Method for studying the level of subjective control. Methodology for diagnosing the level of subjective control by J. Rotter (usk) (adapted by E.F. Bazhin, S.A. Golynkina, A.M. Etkind)

Name: Methodology for diagnosing the level of subjective control (USC).

Subject population: teenagers and adults.

Purpose of the study: studying the level of subjective control.

Material and equipment: text of the methodology, answer form.

Research procedure: the basis for determining the level of subjective control of an individual is based on 2 prerequisites:

People differ in how and where they localize control over events that are significant to them. There are two possible polar types of such localization: external and internal. In the first case, a person believes that the events that happen to him are the result of the action of external forces - chance, other people, etc. In the second case, a person interprets significant events as the result of his own activities. Every person has a certain position on a continuum that extends from the external to the internal type.

The locus of control characteristic of an individual is universal in relation to any type of events and situations that he has to face. The same type of control characterizes the behavior of a given individual in the event of failures and in the sphere of achievements, and this equally applies to various areas of social life.

The USC method includes the following diagnostic indicators or scales:

1. AND O- scale of general internality.

2. AND d- scale of internality in the field of achievements.

3. AND n- scale of internality in the field of failures.

4. AND With- scale of internality in family relationships.

5. AND P- scale of internality in industrial relations.

6. AND m- scale of internality in the field of interpersonal relations.

7. AND h- scale of internality in relation to health and illness.

During the USC technique, the subject is offered 44 statements relating to various aspects of life and attitudes towards them. He needs to assess the degree of his agreement or disagreement with the given statements according to 7-point scale :

Complete Complete disagreement -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 agree

In other words, the subject needs to circle one of the 7 proposed points against each statement with the corresponding sign “+” (agree), “-” (disagree) or 0 (I don’t know).

Processing and interpretation of results: Processing the results of this technique includes three stages.

STAGE 1

The calculation of “raw” (preliminary) points on 7 scales (I o, I d, I n, I s, I p, I m, I z) is carried out using a key. It is necessary to calculate the sum of your points (taking into account the sign) for each of the 7 scales, while the questions indicated in the “+” column are taken with the sign of your score, and the questions indicated in the “-” column change the sign of your score to the opposite .

The key to the usk technique

AND O

AND d

AND n

AND With

AND P

AND m

AND h

So, in the end you received 7 points.

STAGE 2

Then the “raw” scores are converted into walls (standard scores). The walls are presented on a 10-point scale and make it possible to compare the results of various studies.

Table for converting “raw” points into walls

AND O	AND d	AND n	AND With

AND P	AND m	AND h

STAGE 3

Construction of a “USC profile” on 7 scales. Set aside your 7 results (sten) on seven ten-point scales and also mark the norm corresponding to 5.5 sten.

Questionnaire "Level of Subjective Control" (USC)

The identification of a personal characteristic that describes the extent to which a person feels like an active subject of his own activity, and to what extent a passive object of the actions of other people and external circumstances, is justified by existing empirical research and can contribute to further study of a wide range of problems in general and especially applied personality psychology . This characteristic fully corresponds to the theoretical concepts that have developed in Russian psychology, in which the study and formation of the conscious, active activity of the individual has always been given paramount importance.

In total, the USC questionnaire consists of 44 items.

In order to increase the reliability of the results, the questionnaire is balanced according to the following parameters:

I) regarding internality-externality, half of the questionnaire items are formulated in such a way that people with internal USC will give a positive answer to them, and the other half are formulated in such a way that people with external USC will give a positive answer to it;

2) according to the emotional sign - an equal number of questionnaire items describe emotionally positive and emotionally negative situations;

3) in the direction of attributions - an equal number of points are formulated in the first and third person.

Unlike the Rotter scale, the questionnaire includes items measuring internality-externality in interpersonal and family relationships. For medical and psychological studies, it includes items measuring USC. regarding illness and health.

To increase the range of possible applications of the questionnaire, it is designed in two versions, differing in the format of the respondents’ responses. Option A, intended for research purposes, requires a response on a 6-point scale “-3, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3”, in which the answer “+3” means “strongly agree”, “- 3" - “completely disagree” with this item. Option B, intended for clinical psychodiagnostics, requires answers on a binary scale “agree-disagree.”

As studies conducted on normal student subjects have shown, the answers to all points of the questionnaire have a sufficient spread: none of the halves of the scale was chosen less than 15% of the time. The results of filling out the questionnaire by individual subjects are converted into a standard system of wall units and can be visually presented in the form of a profile of subjective control.

The indicators of the USC questionnaire are organized in accordance with the principle of the hierarchical structure of the activity regulation system in such a way that they include a generalized indicator of individual USC, invariant to frequent situations of activity, two indicators of the average level of generality, differentiated by the emotional sign of these situations, and a number of situation-specific indicators .

