and future research. Canrrdian Journal of Behavioral Science, 1973, 5, 264-271. 10. ROTTER,J. B. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 1966, 80, No. 1 (Whole No. 609). 11. THOMAS,L. E. The I-E scale, ideological bias, and political participation. Journal o f Personality, 1970, 38, 273-286. Accepted February 14, 1975.
