Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on the self control theory
Essays on the self control theory
Essays on the self control theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on the self control theory
It is important for us humans to know that we must take full responsibility for our actions and maturely deal with any consequences that those actions may lead to. According to Ryon and Gleason (2013), “the first conceptualization of control was developed in 1966 by Rotter,” which is currently referred to as locus of control. Rotter defined locus of control as “the degree to which an individual expects that a contingent relationship exists between one’s behaviors and outcomes” (Ryon & Gleason, 2013). Fournier and Jeanrie reference Rotter’s study by explaining the two types of locus of control: “external control” and “internal control” (as cited in Rotter, 1966, p. 1). The purpose of Rotter’s theory was to examine “what causes reinforcement” whether it be an intrinsic or extrinsic factor (Kormanik & Rocco, 2009). Rotter measured “people’s general control expectancies” by using what is known as the “Internal-External Locus of Control Scale” (Fournier & Jeanrie, 2003).
As stated in the article written by Kormanik and Rocco, “Rotter provided grounded theory on the locus of control construct in a discussion of generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement” (as cited in Rotter, 1966). Internal control of reinforcement refers to the ability to any person can be rewarded by their “own behavior” or their “own relatively permanent characteristics or traits” (Kormanik & Rocco, 2009). While internal control of reinforcement depends on each individual person and situation, external control of reinforcement refers to “factors beyond one’s control” such as “luck, chance, [or] fate” (Kormanik & Rocco, 2009). Through the use of a scale referred to as the “Internal-External Locus of Control Scale,” Rotter was able ...
... middle of paper ...
...he events that occur in my life. Keeping this in mind, I am aware that every single one of my actions has a possible consequence that I must always be prepared for and assume full responsibility for the decisions I previously made.
Works Cited
Fournier, G., & Jeanrie, C. (2003). Locus of control: Back to basics. Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures, 139-154.
Kormanik, M. B., & Rocco, T. S. (2009). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review of the locus of control construct. Human Resource Development Review, 8(4) 463-483.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectations for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1-28.
Ryon, H. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2013). The role of locus of control in daily life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
The Self-Control Theory is self explanatory, for example people with little or no self-control are lazy, impulsive, lose their tempers ea...
Humans thrive from reinforcements, whether they are direct, indirect and have a negative or positive affect. “Moreover, recent formulations of social learning theory suggest that learning occurs through both direct and vicarious behavioral reinforcement” (Brauer, 2012). Thus, seeking approval from one’s peers through involuntary or direct actions. This gives the individual satisfaction in knowing their behavior is reinforced.
Throughout childhood and our adolescent years, we learn to control our emotions, eventually gaining an understanding of how and when it is appropriate to express or suppress those emotions. This technique is referred to as emotional regulation or effortful control and is considered a lifelong endeavor, with early childhood being a crucial time for development (Berger. 2014, p.210) According to Berger, by age 6 signs of emotional regulation are evident with most children being able to become upset or angry without emotional outburst or proud without being narcissistic (Gross,2014; Lewis,2013). Emotional control and delayed gratification are developed using motivation either intrinsic (the joy felt within after achieving something) or extrinsic (the gratification felt after receiving praise or acknowledgment from outside sources) (Berger. 2014, p.214). Unlike intrinsic motivation, because extrinsic motivation requires outside reinforcements to be achieved, once the extrinsic reward stops, so does the behavior; unless it becomes habitual due to intrinsic gratification (Berger,2014, p.214).
Personal responsibility may be perceived in many ways, but it is imperative to understand the relevance of why it must begin with our self. First, one will never develop an attitude of responsibility if they always look for others to complete their task. It is a necessity that one has personal discipline or their efforts to be responsible will prove to be fruitless. Second, being responsible yields great rewards and acting responsible is a clear sign of maturity. A responsible individual looks to no one but self and no matter what the outcome; they are willing to stand by their decisions. (Maltby 2009), “Personal responsibility is concerned with people taking individual accountability for their decisions and actions, together with the outcomes they create and their impacts on others.” (para.1)
Smith, P., Trompenaars, F. and Dugan, S. (1995). The Rotter locus of control scale in 43 countries: A test of cultural relativity. International Journal of Psychology, 30(3), pp.377--400
Control theory, originally known as the social bond theory by Travis Hirschi (1969), focused on an individual’s bond to society and delinquency a result of weak or broken bonds. A later adaption of the theory, by Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990), resulted in a distinctly different theory, self-control theory. Self-control theory attributes delinquency to an individual’s lack of self-control which allows a person to pursue short-term and immediate pleasure. Self-control is said to develop through effective and adequate child rearing and will be examined within this paper. Sykes and Matza (1957) used the social control theory paradigm and developed techniques of neutralization which essentially described a person’s justification for
Behavioral motivation puts emphasis on the idea that a person is motivated to make a decision or perform a task based on the reinforcement received at the end. Essentially, motivation is categorized into two types: intrinsic (internal) and extrinsic (external) motivation (Sincero, 2012). Intrinsic motivation comes for a place of a person’s internal enjoyment of pleasure of completing a goal or task and does not entail any external rewards; for example, a person goes to the gym because they enjoy the way their body feels after a run, not because they lose weight. Conversely, extrinsic motivation involves a person receiving some kind of external reinforcement for task completion. In relation to the gym example, a person goes to the gym because they receive the reward of better health and weight loss. Also, “bigger salary, more job benefits, and high grade are rewards that lead to extrinsic motivation” and “crowds cheering a person and competition are abstract sources of extrinsic motivation (Sincero, para. 4, 2012). As well, negative reinforcement, such as getting fired, failing a class, or getting punished are also sources of extrinsic motivation. The average person is more motivated to complete a task when there is a higher chance of a reward waiting for them upon
Magnavita, J. J. (2002). Theories of personality: Contemporary approaches to the science of personality. New York: Wiley.