1. Scale of general internality I o. A high score on this scale corresponds to a high level of subjective control over any significant situations. Such people believe that most of the important events in their lives were the result of their own actions, that they can control them, and therefore feel their own responsibility for these events and for the way their lives turn out in general. A low score on the Io scale corresponds to a low level of subjective control. Such subjects do not see the connection between their actions and the events of their life that are significant to them, do not consider themselves capable of controlling their development, and believe that most of them are the result of chance or the actions of other people.

2. Scale of internality in the field of achievements Id. High scores on this scale correspond to a high level of subjective control over emotionally positive events and situations. Such people believe that they have achieved everything good that was and is in their life themselves and that they are able to successfully pursue their goals in the future. Low scores on the Id scale indicate that a person attributes his successes, achievements and joys to external circumstances - luck, good fortune or the help of other people.

3. Scale of internality in the field of failures I n. High scores on this scale indicate a developed sense of subjective control in relation to negative events and situations, which is manifested in a tendency to blame oneself for various failures, troubles and suffering. Low I n scores indicate that the subject is inclined to attribute responsibility for such events to other people or consider them the result of bad luck.

4. Scale of internality in family relationships I with. High scores on this scale mean that a person considers himself responsible for the events of his family life. Low I c indicates that the subject considers not himself, but his partners, to be the cause of significant situations that arise in his family.

5. Scale of internality in the field of industrial relations I p. High I p indicates that a person considers his actions an important factor in organizing his own production activities, in developing relationships in a team, in his advancement, etc. Low I p indicates that the subject is inclined to attribute more importance to external circumstances - management, workmates, luck or bad luck.

6. Internality scale in the field of interpersonal relations I m. A high I m indicator indicates that a person considers himself capable of controlling his informal relationships with other people, arousing respect and sympathy for himself, etc. Low I m, on the contrary, indicates that he does not consider himself capable of actively form their own social circle and are inclined to consider their relationships as the result of the actions of their partners.

7. Scale of internality in relation to health and illness I from. High Iz scores indicate that the subject considers himself largely responsible for his health: if he is sick, he blames himself for it and believes that recovery largely depends on his actions. A person with low Iz: considers health and illness to be the result of chance and hopes that recovery will come as a result of the actions of other people, first of all doctors.

Keys to USK scales

Processing of completed forms should be carried out according to the keys given below, summing up the answers to the items in the “+” columns with the opposite sign and the answers to the items in the “-” columns with the opposite sign.

1. Io Scale

+: 2, 4, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 25, 27, 29, 31, 32, 34,. 36, 37, 39, 42, 44.

-: 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 18, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30, 33,

35,. 38, 40, 41, 43.

2. Id scale: +: 12, 15, 27, 32, 36, 37.

-: 1, 5, 6, 14, 26, 43.

3. In scale: +: 2, 4, 20,31,42,44.

- :7,24,33,36,40,41

4. Is scale: +: 7,24,33,36,40,41

. -: 7, 14,26,28,41

5. Ip scale: . +: 19,22,25,31,42.

-: 1,9, 10,24,30

6. Im. Scale +; 4.27.

7. Scale I. +: 13.34.

Converting raw points into walls

To convert the raw score of the scales of the USC questionnaire into a standard value (sten), find the desired scale in the top line and move down the column to the line with the value interval in which the raw score you calculated falls. The leftmost column of the found line shows the corresponding wall. For example, if the raw score on the IS scale is 8, we find the interval 7-10 in the IS column and the wall value -7 is indicated in the left column of this row.

QUESTIONNAIRE USK.

Instructions. Read each of the statements below carefully and mark on your answer sheet:

completely agree rather agree, rather disagree, completely disagree

agree than disagree than agree disagree

1.Promotion depends more on a successful combination of circumstances than on a person’s abilities and efforts.

2. Most divorces occur because people did not want to adapt to each other.

3. Illness - given the opportunity, if you are destined to get sick, then nothing can be done.

4. People find themselves lonely because they themselves do not show interest and friendliness towards others. to others.

5. The fulfillment of my desires often depends on luck.

6. It is useless to make efforts to win the sympathy of other people.

7. External circumstances - parents and wealth - influence family happiness no less than the relationship of spouses.

8. I often feel that I have little influence on what happens to me.

9. As a rule, management is more effective when the actions of subordinates are fully controlled, rather than relying on their independence.

10. My grades at school often depended on random circumstances (for example, on the mood of the teacher) than on my own efforts. .

11. When I make plans, I generally believe that I can carry them out.

12. What seems to many people like luck or luck is actually the result of long, focused efforts.

13. I think that a healthy lifestyle can help your health more than doctors and medications.

14. If people are not suitable for each other, then no matter how hard they try to improve their family life, they still will not be able to.

15. The good things I do are usually appreciated by others.

16 Children grow up the way their parents raise them.

17. I think that chance or fate do not play an important role in my life.

18. I try not to plan too far ahead, because a lot depends on how circumstances turn out.

19. My grades at school depended most on my efforts and degree of preparedness.

20. In family conflicts, I more often feel guilty for myself than for the opposite party.

21. The life of most people depends on a combination of circumstances.

22. I prefer leadership in which I can independently determine what to do and how to do it.

23. I think that my lifestyle is in no way the cause of my illnesses.

24. As a rule, it is an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevents people from achieving success in their business.

