EXTERNAL–INTERNAL CONTROL

EXTERNAL–INTERNAL CONTROL
J. B. Rotter’s seminal work on external–internal control
has stimulated much theoretical and empirical work in
personality psychology, in general and multicultural
psychology, in particular. Rotter described external-
internal control as a general personality trait of attribu-
tion tendency. Persons with an external locus of control
tend to attribute causes of events and future conditions
to external forces such as other people, society, luck, or
fate. On the other hand, persons with an internal locus of
control tend to take responsibility for life conditions and
believe in their ability to shape their future. Rotter devel-
oped the Internal–External Locus of Control Scale, a
29-item measure that uses a forced-choice format with
two options (internal or external control) for each item.
Multicultural psychologists find the concept of
external–internal control particularly relevant for
studying the experience of racial and ethnic minorities
and other oppressed groups (e.g., women). They theo-
rize that discrimination, oppression, a lack of power,
and cultural beliefs may contribute to minority per-
sons’ endorsement of external locus of control. Such
control attributions may also influence a person’s per-
ceptions, motivation, behavior, and adjustment. For
example, Rotter suggested that internal locus of con-
trol is associated with higher motivation for achieve-
ment, whereas external locus of control is associated
with perceptions of limited opportunity.
Researchers have investigated racial and ethnic dif-
ferences in external–internal control, as well as
within-group differences in locus of control and its
correlates. Racial and ethnic minorities (i.e., African,
Asian, Hispanic, and Native Americans) often exhibit
more external locus of control than European
Americans. Because internal locus of control is
deemed more desirable in mainstream American cul-
ture than external control, racial and ethnic minorities
may be stereotyped as lacking self-confidence, per-
sonal responsibility, and achievement motivation.
However, Derald Wing Sue and David Sue cautioned
viewing external control as universally undesirable,
because of cultural differences in worldview as well
as minorities’ experience with discrimination. In some
cultures, an external locus of control is part of a
worldview about the relationship of people to nature.
Racial oppression and lack of power and opportunity
may also contribute to an external locus of control.
Sue and Sue further defined external–internal con-
trol as having two dimensions: locus of responsibility
and locus of control. In this framework, locus of
responsibility refers to whether individuals attribute life
conditions and consequences to external forces (exter-
nal responsibility) or themselves (internal responsibil-
ity).  Locus of control refers to whether individuals
believe that their fate is determined by others (external
control) or that they can control their future and take
actions to affect outcomes (internal control). In other
words, locus of responsibility is about beliefs in “who
caused it?” whereas locus of control is about “who can
change it?” This multidimensional model results in four
worldviews: (1) internal responsibility, internal control;
(2) internal responsibility, external control; (3) external
responsibility, internal control; and (4) external respon-
sibility, external control. Readers are referred to Sue
and Sue’s discussion of the characteristics of these four
worldviews for multicultural groups and counseling
implications.
—Y. Barry Chung
FURTHER READING
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal ver-
sus external control of reinforcement.  Psychological
Monographs: General and Applied, 80, 1–26.
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2003).  Counseling the culturally
diverse: Theory and practice (4th ed.). New York: Wile