Stress Levels

Total words: 1679

Research was conducted to determine whether a relationship exists between locus of control (external or internal) and stress levels. To determine this relationship data from 32 participants of professional status was collected from 2 questionnaires. Participants were asked to complete the locus of control scale designed by Rotter (1966) to distinguish between internals and externals and the Professional life stress scale designed by David Fontana (1989). The results were plotted against each other to search for a correlation and there was no evidence found to support the hypothesis, as the correlation coefficient was not significant enough.

Introduction

There have been numerous personality theories including the most notorious ones from Freud and Eysenck. Human behaviour is very complex and it is impossible to understand the differing personality of each other individual. Central to this idea would be the work of Julian Rotter (1966), which emerged out of the social learning theory. This theory now finds itself in the behavioural approach due to the notion of internal versus external control of reinforcement. Rotter's influential locus of control maintains that people develop a generalised expectation about whether events that happen are caused by themselves (internal orientation) or by outside factors such as fate or luck (external orientation). The locus of control was believed to influence the way people interpret events and how they view themselves in terms of self-esteem, stress and motivations. According to Rotter people can be categorized into either having an internal or external locus of control. At the internal end people view their behaviour as under their immediate control. In contrast at the other end, the externals believe that they have little control over events, which are due to factors such luck or people in authority. Subsequently the consequence of an individual's behaviour forms expectancy that the outcome of similar behaviour will be the same. This particular research is attempting to find links between a person's locus of control and stress levels.

Stress is a physiological and psychological response to excessive and usually unpleasant stimuli in the environment. Many stressors are not inherently stressful as there are not just conscious things but unconscious things that occur that will determine whether a stressor will trigger a response known as mediating responses. Beck et al (1985) showed how people who believe they could exercise control over threatening situations were able to respond differently, then people who felt had little control. In other words people who know they can directly influence their behaviour know that continuous worrying could only worsen an individuals anxiety and stress levels. Continuing on from this comes the influential idea of learned helplessness which implies that people who experience a negative situation which was beyond their control transfer the state of emotions onto other situations which are in fact under their control. The research in this report attempts to link passiveness, which is harboured by a state of extreme externality to stress. Similarly Lazarus and Folkmans' (1984) psychological model of stress suggests a person's belief about control is key to whether the feels challenged by life's demands. This model continues to be used as an indication of health related research. The stress faced by professional workers is tremendous .Yet some people are seen to have the ability to stay in control. Much psychological work of stress has been conducted in the workplace and it has been found that almost 50% aren't happy and spent 90% of their time involved with work. A recent study by Schmitz et al (2000) found that people with an internal locus of control reported low stress levels compared with externals reporting high stress levels. Scientific studies have also found that 80% of all health problems are related to stress therefore this shows how important stress is today and how much it influences the way people live their day to day life's.

Hypothesis: People with an external locus of control are more likely to have high stress levels compared to people with an internal locus of control having low stress levels.

Null hypothesis: There is no relationship between locus of control and Stress levels

Method

Participants
32 participants were selected using opportunity sampling because of convenience and time restraints. The sample group were all 18 years and over, of professional status and of mixed nationality and diverse ethnic backgrounds.

Stimuli
The locus of control scale similar to Rotters (1966) I-E scale but consisting of 20 questions and the Professional life stress scale consisting of 24 questions.

Procedure
Participants were approached in their natural setting and asked to complete both the Locus of control scale and the Professional life stress scale. Each participant was made aware prior to that they could discontinue at any time and that their results were confidential. Each participant was then left to complete the questionnaires at his or her own pace.

Results

The researcher, using the standard scoring instructions that came with each questionnaire, compiled the data. The PLSS scores were then plotted against the Locus of control scores on a scatter graph. (As you can see above). At first glance of the graph it would seem that there is a positive correlation between both variables. The scatter of the scores/ points are moderately dispersed away from which would be a regression line therefore showing a correlation. However the Pearson's correlation coefficient of the data revealed there wasn't a significant correlation. The correlation equalling 0.191 ~ 0.2 means that the correlation in fact was extremely low as a correlation needs to be within 0.36 and 1 or -0.36 and -1 of a sample size of 30 to support a correlation between two variables. Therefore any relationship was purely related to chance and the results are not significant enough to support the hypothesis .In this instance we must be in favour of the null hypothesis.

Discussion

The results found from this research, which attempted to find a relationship between the locus of control and the Professional life stress scale failed to do so. There are a number of factors that could explain the results gained. Firstly the design of the locus of control study could be interpreted as in accurate or ineffective. This is firstly because a large number of questions concern the area of Politics. There are few questions for example on interpersonal relationships, which would be a good place to start in measuring locus of control. Nowadays political participation is in a state of decline, which suggests that people are less interested for whatever reasons in politics. Therefore perhaps the locus of control study is no longer in touch with present society.

The importance of social desirability has also placed doubt over the validity of the scale. It is believed that it is socially desirable to possess qualities that internal people will have. Joe (1971) investigated Locus of control scores with social desirability and found a relationship, thus leading to the assumption that people could well be a state of denial therefore in relation to this research it could mean that participants wouldn't answer the questionnaires honestly.

Experimenter influence could affect the reliability of the study as participant's honesty could be questioned. For example if participants felt uncomfortable answering questions in the presence of the experimenter or if they felt pressured to complete the questionnaires quickly when perhaps they needed more time.

The most important limitation of this research was that the results indicated that the participants were not stressed. Majority of participants fell between the mid range score of locus of control and no participants scored over the 45 score for the PLSS. Therefore this study was not a good one to measure stress levels and locus of control if participants weren't stressed. However at the same time it could well mean that people perceive stress at different levels. For example Miller (1979) found that people tend to perceive uncontrollable major events as being more stressful and Cohen et al (1986) found that it is all a mater of personal control. Cohen et al found that cognitive control to be effective as some people are able to use the ability for thought processors to defy the impact of stress and focus on more pleasant thing rather then negative. Kobasa (1919) found that people could handle stress for 3 reasons, Control, commitment and the challenge. He also found that the people who were more stressed had had major life events compared to those with low stress levels having had rare major life events.

Nether less despite the criticisms or the underlying reasons why the participants appeared to not be stressed there is still room for further research. It is true that the workplace is a breeding ground for stress and as we know numerous research has gone into this area. However other factors such as Interpersonal relationships, moving house, racial discrimination and large families can be just, if not more stressful. Therefore further research into locus of control and other stressful factors would seem plausible.

To improve on this study I would look at cross job studies. There are a number of professional jobs that can cause different stressors for example pay, long hours or a personal commitment or feelings that doctors may take home with them.

Testing for gender differences using males and females in the same job and position would make it fairer to find the true relationship between locus of control and stress. More men are in higher professional positions, which could lead to more discrepancies as the higher the position often the more responsibility. Males are also stereotyped as dealing with stress differently for example " keeping it all in". This could indicate why males have more serious health related problems such as high blood pressure and stomach ulcers, perhaps consciously they do not know that they are stressed.

Another limitation is that this research could be viewed as bias and prejudicial to the un educated and working class as only people from professional status were asked to participate.

References

Miller S. M 1979 Controllability and human stress: Method evidences and theory pgs 17, 287 -304

Lazarus, Richard S.1984 Stress, appraisal and coping Springer pub Co: New York pgs 376-436

Rotter, J B. 1966 Approaches to personality theory Methun & Co Ltd : London pgs 79-85

Add a Review for this free essay

Be the first one to review this free Essay

Sticky Note Text....

Welcome! Not a Member? Click here to Join Now!
Log in
Forgot Password?