25. In the end, the people who work in it themselves are responsible for the poor management of an organization.

26. I often feel that I cannot change anything in the existing relationships in the family.

27. If I really want to, I can win over anyone.

28. The younger generation is influenced by so many different circumstances that the efforts of parents to raise them often turn out to be useless.

29. What happens to me is the work of my own hands.

30. It can be difficult to understand why leaders act this way and not otherwise.

31. A person who could not succeed in his work most likely did not show enough effort.

32. Most often, I can get what I want from my family members.

33. For the troubles and failures that happened in my life, other people were more often to blame than myself.

34. A child can always be protected from a cold if you look after him and dress him correctly.

35. In difficult circumstances, I prefer to wait until problems resolve themselves.

36. Success is the result of hard work and depends little on chance or luck.

37. I feel that the happiness of my family depends on me more than anyone else.

38. It has always been difficult for me to understand why some people like me and not others.

39. I always prefer to make a decision and act on my own, rather than rely on the help of other people or fate.

40. Unfortunately, a person’s merits often remain unrecognized, despite all his efforts.

41. In family life there are situations that cannot be resolved even with the strongest desire.

42. Capable people who failed to realize their potential have only themselves to blame.

43. Many of my successes were possible only thanks to the help of others.

44. Most of the failures in my life resulted from inability, laziness and depended little on luck or bad luck.

gender_______ age__________ profession_______________________ date___________

Instructions

Please answer the questions posed using (marking on the form) one of the gradations of the 7-point scale :

USK Questionnaire

1. Career advancement depends more on a successful combination of circumstances than on a person’s abilities and efforts.

2. Most divorces occur because people did not want to adapt to each other.

3. Illness is a matter of chance; If you are destined to get sick, then nothing can be done.

4. People find themselves lonely because they themselves do not show interest and friendliness towards others.

5. Making my dreams come true often depends on luck.

6. It is useless to make efforts to win the sympathy of other people.

7. External circumstances - parents and wealth - influence family happiness no less than the relationship of spouses.

8. I often feel that I have little influence on what happens to me.

9. As a rule, management turns out to be more effective when it fully controls the actions of subordinates, rather than relying on their independence.

10. My grades at school often depended on random circumstances (for example, the teacher’s mood) rather than on my own efforts.

11. When I make plans, I generally believe that I can carry them out.

12. What many people think is luck or luck is actually the result of long, focused efforts.

13. I think that a healthy lifestyle can help your health more than doctors and medications.

14. If people don’t get along with each other, then no matter how hard they try to improve their family life, they still won’t be able to.

15. The good things I do are usually appreciated by others.

16. Children grow up the way their parents raise them.

17. I think that chance or fate do not play an important role in my life.

18. I try not to plan too far ahead, because a lot depends on how circumstances turn out.

19. My grades at school depended most on my efforts and degree of preparedness.

20. In family conflicts, I more often feel guilty for myself than for the opposite party.

21. The life of most people depends on a combination of circumstances.

22. I prefer leadership in which I can independently determine how and what to do.

23. I think that my lifestyle is in no way the cause of my illnesses.

24. As a rule, it is an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevents people from achieving success in their business.

25. In the end, the people who work in it themselves are responsible for the poor management of an organization.

26. I often feel that I can’t change anything in the existing relationships in the family.

27. If I really want to, I can win over almost anyone.

28. The younger generation is influenced by so many different circumstances that the efforts of parents to raise them often turn out to be useless.

29. What happens to me is the work of my own hands.

30. It can be difficult to understand why leaders act this way and not otherwise.

I completely disagree

Test-questionnaire of subjective control (USC) by J. Rotter diagnoses the localization of control over significant events. It is based on the distinction between two loci of control - internal and external and, accordingly, two types of people - internals and externals.

Internal type. A person believes that the events that happen to him depend primarily on his personal qualities (competence, determination, level of abilities, etc.) and are natural consequences of his own activities.

External type. A person is convinced that his successes and failures depend primarily on external circumstances - environmental conditions, the actions of other people, chance, luck or bad luck, etc.

The questionnaire was adapted by E.F. Bazhin, S.A. Golykina, A.M. Etkind.

Any individual occupies a certain position on the continuum defined by these polar loci of control.

Instructions: You will be asked 44 statements relating to various aspects of life and attitudes towards them. Please rate the degree of your agreement or disagreement with the above statements on a 6-point scale: – 3–2 -1 + 1 + 2 + 3, from complete disagreement (-3) to complete agreement (+3).

In other words, give each statement a score from one to three with the corresponding “+” (agree) or “-” (disagree) sign.

