The Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale

1. Abstract

The Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale (ANS-LOC), also widely documented in psychometric literature as the Nowicki-Strickland Internal-External Control Scale for Adults (ANSIE), is an objective, self-report psychological instrument designed to assess generalized expectancies regarding the contingency between personal actions and life outcomes. Developed as an extension of the pioneering Children’s Nowicki-Strickland Internal-External Control Scale (Nowicki & Strickland, 1973), the ANS-LOC was constructed to circumvent key psychometric and linguistic limitations observed in earlier instruments, most notably Julian B. Rotter’s (1966) forced-choice I-E scale. The scale comprises 40 items presented in an accessible, grammatically uncomplicated, dichotomous (“Yes” / “No”) self-report format, facilitating administration across diverse populations without confounding intelligence or reading comprehension.

Extensively utilized across clinical psychology, personality assessment, behavioral medicine, and educational research, the ANS-LOC measures the overarching bipolar construct of internal versus external locus of control. While initially conceptualized as a unidimensional generalized expectancy measure reflecting Rotter’s social learning theory, empirical factor analytic investigations consistently demonstrate multi-faceted underlying dimensions, including personal agency, interpersonal control, fatalism or luck, and institutional or parental power. Psychometric evaluations demonstrate moderate to high internal consistency (split-half coefficients typically ranging between .74 and .86; Cronbach’s alpha coefficients between .68 and .82) and robust test-retest reliability across short- and long-term intervals ($r = .65$ to $.83$). Validity analyses confirm significant convergent associations with alternative locus of control measures, discriminant divergence from social desirability scales, and substantial predictive utility in forecasting psychopathological symptoms, academic underachievement, stress vulnerability, and somatic health behaviors.

2. Keywords

Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale, ANS-LOC, ANSIE, Locus of Control, Generalized Expectancy, Social Learning Theory, Internal-External Control, Attribution Theory, Psychometrics, Test Reliability, Factor Analysis, Self-Efficacy

3. Authors

The Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale was developed primarily by Stephen Nowicki, Jr., Ph.D., and Bonnie R. Strickland, Ph.D., with vital structural adaptations and adult normative standardization conducted in collaboration with Marshall P. Duke, Ph.D.

• Stephen Nowicki, Jr., Ph.D.: Charles Howard Candler Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States. Dr. Nowicki is an internationally recognized clinical psychologist renowned for his groundbreaking research on nonverbal communication, social learning, child development, and locus of control across the lifespan.
• Bonnie R. Strickland, Ph.D.: Professor Emerita of Psychology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and former President of the American Psychological Association (APA). Dr. Strickland has published foundational empirical works on social change, health psychology, feminist psychology, and perceived control mechanisms.
• Marshall P. Duke, Ph.D.: Charles Howard Candler Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Emory University. Dr. Duke contributed extensively to the development of adult, preschool, and non-college extensions of the Nowicki-Strickland scales, specializing in family systems, interpersonal dynamics, and clinical assessment.

4. Purpose

The primary clinical and research purpose of the Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale is to quantify an individual’s generalized expectancy regarding whether life reinforcements, successes, failures, and events are fundamentally determined by one’s own behavioral actions and stable internal attributes (internal control) or by external contingencies such as luck, fate, chance, superstition, or powerful societal and familial figures (external control). In the early 1970s, existing locus of control measures presented substantial psychometric challenges. Rotter’s seminal 1966 I-E scale relied heavily upon a forced-choice paired-statement methodology that introduced significant reading burden, elevated testing anxiety, and systematic vulnerability to social desirability confounding, particularly among non-academic, adolescent, and clinical cohorts. Nowicki and Strickland sought to construct an instrument with an egalitarian reading level (comprehensible at fifth-grade reading proficiency) utilizing straightforward, non-pejorative interrogative statements.

In clinical practice, the ANS-LOC functions as a valuable diagnostic and prognostic assessment tool. An individual’s locus of control orientation directly shapes their appraisal of stress, coping style, and psychotherapeutic responsiveness. Clinicians employ the instrument to identify maladaptive attributional styles; for example, pervasive external locus of control is heavily implicated in learned helplessness, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety, and passive coping in the face of medical illness. Conversely, tracking locus of control shifts from external to internal serves as an empirical marker of therapeutic growth during cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), empowering patients to recognize their personal agency in symptom management and relapse prevention.

In organizational, health, and academic research settings, the ANS-LOC is extensively utilized to predict performance, self-regulation, and adaptive behavioral compliance. Empirical investigations systematically correlate internal scoring on the ANS-LOC with proactive preventative health measures (such as adherence to chronic illness regimens, smoking cessation, and cardiovascular rehabilitation), higher academic achievement independent of general cognitive ability, and superior leadership efficacy under prolonged workplace stress.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct assessed by the ANS-LOC is Locus of Control of Reinforcement, a foundational cognitive construct within social-cognitive personality psychology. Generalized expectancies of control represent cognitive schemas developed across cumulative reinforcement histories regarding the degree to which personal behavior directly impacts behavioral outcomes.

