Locus of control in social psychology briefly. Types of loci of control
self-attitude locus anxiety children
One of the most important psychological characteristics of a person is the degree of independence, independence and activity of a person in achieving his goals, the development of a sense of personal responsibility for the events that happen to him. There is reason to believe that this generalized characteristic has a regulatory influence on many aspects of human behavior when playing important role in the formation of interpersonal relationships, in the method of resolving crisis situations family and work-related, in relation to illness and therapeutic measures, etc.
In his practical medical work with nervous patients, K.G. Jung noted that "besides many individual differences There is also a typical difference in the human psyche, and above all two sharply various types, which I called the type of introversion and the type of extroversion.
Every person has both mechanisms, extraversion and introversion, and only the relative preponderance of one or the other determines the type.
The introverted point of view could be designated as one which, under all circumstances, tries to place the personality and the subjective psychological phenomenon above the object and the objective phenomenon, or at least to affirm them in relation to the object. The extraverted point of view, on the contrary, places the subject below the object, with the object having the predominant value. The subject is always of secondary importance; the subjective phenomenon seems only to be a disturbing and unnecessary appendage to what is happening objectively."
That is, when the orientation towards the object and towards objective data outweighs to the point that the most frequent and most important decisions and actions are determined not by subjective views, but by objective relationships, then we speak of an extroverted attitude. If this happens all the time, then they speak of an extroverted type. The extroverted type takes into account the reality of his subjective needs and wants.
"Although the introverted consciousness sees external conditions, it decisively avoids subjective qualifiers.<…>the subjective factor is subject to variability and individual chance. Excessive development of the introverted point of view in consciousness does not lead to a better and more correct application of the subjective factor, but to an artificial subjectification of consciousness, which cannot but be reproached for being “only subjective.”
"I found the predominance of introverted feeling mainly among women. Proverb" Still water- deeply" concerns these women. They are for the most part silent, hard-working, incomprehensible, often hiding behind a childish or banal mask, and often also have a melancholic temperament. They do not shine and do not come forward. Since they are guided primarily by their subjectively oriented emotions, then their true motives remain mostly hidden. Outwardly, they do not stand out harmoniously, they show a pleasant calmness, a sympathetic parallelism that does not want to force the other, influence him or even educate and change him.<…>The attitude towards the object is, if possible, maintained in a calm and safe average state of emotions, between the stubborn restraint of passion and its boundlessness. The expression of emotions therefore remains moderate, and the subject always feels undervalued if he is aware of it.<…>But even a normal type can only guess about what constitutes the actual object of this feeling. Before himself, he expresses his goal and his content, perhaps in a hidden and timidly kept from the eyes of the layman religiosity or in the same poetic form that does not cause amazement, not without a secret ambitious desire to thereby achieve superiority over the object. Women who have children invest a lot in them, secretly instilling in them their passion."
People differ markedly in who they tend to attribute responsibility for their own actions. Psychologists call a person’s tendency to attribute responsibility for the results of his activities to external circumstances or, conversely, to his own efforts and abilities, localization of control or locus of control.
According to the theory of social learning (a cognitive theory of personality of the second half of the 20th century, developed by the American personologist J. Rotter), the social behavior of an individual can be studied and described using the concepts of “behavioral potential”, “expectation”, “reinforcement”, “reinforcement value”, "psychological situation", "locus of control". The basic concept of generalized expectancy in Social Learning Theory is the internal-external “locus of control.”
We see that “according to the theory of J. Rotter, reinforcement contributes to the formation of the expectation of a certain social behavior, providing the same reinforcement. The expectation of action-reinforcement combinations that has developed as a result of such learning fades away if there is no further reinforcement. The most important parameter of any expectation of the “action-consequence” combination is the subjective attitude towards the influence of one’s own activities on subsequent events. J. Rotter called this phenomenon internal-external locus of control."
J.B. Rotter's locus of control scale, developed in the 60s in the USA, “is based on two fundamental principles.
People differ in where they locate control over events that are significant to them. There are two possible polar types of such localization, or locus of control: external and internal. In the first case, a person believes that the events that happen to him are the result 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 external to internal type, or locus of control.
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 both in case of failures and in the sphere of achievements, and this applies to varying degrees various areas social life. Therefore, to measure the locus of control of a given subject, it is enough to obtain one number - a one-dimensional, linear characteristic that reflects his position on the externality-internality continuum."
“Locus of control is a term by American psychologist Julian Rotter (Rotter, 1966) to refer to the ways (strategies) by which people attribute (attribute) causality and responsibility for the results of their own and others’ activities. It is assumed that different people have a tendency (preference) for a certain type attributions of causation and responsibility. In other words, people can differ greatly in the attributions they make for their own and/or others' successes and failures."
According to the degree of inclination towards these 2 “L.k.” People are classified into internals and externals. More precisely, this is the name given to individuals who receive extreme scores on the internality scale. The terms “internals” and “externals” should not be confused with the consonant terms “introverts” and “extroverts”.
In domestic literature, the term "L.k." is often replaced by the “locus of subjective control”, and the modified Rotter questionnaire is called the “Level of Subjective Control Questionnaire” (abbr. “USK Questionnaire”).
Let us consider the features of the manifestation of external and internal types of locus of control, obtained experimentally and described in the works of researchers.
Features of the manifestation of the type of locus of control: So, internality (internal locus of control) - externality (external locus of control) represent stable structures personality formed in the process of its socialization. “Numerous experimental works that appeared after the creation of the Rotter scale established a connection between various forms of behavior and personality parameters with internality-externality. It turned out that conformist and compliant behavior is more characteristic of people with an external locus of control. Internals, unlike externalities, are less inclined submit to the pressure of others, resist when they feel that they are being manipulated, react more strongly than externalists to the loss of personal freedom. People with an internal locus of control work better alone than under supervision or with video recording. The opposite situation is typical for externalists.
Internals and externals differ in the way they interpret different social situations, in particular, on the methods of obtaining information and on the mechanisms of their causal explanation. Internals seek information more actively and are usually more situationally aware than externals. Thus, prisoners with an internal locus of control know prison rules better. Another study found that patients with internalized locus tuberculosis knew more about their disease and were more interested in treatment options. In this situation (description of an accident), internals attribute greater responsibility to the individuals involved in this situation. A number of other studies have also shown that internals more often resort to dispositional attributions and avoid situational explanations of behavior to a greater extent than externals. Reviews of works by Phares E., Strickland V., Muzdybaeva K. on this issue state that internals show great responsibility and social activity; they, unlike externals, are more consistent in their behavior.
Studies linking internality-externality with interpersonal relationships have shown that internals are more popular, more benevolent, more self-confident, and more tolerant. Literary data indicate a connection between high internality and positive self-esteem, with greater consistency between the images of the real and ideal self. Internals were found to have a more active position in relation to their health than externals: they are better informed about their condition, take more care of their health, and seek preventive care more often.
Numerous studies indicate a connection between external locus of control and psychopathology. Externality correlates with anxiety. A number of authors report a connection between externality and mental illness, often with schizophrenia and depression. Among hospitalized patients, externality correlates with symptom severity. Externality was associated with suicidal tendencies measured using special scales.
In a number of studies, features of the locus of control are associated with reactions to psychotherapy. Thus, internals prefer non-directive methods of psychotherapy, while externals are subjectively more satisfied with directive, behavioral methods (for example, systematic desensitization).