Questions:

Career advancement depends more on a successful combination of circumstances than on a person’s abilities and efforts.
Most divorces occur because people did not want to adapt to each other.
Illness is a matter of chance; If you are destined to get sick, then nothing can be done.
People find themselves lonely because they themselves do not show interest and friendliness towards others.
Making my dreams come true often depends on luck.
It is useless to make efforts to win the sympathy of other people.
External circumstances, parents and well-being influence family happiness no less than the relationship between spouses.
I often feel like I have little influence over what happens to me.
As a rule, leadership turns out to be more effective when the leader fully controls the actions of subordinates, rather than relying on their independence.
My grades at school and college often depended on random circumstances (for example, the mood of the teacher) more than on my own efforts.
When I make plans, I generally believe that I can carry them out.
What many people see as luck or luck is actually the result of long, focused effort.
I think that a healthy lifestyle can help your health more than doctors and medications.
If people are not suitable for each other, then no matter how hard they try, they still will not be able to establish family life.
The good that I do is usually appreciated by others.
People grow up the way their parents raise them.
I think that chance or fate do not play an important role in my life.
I don't try to plan too far ahead because a lot depends on how circumstances turn out.
My grades in school depended most on my effort and level of preparedness.
In family conflicts, I more often feel guilty for myself than for the opposite party.
The life of most people depends on a combination of circumstances.
I prefer leadership in which you can independently determine what to do and how to do it.
I think that my lifestyle is in no way the cause of my illnesses.
As a rule, it is an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevents people from achieving success in their business.
Ultimately, the people who work in it are responsible for the poor management of an organization.
I often feel like I can't change anything about my circumstances.
If I really want to, I can win over almost anyone.
The younger generation is influenced by so many circumstances that the efforts of parents to educate them often turn out to be useless.
What happens to me is the work of my own hands.
It can be difficult to understand why leaders act this way and not otherwise.
A person who has not been able to succeed in his or her job most likely did not try hard enough.
More often than not, I can get what I want from my family members.
The troubles and failures that happened in my life were more often the fault of other people than myself.
A child can always be protected from a cold if you look after him and dress him correctly.
In difficult circumstances, I prefer to wait until the problems resolve themselves.
Success is the result of hard work and depends little on chance or luck.
I feel that the happiness of my family depends on me more than on anyone else.
I've always had a hard time understanding why some people like me and others don't.
I always prefer to make decisions and act on my own, rather than rely on the help of other people or fate.
Unfortunately, a person’s merits often remain unrecognized, despite all his efforts.
There are situations in family life that cannot be resolved even with the strongest desire.
Capable people who fail to realize their potential have only themselves to blame.
Many of my successes were only possible thanks to the help of other people.
Most of my failures were due to inability, ignorance or laziness and had little to do with luck or bad luck.

Processing the results

Processing test results includes several stages.

1st stage. Calculation of “raw” (preliminary) points on scales.
Indicators (scales):
1. IO – scale of general internality;
2. ID – scale of internality in the field of achievements;
3. IN – scale of internality in the field of failures;
4. IS – scale of internality in family relationships;
5. IP – scale of internality in industrial relations;
6. IM – scale of internality in the field of interpersonal relations;
7. IZ – scale of internality in relation to health and illness.

Calculate the sum of points for each of the seven scales, with questions indicated in the “+” column being taken with the same point sign, and questions indicated in the “-” column changing the point sign to the opposite.
The table below shows the statement numbers associated with the corresponding scales.

2nd stage. Converting “raw” scores into walls (standard scores) produced in accordance with the table below. The walls are presented on a 10-point scale and provide the opportunity to compare the results of different studies.

Analyze quantitatively and qualitatively the USC indicators on seven scales, comparing the results (the resulting “profile”) with the norm. A wall value of 5 is considered normal. A deviation to the right (6 or more walls) indicates an internal type of level of subjective control in appropriate situations, a deviation to the left (4 or less walls) indicates an external type.

The results can also be presented as a graph or as a profile:

Example graph

Example profile

Description of the scales assessed

1. Scale of general internality - IO. A high score on this scale corresponds to a high level of subjective control over any significant situations. Such people believe that most of the important events in their lives are the result of their own actions, that they can control them, and thus they feel their own responsibility for these events and for the way their lives turn out in general. A low score on the AI scale corresponds to a low level of subjective control. Such people do not see the connection between their actions and life events that are significant to them, do not consider themselves capable of controlling this connection, and believe that most events and actions are the result of chance or the actions of other people.

2. Scale of internality in the field of achievements - ID. High scores on this scale correspond to a high level of subjective control over emotionally positive events and situations. Such people believe that they themselves have achieved all the good things that have happened and are in their lives, and that they are able to successfully pursue their goals in the future. Low scores on the ID scale indicate that a person attributes his successes, achievements and joys to external circumstances - luck, good fortune or the help of other people.

3. Internality scale in the field of failures – IN. High scores on this scale indicate a developed sense of subjective control in relation to negative events and situations, which is manifested in a tendency to blame oneself for various troubles and suffering. Low IQ scores indicate that a person tends to attribute responsibility for similar events to other people or consider these events to be the result of bad luck.

