A test of the construct validity of the Health Locus of Control (HLC) scale is presented within the larger framework of Rotter's social learning theory. Self-reported compliance behavior was predicted to relate to the subject's HLC orientation, value toward health, and level of perceived home assistance. In a sample of ambulatory hypertensive patients, a significant two-way interaction effect was calculated between the perceived level of home assistance and the patient's HLC orientation (p = .02). The more internally oriented the patient and the higher the level ofperceived home assistance in complying with the prescribed medical regimen, the greater the level of self-reported compliance behavior.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bohrnstedt GW: Reliability and validity assessment in attitude measurement. In Summers GH (ed): Attitude Measurement. Chicago, Rand McNally, 1970.
2.
Cronbach LJ: Essentials of Psychological Testing, ed 2. New York, Harper & Brothers, 1960.
3.
Cronbach LJ: Test validation. In Thorndike RL (ed): Educational Measurement. Washington, DC, American Council on Education, 1971.
4.
Fass MF: An Experimental Intervention to Increase Family Support for Patient Compliance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health, 1977.
5.
Green LW, Levine DM, Co-Principal Investigators: Health Education Strategies for Hypertension Control . The Johns Hopkins Health Services Research and Development Center. NHLBI Grant #1-R24-HL 17016-01, 1974.
6.
Green LW, Levine DM, Deeds SG: Clinical trials of health education for hypertensive outpatients: Design and baseline data. Prev Med4:417-425, 1975.
7.
Greenwald HJ , Satow Y.: A short social desirability scale. Psychol Rep27:131-135, 1970.
8.
Guilford JP, Fruchter B.: Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, ed 5. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1973.
9.
Hays WL, Winkler RL: Statistics: Probability, Inference and Decision. New York , Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970, vol 2.
10.
Joe VC: Review of the internal-external control construct as a personality variable . Psychol Rep28:619-640, 1971.
11.
Kim J.: Factor analysis. In Nie NH, Hull CH, Jenkins JF, et al (eds): Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, ed 2. 1975, pp 468-514.
12.
Lefcourt HM : Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review. Psychol Bull65:206-220, 1966.
13.
Levine DM, Green LW, Deeds SG, et al: Behavioral and clinical effects of randomized trials of health education with hypertensive patients. Paper in progress, 1978.
14.
MacDonald AP, Jr: Internal-external locus of control change-technics . Rehab Lit33(2):44-47, 1972.
15.
Nunnally JC: Psychometric Theory. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1967.
16.
Pawlicki RE : Locus of control and the effectiveness of social reinforcers. J Genet Psychol125:153-159, 1974.
17.
Phares EJ: Locus of Control: A Personality Determinant of Behavior. Morristown, New Jersey, General Learning Press, 1973.
18.
Roter DL: Patient Participation in the Patient-Provider Interaction: The Effects of Patient Question Asking on the Quality of Interaction, Satisfaction and Compliance . Health Educ Monogr5:281-315, Winter 1977.
19.
Rotter JB: Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. New York, Prentice-Hall, 1954.
20.
Rotter JB: Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement . Psychol Monogr80:1 (whole no. 609), 1966.
21.
Rotter JB: Some problems and misconceptions related to the construct of internal versus external control of reinforcement. J Consult Clin Psychol43:56-67, 1975.
22.
Siegel S.: Non-parametric Statistics. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1956.
23.
Wallston BS , Wallston KA, Kaplan GD, Maides SA: Development and validation of the health locus of control (HLC) scale. J Consult Clin Psychol44:580-585, 1976.
