To Control or Not to Control

  • Dariusz Dolinski
Part of the The Springer Series in Social Clinical Psychology book series (SSSC)

Abstract

To have control over an event means exercising authority and influence over it by directing and regulating it oneself. Obviously, events differ in their amenability to control. We cannot change the order of days in the week; our influence on our own health is greater but still limited. We may have almost total control over the amount of sugar and milk in our cup of coffee, but only if we prepare our breakfast ourselves. Regardless of the objective nature of the situation, however, people vary in their assessments of perceived control over particular events and their lives in general. Some feel they can do almost anything they set their minds to; others feel that events result mostly from the actions of others or good and bad luck.

Keywords

Sugar Depression Kelly Defend Sonal 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adler, A. (1930). Individual psychology. In C. Murchinson (Ed.), Psychologies of 1930 (pp. 138–165 ). Worchester, MA: Clark University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Andrisani, P. J. (1978). Internal-external attitudes, personal initiative, and labor market experience. In P. J. Andrisani (Ed.), Work attitudes and labor market experience: Evidence from the national longitudinal surveys (pp. 101–134 ). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  3. Arkkelin, D., Oakley, T., und Mynatt, C. (1979). Effects of controllable versus uncontrollable factors on responsibility attributions. A single-subject approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 110–115.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, S. L., und Kirsch, I. (1991). Cognitive mediators of pain perception and tolerance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 504–510.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beck, A. (1972). Depression: Causes and treatment. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  7. Benassi, V. A., Sweeney, P. D., und Dufour, C. L. (1988). Is there a relation between locus of con-trol orientation and depression? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97, 357–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berglas, S., und Jones, E. E. (1978). Drug-choice as a self-handicapping strategy in response to noncontingent success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 405–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Biner, P. M., Angle, S. T., Park, J. H., Mellinger, A. E., und Barber, B. C. (1995). Need state and the illusion of control. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 899–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bradley, G. W. (1978). Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  12. Brewer, M. (1977). An information-processing approach to attribution of responsibility. Jour-nal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 58–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brewin C. R., und Shapiro, D. A. (1984). Beyond locus of control: Attribution of responsibility for positive and negative outcomes. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burger, J. M. (1989). Negative reactions to increases in perceived personal control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 246–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burger, J. M., Mc Ward, J., und LaTorre, D. (1989). Boundaries of self-control: Relinquishing control over aversive events. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 8, 209–221.Google Scholar
  16. deCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Conolley, E. S., Gerard, H. B., und Kline, T. (1978). Competitive behavior: A manifestation of motivation for ability comparison. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dolinski, D. (1991) Perpetrator’s freedom of choice as a determinant of attribution of responsibility from the perspective of the victim and a neutral observer. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 22, 81–90.Google Scholar
  20. Dolinski, D., Gromski, W., und Szmajke, A. (1988). Perpetrator’s freedom of choice as a deter-minant of responsibility attribution. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 441–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Folkman, S. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 839–852.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from freedom. New York: Avon.Google Scholar
  23. Geer, J. H., Davison, G. C., und Gatchel, R. I. (1970). Reduction of stress in humans through nonverdical perceived control of aversive stimulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 731–738.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Glass, D., und Singer, J. (1972). Urban stress. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Gromski, W., und Dolinski, D. (1987). Ascription of responsibility for others. Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 251–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gromski, W., und Nawrat, R. (1984). Some determinants of perceived responsibility and guilt in a compliance situation. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 15, 235–244.Google Scholar
  27. Grzelak, J., Wieczorkowska, G., Kuhlman, D., Joireman, J., Shelley, G., und Toshiaki, D. (1996). Control preferences in interpersonal and macro social settings. Paper presented at the meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Gmunden, Austria, July 1984.Google Scholar
  28. Henslin, J. M. (1967). Craps and magic. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 316–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hiroto, D. S., und Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Generality of learned helplessness in man. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 311–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jones, E. E., und Berglas, S. (1978) Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  32. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Langer, E. J., und Rodin, J. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 191–198.Google Scholar
  34. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, S. M. (1979). Controllability and human stress: Method, evidence and theory. Behavior Research and Therapy, 17, 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller, S. M. (1980). Why having control reduces stress: If I can stop the roller coaster, I don’t want to get off. In J. Garber und M. E. P. Seligman (Eds.), Human helplessness: Theory and applications (pp. 71–95 ). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Mills, R., und Krantz, D. (1979). Information, choice, and reactions to stress: A field experiment in a blood bank with laboratory analogue. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 608–620.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mirowsky, J., und Ross, C. E. (1983). Paranoia and the structure of powerlessness. American Sociological Review, 48, 228–239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mirowsky, J., und Ross, C. E. (1990). Control or defense? Depresssion and the sense of control over good and bad outcomes. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 71–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Perlmuter, L. C., und Monty, R. A. (1977). The importance of perceived control: Fact or fantasy? American Scientist, 65, 759–765.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Perlmuter, L. C., Scharff, K., Karsh, R., und Monty, R. A. (1980). Perceived control. Ageneralized state of motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 4, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rodin, J. (1986). Aging and health: Effects of the sense of control. Science, 233, 1271–1276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rodin, J., und Langer, E. (1977). Long-term effect of a control-relevant intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 897–902.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rodin, J., Rennert, K., und Solomon, S. K. (1980). Intrinsic motivation for control: Fact or fiction. In A. Baum und J. E. Singer (Eds.), Advances in environmental psychology: Vol. 2 Applications of personal control (pp. 131–148 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  45. Ross, L., Greene, D., und House, P. (1997). The ‘false consensus effect’: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sachs, P. R. (1982). Avoidance of diagnostic information in self-evaluation of ability. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 242–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schulz, R. (1976). Effects of control and predictability on the physical and psychological well-being of the institutionalized aged. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 563–573.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  49. Shaver, K. G. (1985). The attribution of blame: Causality, responsibility, and blameworthiness. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  50. Snyder, C. R. (1989). Reality negotiation: From excuses to hope and beyond. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 8, 130–157.Google Scholar
  51. Snyder, C. R., und Higgins, R. L. (1988). Excuses: The effective role in the negotiation of reality. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 23–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Strube, M. J., und Berry, J. M. (1985). Attributional and emotional concomitants of control relinquishment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 6, 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Strube, M. J., Berry, J. M., und Moergen, S. (1985). Relinquishment of control and the type A behavior pattern. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 831–842.Google Scholar
  54. Strube, M. J., und Werner, C. (1984). Psychological reactance and the relinquishment of control. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 225–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Strube, M. J., und Werner, C. (1985). Relinquishment of control and the type Abehavior pattern: The role of performance evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 688–701.Google Scholar
  56. Thompson, S. C., Sobolew-Shubin, A., Galbraith, M. E., Schwankovsky, L., und Cruzen, D. (1993). Maintaining perception of control: Finding perceived control in low-control circumstances. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 293–304.Google Scholar
  57. White, R. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333.Google Scholar
  58. Wong, P. T. P. (1992). Control is a double-edged sword. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 24, 143–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wortman, C. B. (1975). Some determinants of perceived control Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31282–294 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dariusz Dolinski
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of OpoleOpolePoland

Personalised recommendations