4. Scale of internality in family relationships - IS. High scores mean that a person considers himself responsible for the events occurring in his family life. Low IP indicates that the subject considers not himself, but his partners, to be the cause of significant situations that arise in his family.

5. Scale of internality in the field of industrial relations - IP. A high IP indicates that a person considers his actions an important factor in organizing his own production activities, in developing relationships in a team, in his advancement, etc. A low IP indicates that a person tends to attach greater importance to external circumstances - management, comrades at work, luck or bad luck.

6. Internality scale in the field of interpersonal relations - IM. A high IM score indicates that a person considers himself able to control his formal and informal relationships with other people, to command respect and sympathy. Low MI, on the contrary, indicates that a person cannot actively form his social circle and is inclined to consider his interpersonal relationships as the result of the activity of his partners.

7. Scale of internality in relation to health and illness - IZ. High indicators of IH indicate that a person considers himself largely responsible for his health: if he is sick, he blames himself for it and believes that recovery largely depends on his actions. A person with low ID considers health and illness to be the result of chance and hopes that recovery will come as a result of the actions of other people, especially doctors.

A study of self-esteem of people with different types of subjective control showed that people with low SCS characterize themselves as selfish, dependent, indecisive, unfair, fussy, hostile, insecure, insincere, dependent, irritable. People with high SQ consider themselves to be kind, independent, decisive, fair, capable, friendly, honest, self-reliant, and unflappable. Thus, USC is associated with a person’s feeling of his strength, dignity, responsibility for what is happening, with self-respect, social maturity and personal independence.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

INTRODUCTION

The level of subjective control is a generalized personality characteristic that manifests itself in a similar way in different situations. Psychologists believe that the level of subjective control is associated with a person’s sense of responsibility for what is happening “here and now,” as well as for long-term consequences, i.e., with social maturity and individual independence. For the first time, diagnostic methods for such personality characteristics were tested in the 60s in the USA. The most famous among them is the locus of control scale ( locus of control scale), developed by J. Rotter ( J.B. Rotter). This scale is based on the premise that all people are divided into two types - internals and externals - depending on how they assess what causes various events in their lives and who is responsible for them. Every person can be assessed on the “internality-externality” scale. Internals have an internal locus of control, externals have an external one. The differences between the two types of localization of control can be significant from the point of view of the success of professional activity (the internal locus of control significantly correlates with the index of professional success).

People of the internal type evaluate all significant events that happen to them as the result of their own activities. They work more productively alone and are more active in searching for information. In addition, internal personalities cope better with work that requires initiative. They are more decisive, self-confident, principled in interpersonal relationships, and are not afraid to take risks. Research shows that internal leaders are able to successfully exercise directive leadership.

An external personality, on the contrary, interprets all events occurring in her life as depending not on her, but on some external forces (God, other people, fate, etc.). Since externals do not feel able to influence their lives in any way, to control the development of events, they abdicate all responsibility for everything that happens to them. At the same time, they are characterized by greater conformity, are more compliant and sensitive to the opinions and assessments of others. In general, externalizing individuals appear to be good performers who work effectively under the control of other people.

In domestic practice it is used methodology for studying the level of subjective control(USK), created by E. F. Bazhin, E. A. Golynkina and A. M. Etkind at the Leningrad Psychoneurological Institute. V. M. Bekhterev based on the J. Rotter scale. The authors of this technique proceed from the fact that the direction of subjective control in the same person can have variations in different spheres of life. Therefore, the USC includes a number of scales that measure not just internality-externality, but also the manifestations of this characteristic in such areas as attitudes towards achievements, failures, health and illness, as well as in the sphere of family, work and interpersonal relationships.

This experimental psychological technique makes it possible to relatively quickly and effectively assess the level of subjective control formed in the subject over various life situations.

CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL PART

This experimental psychological technique makes it possible to relatively quickly and effectively assess the level of subjective control formed in the test subject over various life situations. Developed at the Research Institute named after. Bekhterev.

Subjective control is a person’s tendency to take responsibility for what happens to them and to hold other people responsible. In contrast to the subjective, there can be so-called objective control of events, in which they occur according to the will of circumstances, chance, regardless of a person’s desire.

This technique assesses the extent to which a person is ready to take responsibility for what happens to him and around him. The subject is offered the following 44 statements, the answers to which indicate the level of subjective control of this person. With each of these judgments, the subject, after reading it, must express his agreement or disagreement.

Such methods were first tested in the 60s in the USA. The most famous of them is J. Rotter's locus of control scale. This scale is based on two fundamental principles.

1. People differ in how and where they localize control over events that are significant to them. There are two possible polar types of such localization: external and internal. In the first case, a person believes that the events that happen to him are the result of the action of external forces - chance, other people, etc. In the second case, a person interprets significant events as the result of his own activities. Every person has a certain position on a continuum that extends from the external to the internal type.

2. The locus of control characteristic of an individual is universal in relation to any types of events and situations that he has to face. The same type of control characterizes the behavior of a given individual both in case of failures and in the sphere of achievements, and this applies to different degrees to different areas of social life.