All this gives reason to believe that the selection personal characteristics, which describes the extent to which a person feels like an active subject of his own activity, and to what extent he feels like 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 in particular applied psychology personality. In our opinion, 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."
"Externality - internality manifests itself primarily in the attribution of social responsibility. The attribution of responsibility for success and failure is different for externals and internals. Externals tend to attribute responsibility to external factors, even to the point of complete fatalism. Failure is blamed only on the situation: the difficulty of the task, the lack of time to solve it , interference, etc. Externals often have an underestimated or overestimated level of aspirations, depending on the external assessment to which they are focused. They become more active after failure and become less active after success. In addition, externals do not have enough faith in themselves and in the achievability of their goals , outlining goals that are not adequate to their capabilities, but at the same time they are content with close and insignificant successes, short-term goals.
Interans, on the contrary, take full responsibility upon themselves, often even going too far, seeing the reason for failure only in their own shortcomings. They have an average level of aspirations, which does not depend on their self-esteem. Internals increase activity after success and decrease it after failure, which frustrates them. They strive for a solution difficult problems. Success in this case evokes in them positive self-esteem emotions, which have a motivating function."
“A person with an external locus of control believes that his successes and failures are regulated by external factors, such as fate, luck, chance, influential people and unpredictable environmental forces. A person with an interval locus of control believes that his successes and failures are determined by his own actions and abilities.
Externals are characterized by conformal and dependent behavior. Internals, unlike externals, are not inclined to subordinate and suppress others, and resist when they are manipulated and tried to deprive them of degrees of freedom. Externals cannot exist without communication; they work more easily under supervision and control. Internals function better in solitude and in the presence of the necessary degrees of freedom.
Externals are more likely to have psychological and psychosomatic problems than internals. They are characterized by anxiety and depression, they are more prone to frustration and stress, and the development of neuroses. A connection has been established between high internality and positive self-esteem, with greater consistency between the images of the real and ideal “I”. Internals show a more active position in relation to their mental and physical health than externals.
Externals and internals also differ in the ways of interpreting social situations, in particular, in the methods of obtaining information and in the mechanisms of their causal explanation. Internals prefer greater awareness of the problem and situation, greater responsibility than externals; in contrast to externals, they avoid situational and emotionally charged explanations of behavior."
"The results of K. Muzdybaev's study show that there is a positive correlation between internality and the determination of the meaning of life: the more a subject believes that everything in his life depends on his own efforts and abilities, the more often he finds meaning in life and sees its goals. Externalities distinguished by increased anxiety, concern, less tolerance towards others and increased aggressiveness, conformity, less popularity. However, there are still few comprehensive studies on the connection between locus of control (level of subjective control) and delinquency in real behavior in our country and abroad."
Mashkov V.N. in his article reveals the following qualities of workers with internal - external types of locus of control: “Characteristic features of internals are emotional stability, moral normativity, gullibility, rich imagination, cordiality, sophistication, sociability and great willpower. Workers who are characterized by such localization of control are more responsible, consistent in achieving goals, prone to introspection, sociable, independent. They are more productive in decision-making situations and situations involving risk, they show a greater willingness to delay immediate pleasure in order to achieve a distant, but more valuable good. Internals to a greater extent than Externals believe that hard work is likely to lead to high productivity, and high productivity, in turn, to high “rewards.” Their overall job satisfaction is significantly higher than that of externals.
The tendency for externals to localize control is associated with such personality traits as irresponsibility, lack of confidence in their abilities, and the desire to again and again postpone the implementation of their intentions. In general, they are more characterized by suspicion, anxiety, depression, aggressiveness, conformism, dogmatism, authoritarianism, unprincipledness, cynicism, and a tendency to deceive. Externals' leadership style is more directive and often based on negative sanctions" .
“Of course, there is no purely internal or external orientation of the subject, since every person contains elements of each of them. We can only talk about their various combinations, which determine the direction of the general “field” of the locus of control, representing a multidimensional, ambiguous motivational and semantic formation, characterizing the vector of social orientation of the individual and corresponding to the highest level of personal structure."
"Locus of control is not a diagnosis, it is a value, although relatively stable, but capable of changing throughout life. What influences the formation of an internal locus of control? In addition to economics and legal protection, the family situation plays a role. If parents are consistent in terms of discipline, clearly express their love for the child and try to instill in him the habit of being responsible for himself - the child will most likely have an internal locus of control. And for children of authoritarian, strict and inconsistent parents (from whom you do not know what to expect - rewards or punishment) - an external one "Those who find themselves in responsible work with immediately noticeable results of work can acquire an internal locus of control. And, finally, the last (and most reliable way) to begin to be responsible for your life is to simply begin to be responsible for your life."
"Locus of control is the most important integral characteristic of self-awareness<#"justify">1.3 Concept, types of anxiety. Features of the manifestation of anxiety in children 5-6 years old
Emotions and feelings are a reflection of reality in the form of experiences. Various forms of experiencing feelings (emotions, affects, moods, stress, passions, etc.) collectively form the emotional sphere of a person.
"There are such types of feelings as moral, intellectual and aesthetic. According to the classification proposed by K. Izard, fundamental and derivative emotions are distinguished. Fundamental ones include: 1) interest-excitement, 2) joy, 3) surprise, 4) grief-suffering , 5) anger, 6) disgust, 7) contempt, 8) fear, 9) shame, 10) guilt."
"The rest are derivatives. From the combination of fundamental emotions arises such a complex emotional condition, as anxiety, which can combine fear, anger, guilt, and interest-excitement."
For the first time, Z. Freud identified and emphasized the state of anxiety. He characterized this state as emotional, including the experience of expectation and uncertainty, a feeling of helplessness. This characteristic indicates not so much the components of the condition in question, but rather its internal causes.
None psychological problem has not undergone such ups and downs in its study as the problem of anxiety. If in 1927 The Psychological Abstract contained only 3 articles, then in 1960 - already 222, and in 1995 - more than 600. In Russian psychology, the period of active research on anxiety occurred in the 1970s - early 1990s. Despite a large number of research, one would assume that the subject matter designated by this term has a clear and generally accepted definition. However, both in psychiatry and psychology, we are faced with a wide range of opinions in the definition of anxiety.
For a fairly complete analysis, it is of fundamental importance to clarify some theoretical and methodological provisions. As shown by many researchers, first of all, it is important to have a clear conceptual distinction between the concepts of anxiety as a state and anxiety as a personality trait.
P. Tillich wrote that “first of all, the following can be stated about the nature of anxiety: anxiety is a state in which being is aware of the possibility of its non-existence. That same statement is more short form It would sound like this: anxiety is the existential awareness of non-existence. The definition “existential” here indicates that anxiety is not generated by abstract knowledge of non-existence, but by the awareness that non-existence is part of a person’s own existence.”
It is advisable to begin studying the problem of determining the essence of anxiety with the etymology of the concept “anxiety”. "It is believed to have an Indo-Germanic root, angh. In Greek it appears in the word ????, meaning 'to press tightly', 'to choke'. Relevant Latin words also contain the root angh. In Tesarius Latin language(Thesaurus latinae linguae) we encounter words such as ango, angor, anxius, anxietas, angina, which contain the meaning of “limitedness”, “compression”.
