Self-efficacy is a unique theoretical construct different from
related ones, such as self-concept, self-esteem, locus of
control, or self-concept of ability. Self-concept
refers to an organized knowledge about oneself ("I see
myself as a diligent person"), whereas self-esteem
has its main focus on the emotional side of this knowledge
("I feel that I have a good character," or "I
am proud of myself"). Locus of control
refers to an attribution of responsibility for outcomes (internal
agency versus external causation), and self-concept
of ability pertains to a judgment of one's competence
("I am good at math") without reference to any subsequent
action. Only self-efficacy ("I am certain that I can quit
smoking even if my partner continues to smoke") is of
a prospective and operative nature, which furnishes this construct
with additional explanatory and predictive power in a variety
of research applications. In sum, perceived self-efficacy
can be characterized mainly as being competence-based, prospective,
and action-related as opposed to similar constructs that share
only part of this portrayal (Bandura,
1997
xClose
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
New York: Freeman. ).
Dispositional Optimism
Generalized outcome expectancies have been coined dispositional
optimism, measured with the Life Orientation
Test (LOT; (Scheier
& Carver, 1985
xClose
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping,
and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome
expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247. ).
This construct reflects a sense of confidence about attaining
a goal. It does not specify the cause of goal attainment,
but the theory (Carver
& Scheier, 1998
xClose
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation
of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press. )
assumes that effort is a key self-regulatory component that
is made responsible for the outcomes. In contrast, perceived
self-efficacy requires an explicit attribution of expected
goal mastery to one's competence. Although both constructs
share the notion of optimism, the source for this optimism
is different (Schwarzer,
1994
xClose
chwarzer, R. (1994). Optimism, vulnerability, and self-beliefs
as health-related cognitions: A systematic overview. Psychology
& Health, 9, 161-180. ). Dispositional optimism
is the broader construct because it includes ability attribution
as one possibility among others (see Dispositional
Optimism in Other Constructs).
Hope
The hope construct is two-dimensional, consisting of agency
and pathways (Snyder, 1994
xClose
Snyder, C. R. (1994). The psychology of hope: You can
get there from here. New York: Free Press. , 2002
xClose
Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological
Inquiry, 13, 249-275. ). The Hope scale includes
4 items for each of these components (Snyder
et al., 1991
xClose
Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A.,
Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., Yoshinobu, L., Gibb, J., Langelle,
C., & Harney, P. (1991). The will and the ways: Development
and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60,
570-585. ). Agency is conceptualized as almost the
same as perceived self-efficacy although the scale items are
somewhat ambiguous. Pathways resemble outcome expectancies.
(See contribution by Carver).
Health Locus of Control
According to Rotter's
(1966)
xClose
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal
versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological
Monographs, 80, No. 609. social learning theory,
people may have either an internal or an
external locus of control, often abbreviated
as the I/E-dimension. The level of generality or situation
specificity of this construct can vary. The research team
of K. A. Wallston deserves the acclaim to have applied successfully
Rotter's basic idea to the health domain. This domain specificity
may be regarded as a medium level of generality, constrained
to the subjective interpretation of various phenomena such
as health behaviors, health outcome, health care, etc. (Wallston,
Wallston, & DeVellis, 1978
xClose
Wallston, K. A., Wallston, B. S., & DeVellis, R. F. (1978).
Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control
(MHLC) scales. Health Education Monographs, 6, 160-170.
). The term "locus" refers to the location where control
resides-either internal (I) to the individual (based on one's
traits or behaviors) or external (E) to the individual (due
to other forces or chance). There are two dimensions, I and
E, and, obviously, it is possible to subdivide them further.
For example, chance and powerful others are quite distinct
subfactors of the E dimension. The construct of MHLC has been
built upon this idea, and its corresponding measure, the MHLC
scales, contain exactly these three subscales, one I dimension
and two E dimensions, all of which are considered to be orthogonal
(Wallston
et al., 1978
xClose
Wallston, K. A., Wallston, B. S., & DeVellis, R. F. (1978).
Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control
(MHLC) scales. Health Education Monographs, 6, 160-170.
). The measurement of MHLC refers to wide areas of
functioning, health, and medical conditions (see Wallston
et al., 1978
xClose
Wallston, K. A., Wallston, B. S., & DeVellis, R. F. (1978).
Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control
(MHLC) scales. Health Education Monographs, 6, 160-170.
). This generality might also explain the lack of significant
associations between the loci and specific measures of health
status or health behaviors. According to implicit assumptions
that form the background of many studies, a firm internal
locus of control belief might promote better health or healthier
behaviors. Self-efficacy, nevertheless, seems to be the more
powerful construct when it comes to the prediction of health
behaviors. Self-efficacy shares the internal locus of control,
but is also behavioral and prospective.
|