Experimental work has established a connection between various forms of behavior and personality parameters with externality-internality. Conformal and compliant behavior is more characteristic of people with an external locus. Internals, unlike externals, are less inclined to submit to the pressure of others, to resist when they feel that they are being manipulated, and they react stronger than externals to the loss of personal freedom. People with internal loci of control work better alone than under supervision or video recording. The opposite is true for externalities.

Internals and externals differ in the ways of interpreting different social situations, in particular in the methods of obtaining information and in the mechanisms of their causal explanation. Internals seek information more actively and are usually more situationally aware than externals. In the same situation, internals attribute greater responsibility to the individuals participating in this situation. Internals avoid situational explanations of behavior to a greater extent than externals.

Studies linking internality-externality with interpersonal relationships have shown that internals are more popular, more benevolent, more self-confident, and more tolerant. There is a connection between high internality and positive self-esteem, with greater consistency between the images of the real and ideal “I”. Internals were found to have a more active position in relation to their health than externals: they are better informed about their condition, care more about their health and more often seek preventive care.

Externality correlates with anxiety, depression, and mental illness.

Internals prefer non-directive methods of psychocorrection; Externals are subjectively more satisfied with behavioral methods.

All this gives sufficient grounds to believe that the identification of a personal characteristic that describes the extent to which a person feels like an active subject of his own activity, and to what extent a passive object of the actions of other people and external circumstances, is justified by existing empirical research and can contribute to further study of the problems of applied personality psychology.

The second proposition stated above, on which the American tradition of locus research is based, seems hardly acceptable. Describing personality using generalized trans-synthetic characteristics is insufficient. Most people are characterized by more or less wide variability in their behavior depending on specific social situations. Features of subjective control, in particular, can change for the same person depending on whether the situation seems complex or simple, pleasant or unpleasant, etc. Therefore, measuring the locus of control, apparently, is more promising to construct not as a one-dimensional characteristic, but as a multidimensional profile, the components of which are tied to types of social situations of varying degrees of generality.

The USC questionnaire consists of 44 items. Unlike J. Rotter's scale, it includes items measuring externality-internality in interpersonal and family relationships; it also includes items measuring SQM in relation to illness and health.

To increase the range of possible applications of the questionnaire, it is designed in two versions that differ in the format of the test subjects’ responses.

Option A intended for research purposes, requires a response on a 6-point scale (-3, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3), and the answer “+3” means “strongly agree”, “--3” -- “completely disagree” with this point.

Option B intended for psychodiagnostics, requires answers on a binary scale “agree - disagree.”

Application:

The test is intended for individual and group examination. The use of the USK questionnaire is possible when solving a wide range of socio-psychological and medical-psychological problems in clinical psychodiagnostics, during professional selection, family consultation, etc. USC increases in the process of psychocorrective influence on the individual. Therefore, it is possible to use USC to assess the effectiveness of psychological correction methods.

CHAPTER 2. PRACTICAL PART

QUESTIONNAIRE USK (level of subjective control). METHOD FOR DIAGNOSTIC LEVEL OF SUBJECTIVE CONTROL J. ROTTER, ADAPTATION BY BAZHIN E. F., GOLYNKINA S. A., EKINDA A. M.

The basis of the definition USK personality has 2 prerequisites:

1. People differ in how and where they localize control over events that are significant to them. There are two possible polar types of such localization: external and internal. In the first case, a person believes that the events that happen to him are the result of external forces - chance, people's friends, etc. In the second case, a person interprets significant events as the result of his own activity. Every person has a certain position on a continuum that extends from the external to the internal type.

2. The locus of control characteristic of an individual is universal in relation to any types of events and situations that he has to face. The same type of control characterizes the behavior of a given individual in the event of failures and in the sphere of achievements, and this equally applies to various areas of social life.

In other words, put against each statement one of the 6 proposed points with the corresponding “+” (agree) or “-” (disagree) sign.

test level subjective control

Test material. You are offered a series of statements. If you agree with what they say, then in the answer form put a point with a “+” sign, if not, then “-”.

