Introduction to Psychology (Fall 2005)

SR Paper for November 10, 2005

By

Halford H. Fairchild

 

Rotter, J.B.  (1966).  Generalized expectancies for internal vs. external control of reinforcement.  (Hock, pp. 192-199)

Stimulus:  This article details Rotter’s development of the I-E (Internal-External) Locus of Control Scale.   The article showed the construct’s applicability to gambling, hospitalization, political activism (activists as more internal), persuasion (internals as more persuasive, and more resistant to persuasion), smoking (smokers were external; quitters were internal); achievement motivation, and conformity.  Ethnicity and SES were related to internal/external orientation.  “Implicit in Rotter’s concept of locus of control is the assumption that internals are better adjusted and more effectiv4e in life” (p. 196 of 3rd edition). 

Response:  Racial and class differences in I-E have been used in racist and classist ways.  The text offers a good counterpoint:  “When forces outside of the individual are actually in control of behavioral consequences, the most realistic and healthy approach to take is probably one of an external orientation” (p. 197 of 3rd edition).  Thus, internality within discriminated-against minorities may be psychologically dysfunctional.

Bem, S.L. (1974).  The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.  (Hock, pp. 199-209)

Stimulus:  This article focuses on the development of the Bem Sex Role Inventory, which distinguished androgyny (the new concept) from masculinity and femininity.  Androgyny is seen as psychologically healthier.

Response:  Would like to see more cross-cultural, cross-ethnic comparisons and articulations.  There is room, here, for new developments in space, time, and culture.  The article offers a teachable moment in the concepts of reliability (consistency within the items and across time), and validity (truth in measurement).

 

Triandis, H., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M., Asai, M., & Lucca, N.  (1988).  Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-338.  (Hock, pp. 217-225).

Stimulus:  This article details Triandis (and colleagues) landmark work on collectivism vs. individualism across societies, cultures and within societies (sub-cultures).  Interestingly, collectivism leads to better health outcomes, such as lower rates of coronary heart disease and heart attacks.

Response:  It was gratifying to see the discussion of sub-cultural differences, variations within national boundaries (such as the U.S.).  Some of the methods would be inapplicable in very different cultures, such as aboriginal cultures in Australia or rural (bush) cultures in Africa.  Pencil and paper measures, are, well, inapplicable.  What measures would be appropriate?