The Internal Control Pole

Individuals who endorse an internal locus of control believe that outcomes are fundamentally contingent upon their own agency, diligence, effort, decision-making, and competence. In the context of the ANS-LOC, internal individuals affirm items asserting that studying yields academic success (Item 6), that planning ahead optimizes outcomes (Item 38), and that social rapport depends upon how one conducts oneself (Item 25). These individuals interpret behavioral consequences through a causal framework of personal responsibility. Psychologically, high internality is linked to proactive problem-focused coping, high resilience in the face of structural obstacles, heightened self-monitoring, and cognitive flexibility.

The External Control Pole

Conversely, individuals who exhibit an external locus of control perceive outcomes as decoupled from their personal initiative. They view life events as the arbitrary byproduct of external forces, such as chance, luck, superstition, systemic barriers, or unpredictable powerful others. In the ANS-LOC, external beliefs are manifested in endorsements of fatalistic assertions: believing problems resolve themselves without intervention (Item 1), viewing success as an accident of birth or luck (Item 3, Item 17), maintaining good luck charms or superstitions (Item 21, Item 24), and expressing systemic helplessness regarding interpersonal conflicts or institutional directives (Item 14, Item 29, Item 33). Prolonged externality often leads to behavioral passivity, emotional resignation, defensive externalization of failure, and chronic vulnerability to affective disorders.

Multidimensional Nuances within the Construct

Although scored along a continuous unidimensional gradient where higher cumulative scores represent greater externality, psychometric scholarship acknowledges that locus of control is functionally multi-faceted. The ANS-LOC encapsulates several distinct life domains:

• Helplessness and Fatalism: The perception that catastrophic or negative occurrences are predetermined and immutable regardless of preventative action (e.g., Items 7, 16, 29).
• Interpersonal Control: Beliefs regarding one’s capacity to resolve social friction, influence peer opinions, or defend against social ostracization (e.g., Items 12, 23, 27, 36).
• Academic and Achievement Competence: The subjective perception that cognitive outcomes and mastery result from applied exertion rather than intrinsic, unalterable endowments (e.g., Items 4, 6, 22, 37).
• Belief in Luck and Superstition: Cognitive reliance on non-empirical, metaphysical phenomena such as good luck charms, wishing, or astrological serendipity (e.g., Items 8, 10, 21, 24, 40).
• Authority and Systemic Power: Perceived autonomy within institutional, parental, or family-of-origin hierarchies (e.g., Items 9, 14, 15, 31, 35, 39).

6. Theoretical Framework

The Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale is theoretically anchored in Julian B. Rotter’s Social Learning Theory of Personality (1954, 1966). Rotter posited that the potential for a given behavior to occur in a specific psychological situation is a function of the expectancy that the behavior will lead to a particular reinforcement and the subjective psychological value of that reinforcement:

Behavior Potential (BP) = f(Expectancy [E], Reinforcement Value [RV])

Rotter differentiated between specific expectancies—which emerge through repeated experiences within a highly demarcated setting (e.g., a specific classroom or a specific employer)—and generalized expectancies. Generalized expectancies represent cross-situational beliefs distilled from cumulative lifetime reinforcement experiences. When individuals encounter novel, ambiguous, or complex life circumstances where explicit behavioral contingencies are poorly defined, they default to generalized expectancies regarding whether outcomes are subject to personal mastery or external caprice.

Attribution Theory Syntheses

The construct measured by the ANS-LOC intersects profoundly with attribution theory, advanced by Fritz Heider (1958) and structured extensively by Bernard Weiner (1979, 1985). Weiner conceptualized causal attributions across three orthogonal dimensions: locus of causality (internal vs. external), stability (stable vs. unstable), and controllability (controllable vs. uncontrollable). The ANS-LOC heavily interrogates the confluence of locus and stability; for instance, attributing failure to innate, unchangeable traits (“most other students are just plain smarter than you are”, Item 37) represents an external, stable, and uncontrollable attribution that paralyzes achievement motivation.

Distinction from Self-Efficacy

It is psychometrically imperative to differentiate Rotter’s locus of control from Albert Bandura’s (1977) construct of perceived self-efficacy. While locus of control concerns outcome expectancies (the generalized contingency belief: “If an individual acts, will the environment predictably yield a given reward?”), self-efficacy pertains to efficacy expectations (the subjective self-belief: “Do I possess the capability to execute the required behavior?”). An individual may possess an internal locus of control (believing that academic excellence is entirely driven by rigorous study) while concurrently exhibiting low self-efficacy (doubting their personal cognitive stamina to execute that studying). The ANS-LOC predominantly operates as an index of generalized outcome expectancies.