Statement
	I completely agree	agree	I agree rather than disagree	I rather disagree than agree	I don't agree	I don't agree completely
Career advancement depends more on a successful combination of circumstances than on personal abilities and efforts
Most divorces occur because people did not want to adapt to each other.
Illness is a matter of chance; If you are destined to get sick, then nothing can be done
People end up lonely because they themselves do not show interest and friendliness towards others
Making my dreams come true often depends on luck.
It is futile to make efforts to win the sympathy of other people
External circumstances, parents and well-being influence family happiness no less than the relationship between spouses
I often feel like I have little influence over what happens to me
As a rule, management is more effective when it fully controls the actions of subordinates, rather than relying on their independence
My grades at school depended more on random circumstances (for example, on the mood of the teacher) than on my own efforts
When I make plans, I generally believe that I can carry them out
What many people think is luck or luck is actually the result of long, focused effort.
I think that a healthy lifestyle can help your health more than doctors and medications
If people are not suitable for each other, then no matter how hard they try, they still will not be able to establish family life.
The good that I do is usually appreciated by others
Children grow up the way their parents raise them
I think that chance or fate do not play an important role in my life
I try not to plan too far ahead because a lot depends on how the circumstances turn out
My grades in school depended most on my effort and level of preparedness
In family conflicts, I often feel guilty for myself rather than for the other party.
People's lives depend on circumstances
I prefer leadership where you can decide for yourself what to do and how to do it
I think that my lifestyle is in no way the cause of my illnesses
As a rule, it is an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevents people from achieving success in their business
In the end, the people who work in it are responsible for the poor management of an organization.
I often feel that I can’t change anything in my family relationships.
If I really want, I can win over anyone
The younger generation is influenced by so many different circumstances that the efforts of parents to raise them are often useless
What happens to me is the work of my hands
It can be difficult to understand why leaders act this way and not otherwise.
A person who has not been able to succeed in his or her job most likely did not try hard enough.
Most often I can get what I want from my family members
The troubles and failures that happened in my life were often the fault of other people than myself.
A child can always be protected from a cold if you look after him and dress him correctly
In difficult circumstances, I prefer to wait until the problems resolve themselves
Success is the result of hard work and depends little on chance or luck
I feel that the happiness of my family depends on me more than on anyone else.
I've always had a hard time understanding why some people like me and others don't.
I always prefer to make a decision and act on my own, rather than rely on the help of other people or fate
Unfortunately, a person’s merits often remain unrecognized, despite all his efforts
There are situations in family life that cannot be resolved even with the strongest desire.
Capable people who fail to realize their potential have only themselves to blame
Many of my successes were only possible thanks to the help of other people.
Most of the failures in my life were due to ignorance or laziness and had little to do with luck or bad luck.

Answer form

Processing of testing results is carried out in several stages. The number corresponding to the choice determines the number of points received for each answer. First, with the help of keys, points are calculated on each scale (by simple summation). In this case, points for answers to questions with a “+” sign are summed up with their own sign, and for questions with a “-” sign - with the opposite sign.

KEY

Processing test results includes three stages.

Calculation of “raw” (preliminary) points on 7 scales using key No. 1.

INDICATORS (SCALES):

1. And about - scale of general internality;

2. Eid - achievement internality scale;

3. I n - scale of internality in the field of failures;

4. Is - scale of internality in family relationships;

5. IP - scale of internality in industrial relations;

6. Them - scale of internality in the field of interpersonal relations;

7. From - scale of internality in relation to health and illness.

Table 1. To calculate “raw” scores on 7 scales. Calculate the sum of your points for each of the 7 scales, while the questions indicated in the “+” column are taken with the sign of your score, and the questions indicated in the “-” column change the sign of your score to the opposite.

So, you received 7 points.

Converting “raw” scores into walls (standard scores). The walls are presented on a 10-point scale and make it possible to compare the results of various studies.

Table 2. For converting “raw” points into walls. Wall points:

1.And about from










2.Eid from










3.In from










4.Is from










5.IP from










6.Them O T










7.From from

Construction of a “USC profile” on 7 scales.

Set aside your 7 results (sten) on 7 ten-point scales and also mark the norm corresponding to 5.5 sten.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Analysis of results

Analyze your indicators quantitatively and qualitatively USK on 7 scales, comparing your results (the resulting “profile”) with the norm. Deviation to the right (> 5.5 walls) indicates an internal type of control ( USK in appropriate situations. Deviation to the left from the norm (< 5,5 стенов) свидетельствует об экстернальном типе USK.

The results can also be presented as a graph or as a profile.

Example of USC chart

USK profile example

Interpretation of the results obtained

Psychologically, a person with high level of subjective control has emotional stability, perseverance, determination, sociability, high self-control and restraint. Man with low subjective control emotionally unstable, prone to informal behavior, uncommunicative, poor self-control and high tension.

Description of the scales assessed:

1.General internality scale (And about ). A high score on this scale corresponds to a high level of subjective control over any significant situations. Such people believe that most of the important events in their lives are the result of their own actions, that they can control them, and thus they feel their own responsibility for these events and for the way their lives turn out in general. Low on the scale And about corresponds to a low level of subjective control. Such people do not see the connection between their actions and life events that are significant to them, do not consider themselves capable of controlling this connection, and believe that most events and actions are the result of chance or the actions of other people.

2. Achievement Internality Scale (AND d). High scores on this scale correspond to a high level of subjective control over emotionally positive events and situations. Such people believe that they themselves have achieved all the good things that have happened and are in their lives, and that they are able to successfully pursue their goals in the future. Low on the scale Eid indicate that a person attributes his successes, achievements and joys to external circumstances - luck, good fortune or the help of other people.