In German, the idea of "narrowness" and "compression" can be seen in the words eng and bange - as well as in the word Angst.
If you look at the Oxford Dictionary in English, then we have anxiety (anxiety, uneasiness), anxious (anxious), anguish (suffering) and anger (anger). In addition, there are also relevant meanings: ange - suffering, grief, misfortune; anger - suffering, regret; anguish - excruciating, oppressive physical pain or mental suffering; anxious - mental concern about an unknown event.
IN various languages The common features of this group of words are clearly visible, but the differences are also visible.
The German word Angst, the most significant word from a pathopsychological point of view, means a degree of fear that is far from what is denoted by the English word anxiety.
Some authors use the words Schreck and Fürcht, suffering, fear, apprehension, terror, fright, numbness, confusion as German equivalents of anxiety, although these words are more suitable for expressing more destructive emotions than anxiety.
<…>It can be assumed that the concept of anxiety (anxiety) has become familiar to many because of its leading position in existential philosophy, the founder of which was S. Kierkegaard and which was widely disseminated by theologians such as P. Tillich, and philosophers such as M. Heidegger, K. .Jaspers and J-P. Sartir.<…>S. Kierkegaard, introducing the concept of fear (Angst) as existential fear, speaks not about fear of something specific, but about fear as an inevitable anxiety (anxiety) that underlies human existence and rooted in original sin.<…>IN late XIX century, the concept, which was expressed by the word Angst, relates more to involutional melancholy than to what later came to be called anxiety neurosis. K. Wernike (1906) coined the term "anxiety psychosis", which later became known as " anxious depression", or "anxious melancholy".
In 1909, E. Kraepelin described Angst as a combination of unpleasant sensations with internal tension, including the whole bodily and state of mind. He listed his many external manifestations: Moaning, running away, dizziness, feeling weak, trembling, sweating, etc. This author states that Angst occurs without any stimulus known to the sufferer. If Angst as a working term was used by K. Wernike to refer to anxiety psychosis, then by S. Freud (1895) it was used to describe the subjective feeling of anxiety associated with visceral disorders (Angst-nevroses)<…>in terms of 10 main traits: 1) general irritability; 2) anxious anticipation; 3) acute fear (Angst); 4) various combinations of points (1, 2, 3); 5) nightmares; 6) dizziness; 7) phobias; 8) disorders of the digestive tract; 9) hysterical manifestations; 10) symptoms may be chronic and accompanied by mild anxiety.
<…>In 1929, E. Jones drew attention to related concepts - anxiety, fear, dread, fright, panic and apprehension - and stated that in pathopsychology the term "neurotic anxiety" is widely used to designate a special kind of phenomenon that can be separated from phenomena grouping around the concept of "fear". He then described differences including the disproportion between external stimulus and response and the disproportion between bodily and mental manifestations.
In French, P. Janet (1892) was the first to propose that a diffuse emotional disorder be classified as angoisse, and anxiútú be considered a vague but permanent state. Following P. Janet, P. Pishon (1939) gave a more precise definition. According to him, angoisse is a process in which intense and acute mental suffering is synchronized with subjective feelings of throat constriction, tachycardia and other visceral disturbances. Anxiútú he describes as chronic mental condition, in which there is discomfort of neurovegetative origin.
H.Ey (1951) wrote a large and informative work on pathological anxiety, which he begins by recognizing the differences implicit in the terms: angoisse, which is an emotional disturbance experienced in the face of impending danger and characterized by bodily phenomena, and anxiútú, which is a more general affective condition. But in a note to the work he notes that he will use anxiútú and angoisse undifferentiated.
F.Baruk (1952) develops ideas about the different types of anxiútú, which he considers an all-encompassing term, considering angoisse as less important. Like many other researchers, he sees the difference between anxiútú and fear (pern) in that the latter is caused by some obvious and provable danger and disappears when the danger passes.
The Spanish point of view is most fully represented by J. Ibor (1980) and is close to the French: with angustia (angoisse), the affective side of the violations dominates, and with ansiedad (anxiútú) the psychological side; the first is more static, the second contains movement, a feeling of restless anticipation.
Although Auden called the modern era "the age of anxiety", authors such as T. Sabrin (1957), C. Rycroft (1995), believe that the many different interpretations of anxiety, available in both the psychological and psychiatric literature, indicate the absence a clear idea of the nature of this phenomenon."
"The versatility and semantic uncertainty of the concept of anxiety in psychological research is a consequence of its use in different meanings. This term denotes both a hypothetical “intermediate variable” (C. Huii, 1945) and a temporary mental state that arose under the influence of stress factors (O. Mowrer, 1940; B. Basselman, 1940; M. Basowitz, 1964; R. Lazarus, 1970; H. Delgaro, 1971; Ch. Spielberger, 1955; R. May, 1979), and frustration of social needs (H. Sullivan, 1953; J. Lindgren, 1956; R. May, 1979), and personality trait (R .Cattel, 1961;H.Eysenck, 1975).
<…>The greatest difficulties arise when distinguishing between anxiety and fear. Some authors consider them as synonyms (G. Lindzey, E. Aronson, 1968; C. Izard, S. Tomkins, 1966; E. Levitt. 1971), others try to define them as mutually subordinate states (X. Delgado, 1971; O. Mower. 1936). Most authors note that anxiety and fear are different phenomena. Some works (R. Cattell, 1972) identify differences between anxiety and fear across a whole range of psychological, physiological and biological indicators. However, we come across statements that if a subject experiences fear, then he experiences the need for immediate action (escape from the situation or an attempt to overcome it), showing undifferentiated activity (S. Epstein, 1972; Ch. Spielberger, 1972), rather characteristic of a state of anxiety . There is also a point of view according to which fear is an innate reaction to danger, and anxiety is acquired. More common is the distinction between states of anxiety and fear, based on an analysis of the source and direction of anxiety. According to one point of view, fear is considered as a reaction to a specific and directly perceived danger, and anxiety as an “unresponsive” reaction. It occurs when experiencing a threat, despite the absence of real danger signals in situations of uncertainty and uncertainty.<…>that a state of anxiety is experienced in cases where objective conditions are not threatening - the danger is unknown, but possible. This allows us to identify a clear differentiating feature - inconsistency, inadequacy this state current situation.
Equally important for understanding anxiety as a mental state is its differentiation from stress. In the works of some authors (A. Carron, 1971), the state of anxiety and stress are used as synonyms. This is apparently due to the fact that researchers of the problem of stress moved away from the initial understanding and began to use it to characterize the characteristics of an individual’s condition in extreme conditions at the physiological, psychological and behavioral levels the concept of anxiety (R. Lazarus, 1970). To understand the nature of these states special meaning has the characteristic of stress from the extreme factors that cause it.
When analyzing the state of anxiety and stress, we must note the differences between the characteristics of anxiety as an emotional state and the stressors that cause it. Particular attention should be paid to the concept of threat as a psychological reality. It is important to note that situations that are objectively recognized as stressful are assessed by most people as threatening. However, whether or not they are such depends primarily on subjective assessment. In addition, even situations classified as safe may be regarded by individuals as potentially threatening.
<…>The proposed characteristic of the state of anxiety allows us to more clearly determine the relationship between its content and traditional understanding anxiety as a relatively stable individual property.
