Thesis (M.Sc.)--Acadia University, 1997. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1917. / "A Private Edition Distributed by University of Chicago Libraries." "A Trade Edition is Published by The Psychological Review Company. Princeton, N.J., As Psychological Monograph No. 000." Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1918. / Bibliography: p. 54.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ball State University, 2009. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on Nov. 11, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 134-157).

People feel in control when they effectively alter an external environment, their own behavior, or their own mental state. Past research on control emphasizes the psychological benefits of having environmental control, in which people bring the environment in line with their own wishes. The present research explores self-directed control, in which people adapt to the surrounding environmental context. Environmental control affirms the traditional Western cultural emphasis on an independent, agentic self that separates positively from others. But self-directed control assists an interdependent, contextual self-concept that values merging with and depending on other people. Guided by culturally informed views of the interdependent self and by initial theories on self-directed control (originally "secondary" control; Weisz, Rothbaum, & Blackburn, 1984), the present research develops an individual difference measure of self-directed control. Unlike past views that consider self-directed control a passive alternative to failed environmental control, this report considers how positive, active styles of self-directed control enable people to maintain social bonds. Initial items on the individual difference measure of self-directed control (SDC) reflect field work and re-interpretations of four categories outlined in Weisz, et al. (1984). Exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis reduced the item pool to 21 items that comprise five correlated factors: trusting a higher power: allowing other people to fulfill persona needs; anticipating and adjusting to other people's needs; merging goals with others; and accepting that bad times will improve on their own. Over 2,300 participants in seven diverse samples completed the SDC scale. The scale meets traditional psychometric standards. It correlates with measures of interdependence and collectivism and is orthogonal to measures of environmental control, as predicted. The scale is uncorrelated with self-esteem. Women and Hispanics, two groups for whom role requirements and cultural background emphasize interdependence, score higher than men and Anglos, respectively. A diary study confirmed that the SDC scale predicts daily reports of self-directed control, and demonstrated that social situations support self-directed control. The results support the social nature of self-directed control, reveal the importance of trust in this type of control, and suggest that self-directed control may not engage conscious self-efficacy.

There is a need for an objective measure for matching psychiatric patients with outpatient community settings. The Current Behavior Inventory has been developed to meet this need. This study uses data from 50 patients at two outpatient settings in New York State to examine the reliability and validity of the CBI. The effect of a measure of likeability is also examined. Four measures were used: the Current Behavior Inventory-Clinician Form, to identify the skills demonstrated by the patients in the study; the Current Behavior Inventory-Provider Form, to identify the skills required by the settings and those skills that enhance success at the settings; Level of Success-Ranking, a forced ranking of the 25 patients from each setting used in the study; and Likeability, a 5 point Likert-type scale. Ten patients were rated by independent raters to examine interrater reliability. The percent of the skills identified as required by the settings that were demonstrated by each patient was calculated and the percent of the skills identified as enhancing success by the settings demonstrated by each patient was calculated. Significant correlations were found between the percent of the required skills demonstrated by patients and Level of Success-Ranking, and the percent of enhancing skills demonstrated and Level of Success-Ranking. There was no significant correlation between Likeability and Level of Success-Ranking. There was a significant correlation between the skill measures and Likeability. The findings suggest that the CBI is useful in predicting success for patients in these settings. The interrater reliability was shown to be good.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.