First of all, I was highly interested in the concept and various factors that together make up positive reinforcement. I had a premise that I could do some experimental work on the three children for whom I baby-sit during the week after school. They leave school full of energy and it is my job to get them to complete a series of tasks before the end of the evening. I imagined that some positive reinforcement might get them on their way to handling their responsibilities in a timelier manner. My first step was to come up with a specific instrumental response that would produce reinforcement. This took no time at all because by far the most painfully difficult thing for me to do is get the children to sit down and do their homework. I then spoke specifically to each child and asked them what they would rather choose as an after school activity. They named video games, television, and going to play with other neighborhood children. I had expected these types of answers from the children and made them into the positive reinforcers that would be contingent on the children’s performance of the instrumental response; namely completing their homework. I explained to the children that if they behaved and finished their homework, then directly following they could spend an hour doing an activity of their choice.
Stimulus control claims that in order for an individual to effectively function in a given environment they must be able to adequately predict the probable consequences of events and required actions to ensure that their behaviour may be compatible with the environment (Bandura, 1977). Cognitive control describes how emotional responses can be conditioned automatically through two unrelated stimuli which are presented together, the influence of cognitive control is crucial when trying to understand conditioning of individuals (Bandura, 1977). Additionally, Reinforcement control refers to how an individuals behaviour is significantly controlled by the consequences and responses to their behaviour, those which produce positive outcomes are more
Have you ever heard the phrase “I’d rather be lucky than good any day.”? Well if you use this phrase it might mean that you have a more external locus of control. Having an external locus of control means that a person believes their behavior is controlled by luck, fate or God. A person that thinks with an internal locus of control believes that they are personally responsible for their own actions. In this essay, I will go over how I mostly have an internal locus of control but have a little external present in my life as well.
This assessment is intended to determine how people perceive the control that they have over their own life and destinies. A person will have either an internal locus of control or an external locus of control and can have varying degrees of either. A person can also have a balance between the two measures. Someone possessing an internal locus of control believe that they have more personal control over their destinies and people with an external locus of control believe outside forces have more control over their destinies. I scored a 0 indicating that I have a high internal locus of control to the most extreme level. This indicates that I must believe that I have total control over my destiny in all aspects. The implications and rationality
Firstly, the instrumental behavior must reflect an awareness of the relationship between a sequence of actions and the repercussions. Secondly, the outcome has to be considerably desirable at the moment of choice. Goal directed actions arise from the fact that subjects tend to prefer actions because they believe the actions lead to outcomes that are currently appealing. This differs from habitual responding mainly because habitual responding in that case is supposed to have been facilitated by past reinforcement. Whereas habitual responding is independent of the current appeal and associated outcome, Goal directed actions significantly depend on the outcomes’ appeal (Ray J. Dolan, 2013). Goals are primarily considered to be the key influencers of individuals’ actions (Peter M. Gollwitzer, 1996). Based on certain special needs, therefore, goals often lead to various self regulatory and different outcomes as well. It is worth noting that positive and negative incentives are framed differently depending on one’s outcome focus. This means that positive outcome focus leads to the conception of positive incentives in terms of the assurance of favorable outcomes. The positive outcome focus also leads to conceiving of negative incentives in terms of the lack of a positive outcome. On the other hand, a negative outcome focus defines a negative incentive in terms of the availability of
Based on the test results my locus of control is external. According to our text, Individuals who fall into this category do not believe that their future is within their control. They believe that it is more influenced by external forces. I agree somewhat with this assessment of myself. Although I also feel that some portions of our lives can be influenced greatly by our own inner desires and motivations. My interests are also centered on the outside world. This is consistent with the description at the end of the exercise. I thrive in situations where I can be around and mingle with large groups of people. I grew up in a very large family and this helped to shape my personality. However, I do enjoy quiet time and occasionally working on my own.
From 1900 to 1930 there was Psychoanalytic Theory of motivation, which was developed by Sigmund Freud. It looks carefully at the unconscious drives that persuade individuals to act in specific ways. The role of the mind is something that Freud discussed quite often. He believed that mind is in charge of both conscious and unconscious choices based on drive and forces. Unconscious desires inspire individuals to act appropriately. From 1940 to 1960 there was the Drive Theory, which was developed by Clark Hull. This theory explains that all people have four biological needs that are hunger, thirst, sex and avoidance of pain. At a point when any of these needs are denied, an individual is determined to act in a manner that restores a condition of natural balance. From 1948 to 1960 there was Operant Conditioning Theory, which was developed by B.F. Skinner. This theory suggested that those practices that are quickly rewarded are liable to reoccur, while those that prompt unpleasant results are certainly not. All conduct can be clarified through past reinforcements. From 1940 to 1960 there was Field Theory, which was developed by Lewin. This explains that conduct is a capacity of both the individual and the environment. People have needs and objectives that emerge from their knowledge of reality. These objectives cause a strain in the individual until they are achieved. Objectives have worth, power and mental vicinity. An individual plans his conduct as indicated by how important the fancied conclusion is and how capable he feels to reach it. From 1960 to 1990 there was Social Learning Theory, which was developed by Rotter. This theory tells us that behavior is chosen. People tend to choose to engage in behaviors that will lead to the most personally rewarding goals. Individuals can feel in charge of their conduct and the reinforcement they get i.e., having an inward locus of control,