In the literature it is designated differently:
- · Anxiety as a personality trait (in some sources - character);
- · Tendency to anxiety;
- ·Anxiety as a disposition or trait.
The most common is the idea of anxiety as a stable property, suggesting an increased tendency to experience a state of anxiety (R. Cattell, 1961). Some authors (B. Ruebush, 1963) consider anxiety as a chronic emotional state. It is assumed that in this case the individual is constantly anxious, in all situations. However, such cases are more likely to relate to pathology.
Anxiety as a personality trait can mean a motive or an acquired behavioral disposition that predisposes the individual to perceive a wide range of objectively safe circumstances as containing a threat, prompting him to respond to them with a state of anxiety, the intensity of which does not correspond to the objective danger (H. Heckhausen, 1986).
<… >According to a number of authors, anxiety can be represented not as a personality trait that manifests itself in a wide range of conditions and situations, but as a choice of situational behavioral traits that determine the intensity of anxiety in different circumstances (J.Sarason, 1972; N.Endler, 1974; M. Zuckerman, 1976).<…>From this point of view, anxiety as a trait represents an individual response to a strong internal stimulus, created in turn by situational stimuli.
In developing the theory of introversion and extraversion by H. Eysenck (1975), J. Gray (1978) suggested that there is a relationship between the state and personal qualities. According to J. Gray, extroverts are more likely to be dominated by positive reactions than by negative reinforcement. Therefore, extroveters strive to satisfy desires and are insensitive to negative reinforcement. As for introverts, they react more strongly to negative reinforcements and less to positive ones. This response pattern makes introverts more prone to anxiety compared to extroverts. However, as RHoehn-Saric (1981) writes, increased level Personality anxiety can be found in representatives of any personality type."
"One of the main components of anxiety is worry. Since anxiety is associated with uncertainty, anxious individuals tend to express worry and form anxious expectations. Expectations are ambivalent. As an individual's awareness of potential danger increases, he becomes more anxious, but at the same time the likelihood of that the event will take him by surprise and he will be completely in the grip of anxiety." .
“With an objective approach, in order to distinguish fear from anxiety, it is necessary to decide whether this reaction is an adequate, rationally aimed at saving response to a real, unconditional danger, or whether there is a disproportion between the stimulus and the reaction.
It is proposed to use behavioral response, repetition, and chronological sequence as criteria for differentiating anxiety and fear (Zetzel, 1955; May, 1950; Kempinski, 1998).
The psychological problem of anxiety has another aspect of research - establishing the difference between normal, rational anxiety and pathological, neurotic anxiety.
Philosophers and existentialist psychologists view anxiety as an integral part of human life, and neuroticism as a phenomenon that arises on its basis due to frustration in self-affirmation (Kierkegaard, 1993; Tillich, 1995). Freud (1986) sees the difference in the fact that nervous anxiety is a reaction to an external threat, while neurotic anxiety is a reaction to some kind of “motivating demand.” Horney (1993) emphasizes that general anxiety is an expression of human helplessness in the face of a world of real danger, while neurotic anxiety is a consequence of repressed hostility. Mau (1990) argues that in neurotic anxiety there is a blocking of consciousness that makes the individual more vulnerable to threat and thus increases neurotic anxiety.
"According to I. Ramzy and W. Wallerstein (1958), there is an idea that pain and fear give rise to anxiety. They believe that there is a close connection between the initial pain and fear, on the one hand, and the nature and level of subsequent anxiety, on the other ". Researchers have often equated the concepts of fear and anxiety or separated them inappropriately. "In theory, as many authors emphasize, the difference between anxiety and fear is simple:
Fear is a reaction to a specifically existing threat;
Anxiety is a state of unpleasant foreboding for no apparent reason (the reason exists only in the human mind).
But when analyzing a specific case of stress state, it is quite difficult to establish this difference. It is often very difficult to say whether an observed reaction is fear or anxiety, or whether there is more of it - fear or anxiety, or at what point fear turns into anxiety and vice versa."
"The second believe that anxiety has a purely physiological nature of origin (Blau, 1955); others emphasize that the essence of anxiety is alertness and vigilance, which is based on the instinct of self-preservation (McDougall, 1968; Bazowitz and Drew 1955); the fourth - the primary source of anxiety is seen in features of the course of intrauterine development and birth trauma (Rank, 1924; Flescher, 1955; Goldstein, 1957; Grineiker, Feudor, 1996); fifth, attribute the genesis of anxiety to childhood cognitive development (Piaget, 1954; Flavell, 1963; Bower, 1947; Lewis , 1978, etc.)".
"Conventionally, the differences between anxiety and fear can be represented as follows: 1) anxiety is a signal of danger, and fear is a response to it; 2) anxiety is more of a premonition, and fear is a feeling of danger; 3) anxiety is more exciting, and fear - inhibitory effect on the psyche. Anxiety is more typical for persons with choleric, fear - phlegmatic temperament; 4) anxiety stimuli are more general, vague and abstract in nature, fear is more definite and concrete, forming a psychologically closed space; 5) anxiety as the expectation of danger projected into the future, fear as a memory of danger has its source mainly from past traumatic experiences; 6) despite its uncertainty, anxiety is more rational (cognitive), and fear is an emotional, irrational phenomenon. Accordingly, anxiety is more likely left-hemisphere, and fear - a right-hemisphere phenomenon; 7) anxiety is social, and fear is an instinctively conditioned form of mental response in the presence of a threat." Anxiety and fear have the same basis in the form of a feeling of restlessness, and the differences outlined above do not take into account transitional states.
N.D. Levitov, K.E. Izard point out that fear cannot be equated with anxiety.
“Fear is a mental state associated with a pronounced manifestation of asthenic feelings: anxiety, restlessness, etc. in situations of threat to the biological or social existence of an individual and aimed at the source of real or imaginary danger.”
K.E. Izard identifies fear as a separate category: a very specific, specific emotion, distinct from the phenomenon of anxiety, noting that anxiety is a combination of emotions, and the emotion of fear is only one of them.
K. Horney writes: “Anxiety can be hidden behind feelings of physical discomfort, such as palpitations and fatigue; behind numerous fears that outwardly appear rational or justified; it can be a hidden force that pushes us to drink or plunge into all sorts of states of confusion.” .
"In the works of many researchers (Rank, 1924; Cuttu, 1961; Klein, 1948; Walter, 1968; Goldstein, 1957; Bazowitz, 1955; Carre, 1962; Flescher, 1955; Sullivan, 1953), thanks to the work of Bowlby (1960) and Spitz (1965), there is a tendency to look for the origins of anxiety in the experience of inadequate functioning of the individual, accumulated by the child during the establishment of his first connections with his mother, as well as during weaning (Bowlby, 1960; Bender, 1950; Cattell and Scheier, 1961). Some authors see the preconditions development of anxiety in violations of interpersonal contacts with parents and “significant others” (Mowrer, 1950; Horney, 1993; Fromm, 1994; Blau and Hulse, 1956).
The analysis showed that many researchers of this problem believe that early anxiety is a prototype of a further anxiety reaction. This means not simply reproducing the original response pattern, but activating the original predisposition. There are many factors causing concern, but the threat retains its original essence. In this case, it is fair to assume that anxiety has a certain single source, which has two components - the situation and its representation in consciousness.