3. Internality scale in the field of failures (In ) . High scores on this scale indicate a developed sense of subjective control in relation to negative events and situations, which is manifested in a tendency to blame oneself for various troubles and suffering. Low performance In indicate that a person tends to attribute responsibility for such events to other people or consider these events to be the result of bad luck.

4. Internality scale in family relationships(Is) . High performance Is mean that a person considers himself responsible for the events occurring in his family life. Short Is indicates that the subject considers not himself, but his partners, to be the cause of significant situations that arise in his family.

5. Scale of internality in the field of industrial relations (Is) . High Is indicates that a person considers his actions an important factor in organizing his own production activities, in developing relationships in a team, in his advancement, etc. Low Is indicates that a person tends to attribute more importance to external circumstances - management, workmates, luck - bad luck.

6. Internality scale in the field of interpersonal relations (Them) . High rate Them indicates that a person considers himself able to control his formal and informal relationships with other people, to evoke respect and sympathy. Short Them on the contrary, it indicates that a person cannot actively form his social circle and is inclined to consider his interpersonal relationships as the result of the activity of his partners.

7. Internality scale in relation to health and illness (From) . High performance From indicate that a person considers himself largely responsible for his health: if he is sick, he blames himself for it and believes that recovery largely depends on his actions. Man with low From considers health and illness to be the result of chance and hopes that recovery will come as a result of the actions of other people, especially doctors.

A study of self-esteem of people with different types of subjective control showed that people with low USK characterize themselves as selfish, dependent, indecisive, unfair, fussy, hostile, insecure, insincere, dependent, irritable. People with high USK They consider themselves kind, independent, decisive, fair, capable, friendly, honest, independent, and unflappable. Thus, USK is associated with a person’s feeling of his strength, dignity, responsibility for what is happening, with self-esteem, social maturity and personal independence.

USK test table in the program

See table below to take the online test (click on table)

CONCLUSION

For professional diagnostics, the most informative are the results on the scale of internality in industrial relations (IP). Results on other scales make it possible to construct a multidimensional profile. Since most people are characterized by more or less wide variability in behavior depending on specific social situations, the characteristics of subjective control can also change in a person depending on whether the situation seems complex or simple, pleasant or unpleasant, etc.

The level of subjective control increases as a result of psychological correction. It should be remembered that internals prefer non-directive methods of psychological correction; and externals, as individuals with increased anxiety and prone to depression, are subjectively more satisfied with behavioral methods.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Ageev V.S. Attribution of responsibility for the success and failure of a group in intergroup interaction // Questions of psychology. 1982, no. 6, pp. 101-106.

2. Bazhin E.F., Golynkina E.A., Etkind A.M. Method for studying the level of subjective control // Psychol. magazine 1984, no. 3, pp. 152-162.

3. Bykov S.V., Alasheev S.Yu. “Diagnostics of personality locus of control in antisocial adolescent groups.” Project "Sociological Journal", 2003, No. 1.

4. Eliseev O.P. Locus of control / Workshop on personality psychology - St. Petersburg, 2003, p. 413-417.

5. Karpenko L.A. History of psychology in faces. Personalities. // Psychological Lexicon. Encyclopedic Dictionary in six volumes / Ed. - comp. L.A. Karpenko. Under general ed. A.V. Petrovsky. - M.: PER SE, 2005, 784 p.

6. Karpenko L.A. Encyclopedic Dictionary in six volumes / Ed. - comp. Under general ed. Petrovsky A.V. - M.: PER SE, 2006, 176 p.

7. Kondratyev M. Yu Social psychology. Dictionary. // Psychological Lexicon. Encyclopedic Dictionary in six volumes / Ed. - comp. L.A. Karpenko. Under general ed. A.V. Petrovsky. - M.: PER SE, 2006, 176 p.

8. Kornilov A.P. “Activity psychology of personality” in the concept of G. Krampen // Questions of psychology. 1990, no. 2, pp. 159-164.

9. Miloradova N.G. Psychology: a step towards yourself - towards others. Tutorial. - M.: ASV, 2003, p.334 - 337

10. Muzdybaev K. The influence of forms of labor organization on the responsibility of the individual in production // Psychol. magazine 1983, no. 3, pp. 61-69.

11. Nemov R.S. "Psychology. In 3 books. Book 3." - 3rd ed. - M.: Vlados-press, 2004, - p. 394-402.

12. Pantileev S.R. Methods for measuring locus of control // General psychodiagnostics / Edited by A. A. Bodaleva, V.V. Stolin. M.: Publishing house. Moscow State University, 1987, pp. 18, 23, 278-285.

13. Pashukova T.I., Dopira A.I., Dyakonov G.V. PRACTICUM ON GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY. Textbook for students of pedagogical universities.

14. Petrovsky A.V. General psychology. Dictionary. // Psychological Lexicon. Encyclopedic Dictionary in six volumes/Ed. - comp. L.A. Karpenko. Under general ed. A.V. Petrovsky. - M.: PER SE, 2005. - 251 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Description of the technique

The USC questionnaire consists of 44 items.