Oklahoma State University, 011 Murray Hall, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA.
J Fluency Disord. 2011 Sep;36(3):231-45. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2011.03.001. Epub 2011 Mar 30.
The concepts of locus of control and locus of causality are similar and refer to the degree to which a person perceives daily occurrences to be a consequence of his or her own behavior. Locus of control is considered to be a unidimensional construct indicating an inverse relationship between the polls of internality and externality. The locus of control is generally determined by using questionnaires with a limited number of items. Locus of causality is considered to be a two-dimensional construct where Origin and Pawn values, which are similar to internality and externality, respectively, are not necessarily inversely related. Locus of causality is determined by content analysis of freely spoken or written narratives. In the current study Origin and Pawn scores were obtained from twenty adults prior to and following a three-week intensive stuttering treatment program. Brief narratives written by the participants were analyzed to obtain Origin and Pawn values. These scores were compared with traditional measures of therapeutic outcome (Locus of Control, OASES, PSI, percentage of syllables stuttered). Results indicated statistically significant increases in pre- to post-treatment Origin scores (p=.001; Cohen's d=1.44) and statistically significant decreases in pre- to post-treatment Pawn scores (p=.003; Cohen's d=1.11). Origin and Pawn scores showed significant relationships with other measures of stuttering, indicating concurrent and construct validity. Origin and Pawn scaling procedures appear to provide a valid, sensitive, and nonreactive indicator of the speaker's locus of causality and ability to develop an autonomous and agentic lifestyle.
After reading this article, the readers will be able to: (1) distinguish between the concepts of locus of control and locus of causality, (2) describe the characteristics of individuals behaving as an Origin and a Pawn, (3) differentiate patterns of change for Origin and Pawn scores prior to and following treatment, and (4) describe the clinical advantages using Origin and Pawn scaling procedures for individuals who stutter.
控制源和因果源的概念相似,都指的是一个人认为日常事件是其自身行为的结果的程度。控制源被认为是一个单一维度的结构,表明内在性和外在性的票数呈反比关系。控制源通常通过使用带有有限数量项目的问卷来确定。因果源被认为是一个二维结构,其中起源和棋子的值分别类似于内在性和外在性,不一定呈反比关系。因果源是通过对自由发言或书面叙述的内容分析来确定的。在当前的研究中,在为期三周的口吃强化治疗计划之前和之后,从 20 名成年人那里获得了起源和棋子的分数。参与者写的简短叙述被分析以获得起源和棋子的值。这些分数与治疗结果的传统衡量标准(控制源、OASES、PSI、口吃音节百分比)进行了比较。结果表明,起源分数从治疗前到治疗后有统计学上的显著增加(p=.001;Cohen 的 d=1.44),棋子分数从治疗前到治疗后有统计学上的显著下降(p=.003;Cohen 的 d=1.11)。起源和棋子分数与其他口吃衡量标准呈显著相关,表明具有同时和结构效度。起源和棋子评分程序似乎提供了一个有效、敏感和无反应的说话者因果源和发展自主和代理生活方式的能力的指标。
阅读本文后,读者将能够:(1)区分控制源和因果源的概念,(2)描述作为起源和棋子的个体的特征,(3)区分治疗前后起源和棋子分数的变化模式,(4)描述口吃者使用起源和棋子评分程序的临床优势。