The child is not able to identify the object, he senses danger and reacts organismically, while both his perception and reactions are more biological than psychological processes. The infantile nature of the origin of anxiety explains the source of the feeling of helplessness inherent in the affect of anxiety.
Anxiety also occurs when defense mechanisms are weakened or when a neurotic symptom is eliminated. In this regard, an assumption arises about the existence of anxiety in a latent form, since if it is an affect, then “unconscious” or “free-floating” anxiety can be considered a potential formation or some kind of “predisposition”.
“It is a well-known truth that anxiety is a universal experience that is essential to survival, and children are no exception, although their anxiety can be expected to differ from that of adults, reflecting immaturity of the central nervous system, inexperience and a more limited, more secure social ecology"
In the monograph R. Noyes and R. Hoehn-Saric (1998) described it as follows: “Anxiety is one of the universal conditions and, as such, is an integral part of human life. Anxiety performs the function biological system warning that is activated by a hazard. Anxiety also arises as a result of the loss of a significant object or intrapsychic conflict, namely, the conflict between the needs of the subject and the requirements of the environment or between conflicting value systems. Anxiety is a negative emotion that is associated with bodily discomfort. Unlike depression, anxiety is a reaction to threat and is focused on the future. The threat can be danger or lack of support, the unknown. Normal anxiety prepares the individual for a defensive response. This level of anxiety allows you to cope with an unpleasant situation, whereas high level Anxiety has a weakening and even disorganizing effect on the human psyche. Anxiety is abnormal when its intensity and duration are disproportionate to the potential harm, and when it occurs in a neutral situation or in a situation that does not contain an objective threat."
IN modern psychology There are a large number of terms used to describe the concepts of anxiety and anxiety.
“Anxiety is an individual psychological feature that manifests itself in a person’s tendency to frequent and intense experiences of anxiety, as well as a low threshold for its occurrence. It is considered as a personal formation and/or as a property of temperament caused by the weakness of nervous processes.” In psychology, anxiety is understood as a person’s tendency to experience anxiety, i.e. an emotional state that arises in situations of uncertain danger and manifests itself in anticipation of an unfavorable development of events.
So, anxiety is an emotional state, expressed in increased emotional tension, accompanied by anxiety, fears that interfere with normal activities or communication with people, and in many foreign studies it is close to the emotion of fear or is considered identical to the reaction of fear.
Prikhozhan A.M. indicates that “anxiety is distinguished as an emotional state (anxiety) and as a stable trait, an individual psychological feature, manifested in a tendency to frequent and intense experiences of anxiety without sufficient grounds - anxiety itself (R. Cattell, I. Sheir, Ch. Spielberger, Yu. Khanin and others).
Sustained anxiety is divided into covering a wide range of objects - “general”, “generalized”, and manifesting itself in a relatively narrow area - “specific”, “private” (school, exam, interpersonal, etc.). The latter in a number of works is also differentiated into “adequate”, reflecting a person’s ill-being in a particular area, or anxiety itself, as a stable expectation of failure, a premonition of danger in areas of activity that are favorable for the individual (L.I. Bozhovich, V.R. Kislovskaya, A.M. Parishioner) .
“Since anxiety strongly depends on the situation, the conclusion suggests itself about the connection of this behavioral indicator with specific situations. To substantiate this conclusion, questionnaires were developed to describe a situation such as test tests (fear of exams). Another confirmation can be the assessment of the state experienced in some real situation anxiety. The latter method better reflects the temporary motivational state than questionnaires that describe many or one class of imaginary situations. Spielberger developed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaire (C.D. Spielberger, R.L. Gorsuch, R.E.Luchene, 1970)" .
A certain level of anxiety is a natural and obligatory feature of an individual’s active activity. Each person has their own optimal or desired level of anxiety - this is the so-called useful anxiety. A person’s assessment of his condition in this regard is for him an essential component of self-control and self-education. However, an increased level of anxiety is a subjective manifestation of personal distress.
Manifestations of anxiety in different situations not the same. In some cases, people tend to behave anxiously always and everywhere, in others they reveal their anxiety only from time to time, depending on the circumstances. “The normal (optimal) level of anxiety is considered as necessary for effective adaptation to reality. An excessively high level is a maladaptive reaction, manifested in a general disorganization of behavior and activity.
The complete absence of anxiety in a person is also understood as maladaptive. In accordance with this, in line with the study of anxiety, insensitivity to real adversity is also considered as a phenomenon that impedes normal adaptation and, just like persistent anxiety or excessive anxiety interfering with normal development and productive activity."
Situationally stable manifestations of anxiety are usually called personal and are associated with the presence of a corresponding personality trait in a person (the so-called “personal anxiety”). This is a stable individual characteristic that reflects the subject’s predisposition to anxiety and presupposes his tendency to perceive a fairly wide “fan” of situations as threatening, responding to each of them with a certain reaction. As a predisposition, personal anxiety is activated by the perception of certain stimuli that are regarded by a person as dangerous, threats to his prestige, self-esteem, and self-esteem associated with specific situations.
Situationally variable manifestations of anxiety are called situational, and the personality trait exhibiting this kind of anxiety is called “situational anxiety.” This state is characterized by subjectively experienced emotions: tension, anxiety, concern, nervousness. This condition occurs as an emotional reaction to a stressful situation and can vary in intensity and dynamic over time.
Individuals classified as highly anxious tend to perceive a threat to their self-esteem and functioning in a wide range of situations and react very intensely, with a pronounced state of anxiety
Behavior is elevated anxious people in activities aimed at achieving success, has the following features:
Highly anxious individuals react more emotionally to messages about failure than low-anxious individuals.
Highly anxious people perform worse at work than low-anxious people. stressful situations or in conditions of shortage of time allotted to solve the problem.
Fear of failure - characteristic highly anxious people. This fear dominates their desire to achieve success.
The motivation to achieve success prevails among low-anxiety people. It usually outweighs the fear of possible failure.
For highly anxious people, messages about success are more motivating than messages about failure.
Low-anxious people are more stimulated by messages about failure.
Personal anxiety predisposes an individual to perceive and evaluate many objectively safe situations as those that pose a threat.
A person’s activity in a specific situation depends not only on the situation itself, on the presence or absence of personal anxiety in the individual, but also on the situational anxiety that arises in the individual. this person in this situation under the influence of prevailing circumstances.
Thus, there are two main forms of anxiety in a person (C.D. Spielberger): personal anxiety (as an individual personality trait, reflecting his stable tendency to react to various life situations that pose a threat to his “I” (self-esteem, level of aspirations etc.) increased anxiety and anxiety) and situational anxiety (as a temporary state, manifesting itself, as a rule, only in certain conditions, life situations, which arises as a habitual emotional and behavioral response for this type of situation).
S.V. Khodarev identifies two main forms of anxiety: open and hidden. "The first, in turn, can be divided into the following options:
Unregulated anxiety (generalized) - strong, conscious, manifested by symptoms of anxiety. It is found in everyone age groups and the child is not able to cope with it on his own;
Regulated (compensated) anxiety - children independently develop ways to overcome it. It is more common in primary school and early adolescence;
Cultivated anxiety is recognized and experienced as a valuable quality for an individual that allows one to achieve the desired result. This type of anxiety is most characteristic of older adolescence and early adolescence.
The latent form is much less common than the open form, equally in all age categories.
There are two forms:
Inadequate calmness is expressed in the fact that the child, hiding anxiety from others and himself, develops strong and inflexible methods of defense that prevent the perception of an external threat and the analysis of his own experiences;
Avoiding the situation (extremely rare).
The main reason for anxiety is the child’s increased sensitivity. The style of communication between parents and children is no less important. The most destructive upbringing is in the spirit of hyperprotection (excessive care, an abundance of restrictions, prohibitions, instructions, constant control and restrictions) or democratic symbiotism, when anxious, suspicious parents build extremely close relationships with the child, in which they pass on their behavioral traits to the child.
Often there is a feeling of chronic failure in a child, caused by excessive demands on the part of parents and teachers who do not take into account the abilities, inclinations and interests of the child. The most pronounced manifestations of anxiety are observed in well-performing children, who are distinguished by conscientiousness, self-demandingness combined with an emphasis on grades rather than on the learning process.
A certain role is played by the imposition on the child of interests alien to him, highly valued by his parents (for example, music, sports, etc.), frequent reproaches for the lack of results, causing a feeling of guilt.
Mental and behavioral manifestations of anxiety are presented in table. 1. Various psychosomatic masks of anxiety may also be found in the clinical picture (Table 1).
Table 1. Clinical manifestations of anxiety
"The question about the causes of anxiety is open; currently the prevailing view is that anxiety, having a natural basis (properties of the nervous system), develops during life, as a result of the action of social and personal factors. In preschool and junior school age The main reason is violations of parent-child relationships. In adulthood, T. can be generated by internal conflicts, mainly of a self-esteem nature."
Currently, there is no single point of view on the reasons underlying the formation of anxiety. According to the works of representatives of the dynamic approach and domestic psychologists, the origins of anxiety, as a stable personality trait, lie in the individual’s childhood. The decisive period, according to L.I. Bozhovich, A.V. Zakharova, M.I. Lisina A.M. Parishioner is preschool age. A child’s admission to school causes an increase in his responsibility, a change in social status, and self-image, which, according to A.M. The parishioner, in some cases, leads to an increase in the level of anxiety.
Both domestic and foreign researchers note that it is important to take into account both the specific features of anxiety-forming situations and the whole picture of the various external and internal components of anxiety, which directly affect behavioral manifestations and psychophysiological reactions.
Do you think a person has complete control over the course of his life? Most people answer this question in the affirmative, citing their life plans, aspirations and goals as evidence. However, in the case of various life difficulties, it is difficult for a person to admit his failures. An example is next question: “in order to occupy a certain social status, is it necessary to work hard or wait for favorable circumstances?” Or: “during a family quarrel, who initiates the conflict - your environment or you?” Conventionally, people are divided into two types: the first, in the case of failures, look for their cause in the external influence of various factors, the second - prefer to take responsibility for their destiny upon themselves. In order to give the correct answer to the questions above, you should carefully familiarize yourself with the phenomenon of locus of control.
Locus of control is a generalized subjective expectation of the extent to which a person is able to control the events that happen to him
Locus of control in psychology is a phenomenon that divides all representatives of humanity into two conditional groups s. Representatives of the first group blame various external factors for their troubles. Think about how often you hear from people about inadequate bosses, negative circumstances, bad luck, and others. negative impacts from the external environment. People belonging to the second category are firmly convinced that external stimuli do not have a significant impact on their lives. In various difficulties, they prefer to blame only themselves. It is important to note that such people do not take into account that their difficulties may be caused by the selfish, greedy and other negative actions of the people around them.
As mentioned earlier, representatives of the first group are firmly convinced that their life goals are of little importance. In their opinion, everything is determined by fate, so you shouldn’t “jump out of your pants” and try to achieve the impossible. Representatives of the second category of people believe that perseverance and effort will allow them to achieve their goals no matter what. This division is called the phenomenon of locus of control.
Theory
For the first time this phenomenon was consecrated in his scientific works psychotherapist from America, Dr. J. Rotter. This scientist in his works says that human behavior is based on two polar aspects. One of them is chosen as the main one, after which the individual begins to adhere to the given attitude. Locus of control is divided into two types:
- External type– which is the outer pole. This model of behavior involves shifting the blame for various life difficulties to a fateful combination of circumstances.
- Internal type– which is the inner pole. This behavioral model is characterized as complete control over all actions that can determine the course of life.
It is important to note that locus of control has an important impact on the course of human life.
People belonging to different groups differ in their choice of life position and the productivity of their work. The Rotter locus of control test, developed by the author of this phenomenon, allows you to determine membership in a specific group. Let's take a look at each of them in more detail.
People with an external locus of control are convinced that the events that happen to them depend on their own activity External group
People belonging to this group are firmly convinced that their efforts and efforts will not be able to change their usual way of life. In their opinion, forecasting and planning will not be successful, so they can be postponed to the near future.
Individuals included in the external group expect various gifts from life that can change their lives. Most of these individuals are characterized by such qualities as low self-esteem, causeless fear and anxiety. Reluctance to take responsibility is accompanied by an inability to defend one’s own interests. Experts note that this category of people is characterized by impulsiveness, causeless aggression and a tendency towards depressive disorder. They often give in to excitement and take risky actions without thinking about the possible consequences.
External locus of control is the desire for conformity. This fact is based on experiments and research conducted on the topic of the phenomenon in question. The basis of such studies is the Rotter test. Based on membership in one of the categories, experts formed a focus group. This group included people with overestimated indicators of belonging to the locus of control of both types.
The purpose of this experiment is to identify individuals who are able to resist public opinion and people who agree with it. Each test participant was given a certain financial amount, which was to be used as a bet on personal opinion or the opinions of others. As a result of the experiment, participants belonging to the internal group made bets taking into account their own opinions, despite the presence of confrontation with others. Individuals belonging to the external locus relied on public opinion, without doubting its truthfulness and correctness.
Internal type
Internal locus of control implies responsibility for decisions made and actions taken. According to experts, taking responsibility increases the power of incentives and the desire to achieve your goals. Based on this, we can say that internal locus of control is closely related to emotional stability. A person who adheres to this behavior is ready to “sacrifice” personal comfort in order to achieve the goal. The life motto of such people is that only work can help achieve success.
This type of locus of control allows an individual to defend his own worldview and interests in various situations, from family relationships to politics. In order to become more familiar with this pole, let's look at another scientific study.
Students from one of the American colleges. The focus group included activists from various groups that fight for the rights of the population. The result of this experiment was quite predictable, since most of the subjects belonged to the internal group. The focus group was provided with information about the negative impact of cigarettes on internal organs and systems human body. The internals, having become familiar with this information, made attempts to get rid of their addiction.
Externals did not take any action, counting on magic pills that could solve all the problems that arose. None of the focus group members with this behavior pattern took a single decisive step to resist fate.
People with an internal locus of control believe that they are the ones who create reinforcements for themselves through their behavior and control everything that happens to them. Based on the above information, we can say that the internal locus has a much more beneficial effect on human life. It is this pole that increases labor productivity, brings a person pleasure from the actions performed, and also contributes to the development of resistance to external influences. However, if this pole is overexpressed, there are also negative consequences. Each individual should have only realistic incentives that can be achieved through targeted actions. Desires to change circumstances beyond one's control external influence, can provoke a state of frustration and the development of depressive syndrome.
An objective assessment of one’s own capabilities is closely interconnected with the state of society. That is why overseas researchers pay such close attention to the locus of control. Many foreign countries are characterized by stability in the sphere of law and economics. This leads to the fact that the vast majority of residents of such countries commit various actions, based on internal state. From this we can conclude that the internal pole is not typical for residents of countries with unfavorable social conditions. This can be explained by the fact that in such countries, from actions specific person Global events are rarely affected. The main influence on human life here is exerted by external forces.
It is important to note that the methodology used to determine membership in one of the conditional groups has several interesting nuances. According to its author, locus of control is an unstable value and can change throughout a person's life. Changes in outlook on life can be facilitated by changes in political or economic sphere. Family values also play an important role in this matter.
The educational process involves learning to be independent and take responsibility for all decisions made and actions taken. The methods and severity of parenting are decisive factors in the choice of locus of control.
External locus of control is one of the key concepts in modern psychology. It can be used to determine the degree human activity, autonomy and independence, and it is also considered one of the main personality traits. Exist different types the term we are considering:
- Internal locus of control.
- External.
If we talk about the first type, it represents a person’s ability to be responsible for events in his life and to believe that the results of an individual’s activities depend on himself, and not on external circumstances.
Internal and external locus of control differ quite seriously. The second type is characteristic of those people who tend to place responsibility for everything that happens around them not on themselves, but on the people around them or some circumstances.
To some extent this resembles fatalism. Based on the above typology, a person with an external locus of control is called external, and a person with an internal locus is called internal.
Research
Psychologists have conducted a variety of studies over the years to study what locus of control is. As a result of this, they received very “telling” data.
At the same time, externals, when planning their lives, often cling to memories from the past, while internals, on the contrary, think about the future. However, people who have an external locus of control rarely plan anything at all, because they believe that life will definitely make adjustments to any plans. Therefore, in their opinion, there is no point in wasting time thinking about the future, because it will only be as it should be.
Such people are characterized by a low level of responsibility, lack of self-confidence, anxiety, and sometimes... They also have such traits as a tendency to depression, an inability to defend their position and a lack of life principles.
A person with an external locus often happens, i.e. he is subject to the opinions of others. Psychologists, having conducted a study, found that people with internal LC in important decisions rely on own feelings, and externally – on the opinions of others.
One of the most famous studies was carried out in the 60s of the last century by the scientist Rotter. It was later called “Rotter’s locus of control.” The experiment involved studying the personalities of college students who were civil rights activists. It turned out that the vast majority of students have an internal locus of control.
Another study by the scientist consisted of placing messages on cigarette packs stating the dangers of smoking, and then the cigarettes were distributed to people with different locus of control. In this case, the internals, for the most part, wanted to quit smoking, but the externals did not pay any attention to the inscriptions, because they were sure that what would happen would not be avoided. In general, in terms of health, representatives of an external locus of control are in no hurry to get treatment or go to the doctor, while people with an internal locus strive to take care of themselves and lead healthy image life.
Main characteristics
An individual's internal locus of control usually indicates that its owner has many positive traits. Among them are attentiveness to information, resistance to psychological pressure, the desire to improve oneself, adequate self-esteem, etc.
Types of people and locus of control are very connected, and this is not only about the typology of the individual or the country as a whole, but also, for example, about the family. Parents who strive to teach a child to be responsible and make independent decisions are likely to develop in him a personality with an internal locus of control, and vice versa - the more you instill in a child a belief in fate, the more inconsistent he will grow up.
By the way, in modern psychology there is a technique, and not even one, that helps to acquire an internal locus of control, and at the same time develop as a person and finally learn to take responsibility for one’s actions.
conclusions
So, we can come to the conclusion that the internal locus of control (LOC) is much better and more useful for a person than the external one, since it acts as a certain lever for personal development. People with internal LC are persistent and consistent in achieving goals because they have self-confidence.
It often happens that internals become successful people. Firstly, they are more frank and trust others, and therefore they themselves inspire trust. Secondly, they always strictly follow their goals and are ready to defend their own interests and principles.
Well, and one more thing - it’s worth noting that there is no locus of control in pure form. Each person has both a share of dependence on external factors and a share of self-confidence. Author: Elena Ragozina
Many of us are quite annoyed by control. But I’m sure not everyone thinks about where control comes from and what it represents. Moreover, very few people think about what influences us more as a control - our internal state or external “controllers”.
What is locus of control
So, first, I’ll talk about the concept of locus of control. This is the degree of independence of a person, his activity and independence. As one of the most significant characteristics of a person, locus of control reflects a person’s level of responsibility in achieving any of his specific goals, the level of perception of his responsibility for occurring events and their consequences. At the same time, there is a small (but significant) difference in the loci: external and internal. The fact is that a certain part of the human population in most current situations does not blame itself, not its actions and actions. In this case we are dealing with an external locus. And if a person considers himself to be to blame for everything, then, of course, the locus of control is internal.
In the process of studying the phenomenon of control, many different experimental studies have been carried out. And this is what became clear.
Firstly, it turned out that people with a predominant external locus of control most often react to unforeseen situations with fear and wariness. While individuals with a more developed internal locus perceive the same task more adequately, often even with humor. And when it comes to planning or remembering their lives, the former often turn to the past, while the latter tirelessly look to the future.
Surprising results have also been obtained regarding studies of locus of control and social behavior. People with an external locus adapt, adapt to the opinion of the group, trying to satisfy needs that are far from their own. Others, with an internal locus - assessing the situation more calmly and with restraint, are not afraid to express their point of view and often achieve enviable success through this.
So, people with a developed internal locus of control are distinguished by the fact that:
- They are attentive to others and to information coming from outside. Thanks to this, they structure their behavior more correctly.
- They are little susceptible to attempts to pressure their opinions and behavior.
- Able to strive to improve themselves and their living environment.
- They are able to adequately assess their behavior, their abilities and shortcomings.
Thus, the internal locus accompanies mature individuals, but the external one, on the contrary, interferes with the process of personal maturation.
Probably, many thought that they had already been able to determine which locus predominated in them? Although in fact, it is very difficult to determine this yourself. Try testing yourself: notice how you react to incoming information - with caution or, on the contrary, with interest?
Locus development
In fact, both external and internal loci must be equally developed in a person in order to achieve harmony in human personality. And the development of this very locus of control is primarily influenced by a person’s upbringing in the family. Which is quite natural, because some special personal qualities They begin to vaccinate from a very young age.
Parents need to understand that punishments must be truly deserved and not received because bad mood moms (dads). Don't forget about rewards (by the way, the power of rewards can awaken in a child the desire to do something right in order to deserve more rewards). Praise your child if he really tries. Praise for nothing. But under no circumstances encourage or praise the guilty child. Give him time to comprehend his mistake and feel guilty. The child must learn to understand and think about his actions, thereby learning to behave adequately in society. By correctly distributing measures of restraint and praise, you can successfully raise a person who has the norm of both internal and external control.
Of course, parents can convince the child that he is not to blame for anything, that “the door itself hit him,” but you need to understand that everything must have a golden mean. By attributing obvious guilt to other people or objects, a person deprives himself of some significant share of responsibility and in the future is quite capable of ceasing to understand the relationship between an act and a consequence. And this already leads to the need to contact psychologists.
For example, think about whether it will be bad for your child (and quite possibly for you too) if you keep telling him “Don’t cry, it’s not your fault!”, even if you probably know that the child is crying to be they were sorry and did not punish. You have to pay for everything, both for your mistakes and misdeeds. And the child must learn to understand this from the very beginning. early age. Another thing is to support a child when he is really not to blame for what is happening.
Probably many have encountered the problem of spoiled children. Most often, children who were allowed everything and were never punished for anything grow up to be overly self-confident and arrogant adults, capable of committing actions the consequences of which should be regretted. But such people do not always regret, simply because they do not consider themselves guilty. “That’s how the circumstances turned out.” That is, the child gradually gets used to the fact that with his screams and hysterics he achieves whatever he wants. He transfers this ability to adult life. It's very difficult to find people like this mutual language. They tend to be rude and overconfident. And most importantly, they do not value other people’s work and do not at all strive to put any of their efforts into achieving their goals. According to them, others will do everything for them.
At the same time, it would seem that it is necessary to cultivate in a person a sense of responsibility for his actions. But again, in moderation. Blaming yourself always and for everything is also not an option. If you use this method exclusively in raising a child, there is a huge chance that he will grow up to be a “stuck” citizen, always afraid of everything.
For example, as a child, a boy was forbidden to walk in the yard with the guys; they shouted at home all the time: “Don’t take this! Don't stand rooted to the spot! Move away! Don't interfere! Don't touch it! and so on. The child, getting used to the feeling of danger, has closed himself off, he has no friends, no desires of his own (because he is also not allowed to desire), no confidence in his actions. Whatever he does will most likely (in his opinion) be wrong. This boy, if things continue like this, will grow up to be an extremely shy, insecure and almost certainly very lonely man.
Professional educators Often mention is made of the need for parents to weigh their requests and orders. The child perceives them much more accurately and effectively when given in small, portioned and, most importantly, reasonable quantities.
The indisputable influence of the following factors on the development of one or another type of locus of control in a person has long been proven. Firstly, if a person was brought up and received holistic experience (the parents’ tasks and teachings were consistent with each other and took into account the interests of the child himself), then the level of internal locus noticeably approached the norm. By the way, the level of internal control is also influenced by what kind of child you are in the family. An only child is selfish, as many say, but everything again depends on the behavior of the parents. First-born children also have a moderate level of internal locus, because from childhood they bore at least some responsibility for younger brothers and sisters.
How to achieve balance
Of course, a person with equally developed internal and external loci of control will be in demand. And that’s why many of us want to change, to become better. It is, of course, possible to change the locus of control, but doing so is a little more difficult than developing over time. For an adult, established personality without their own desire to increase or decrease internal or external control, it is even more difficult. And even more so, if you want to change in the shortest possible time, in this case you will have to contact a psychotherapist so that he can help you with special programs.
In a situation of a prevailing external locus (when a person blames everything around him), it is much easier to change and balance loci without outside help and achieve the desired harmony. As for the predominant, or rather, too predominant internal locus, it is several times less common, and achieving harmony on your own in this case is much more difficult.
And yet, what can be done to achieve internal balance without the help of psychotherapists?! It should immediately be noted that the concept of “equilibrium” in in this case cannot be taken literally - according to psychologists, the correct ratio is a certain predominance of internal control over external control, and not their equivalent levels.
So, the first rule that is strongly recommended to be followed is, of course, not to transfer your responsibility onto the shoulders of others. Be responsible for everything yourself and in full. Admitting your guilt and being punished for it (even self-punishment, within reason, of course) is the first confident step towards balancing your internal and external loci.
If you notice a considerable amount of internal locus in yourself and would like to change it, I recommend listening to the following advice:
- Try to understand the meaning of realizing intentions - in order to get something, you need to do something for it. Don't try to take everything at once without giving anything in return. Try to make mutually beneficial transactions in which you satisfy your needs, but also do not infringe on the needs of others.
- Try to observe the actions of others and the reactions of other people to these actions. Try to establish a connection between a person’s action and his reaction to it. Try to understand why people might be angry or offended at you. Try to be more correct in your behavior and communication.
If you have noticed a weakness in yourself to always succumb to the reaction of a group (perhaps a work team or acquaintances), and you want to change this, try to behave as follows:
- Be confident in yourself, in your actions and actions. Try to be less receptive to the group’s opinion; don’t be afraid to show that this opinion does not coincide with yours. But under no circumstances forget to listen carefully to other people’s opinions (after all, every point of view has the right to exist!).
- Try to control yourself - show less negativity towards other individuals.
- Don't be lazy to change your point of view depending on the information you receive. Often, a principled “insistence on one’s own” does not produce positive results, but leads to nervous breakdowns and resentment. Consider what information was presented to you, not who presented it.
Achieving an equilibrium state, of course, is facilitated by the development of one’s intellectual level, the development of one’s own life positions, the definition of personal moral guidelines and principles. In addition to this, and regardless of the prevailing locus of control, I advise you to understand and do the following.
- Harmony should be understood as something achievable and quite close to the current state of a person. Awareness of this and self-conviction of this determines the initial, optimistic step towards self-improvement. Realizing that there are only a few steps left to a state of calm and balance, a person tries to go through these steps faster and more correctly, which leads to good result. Try to find some good quality in yourself. Just not “good” in your opinion, but good in general. For example, you are friendly. And others notice this. Understand that being friendly is good. And being friendly and not afraid of responsibility for your actions is even better.
- A person should set small achievable goals in the process of achieving the big main goal. Completing small goals helps a person feel the usefulness of achievable actions and internal changes in your personality. It is clear that goals and requirements for them will become more complex and piling up as a person grows, which will indicate the improvement of a person.
For example, try setting yourself the following goal: “Today I will not let go of any responsibility!” Fight for justice, defend your point of view, but do not blame others! Tomorrow, set yourself the same goal, but for a week. Gradually, you will get used to evaluating and analyzing yourself and your behavior in such a way as to understand your responsibility. - You need to remember that you cannot put off achieving your goals - achieving harmony is daily work.
- You need to understand that education and self-education is a long process and, in fact, endless. Its results may appear quickly or not for years. Once you achieve balance, you will feel how much your life has improved. The accompanying feeling of satisfaction with yourself and everything you do will be the key to your good mood and sense of self. And an expanded area of interests and self-realization in them will be one of the signs successful work in the field of self-improvement. Your personality, your body and your body will be pleased with yourself and proud. Try to understand that you are a small part of the world, responsible in your own way for everything that happens, but also helpless in your own way. Stop looking for those to blame - not only is it a boring activity, but it is also completely useless. When you see people’s mistakes and ugly misdeeds, take them into account and don’t repeat them. Eradicate this in yourself! Gain new experience!
Each person receives a share of his personality from childhood - from family, acquaintances, educators and teachers. But everyone is equally able to decide what kind of person they want to become. In general, perhaps no one is controlling you in the knowledge of everyone, perhaps you are subjecting yourself to control. And, most likely, internal.
Fight for your “I”, cherish and punish it, developing and learning.
Latest publications
“The moral quest of Kuprin’s heroes using the example of the heroes of the story “The Duel”
Poems by Robert Rozhdestvensky
Where and when did the Cortes appear in Spain?