7. Validity

The construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale has been extensively documented in psychometric literature across diverse adult and late-adolescent populations.

Convergent and Criterion Validity

During initial standardization (Nowicki & Duke, 1974), the ANS-LOC was correlated with Rotter’s (1966) 29-item I-E scale to evaluate criterion equivalence. Across college cohorts, statistically significant convergent correlations were obtained, ranging from $r = .41$ to $r = .68$ ($p < .001$). The moderate magnitude of these correlations indicates shared construct variance while confirming that the ANS-LOC does not merely duplicate Rotter’s scale, partially attributable to the removal of forced-choice phrasing and the expansion of social-interpersonal scenarios. Furthermore, the scale demonstrates robust convergence with Hanna Levenson’s IPC Scales, correlating positively with the “Chance” ($r = .48$ to $.56$) and “Powerful Others” ($r = .42$ to $.51$) dimensions, and negatively with the “Internal” dimension ($r = -.39$ to $-.49$).

Discriminant Validity

A major design imperative for Nowicki and Strickland was divorcing locus of control assessments from confounding individual difference variables. Multiple psychometric studies demonstrate near-zero correlations between ANS-LOC scores and measures of general cognitive ability or standard intelligence quotients ($r = -.04$ to $.11$, non-significant), confirming that endorsement of external beliefs does not reflect intellectual impairment. Furthermore, correlations with the Crowne-Marlowe Social Desirability Scale remain consistently negligible ($r = -.06$ to $-.14$), proving that the instrument’s simple interrogative format mitigates the defensive posturing often provoked by forced-choice scales.

Predictive and Ecological Validity

The scale possesses extensive predictive validity across clinical and non-clinical domains:

• Psychopathology and Affective Distress: External scores on the ANS-LOC consistently predict higher scores on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), elevated state-trait anxiety (STAI), and increased vulnerability to post-traumatic stress symptomatology following critical life events.
• Health and Preventative Behaviors: In behavioral medicine, internal scorers demonstrate superior therapeutic adherence, active engagement in weight management and diabetic regimens, and significantly lower incidence of substance abuse relapses compared to external counterparts.
• Academic Performance: In higher education and professional training settings, internal scoring on the ANS-LOC explains significant variance in grade point averages (GPA) and course completion rates, independent of baseline SAT/ACT scores.

8. Reliability

The reliability of the Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale has been evaluated through split-half reliability, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and temporal stability paradigms across college-aged and community adult samples.

Internal Consistency

In early validation studies conducted by Nowicki and Duke (1974), the split-half reliability coefficient, corrected via the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, yielded estimates between $r = .74$ and $r = .86$ across diverse collegiate cohorts ($N = 156$ to $N = 312$). Cronbach’s alpha coefficients across subsequent literature routinely fall within the acceptable to robust range of $\alpha = .68$ to $\alpha = .82$. Given that the instrument intentionally spans diverse situational domains (interpersonal, scholastic, superstitious, familial, and fatalistic), an internal consistency coefficient around $.75$ to $.80$ is psychometrically optimal, reflecting broad domain sampling without excessive item redundancy.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability assessments demonstrate that the ANS-LOC reliably captures stable generalized personality expectancies while remaining sensitive to genuine life transitions and therapeutic modifications:

• A six-week test-retest reliability coefficient was established at $r = .83$ ($p < .001$) among non-clinical adult volunteers (Nowicki & Duke, 1974).
• A seven-week retest interval across undergraduate students yielded a stability coefficient of $r = .76$.
• Over extended periods spanning up to one year, stability coefficients remain stable around $r = .65$ to $.71$, confirming the trait-like nature of generalized locus of control in the absence of targeted cognitive-behavioral interventions.

9. Factor Analysis

Although Julian Rotter originally postulated that generalized locus of control operates as a broad, unidimensional personality attribute, extensive exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) performed on the ANS-LOC consistently reveal a multi-dimensional latent architecture.

Exploratory Factor Analytic Solutions

Early exploratory factor analyses conducted on the ANS-LOC (using principal components analysis with varimax rotation) typically identify between three and five robust factors accounting for 38% to 52% of total item variance. The primary factors repeatedly replicated across the literature include:

1. Factor 1: General Helplessness / Fatalism (Eigenvalue: 4.8 – 6.2; accounting for ~16% of variance). Characterized by high loadings on Item 7 (“it doesn’t pay to try hard because things never turn outright anyway”), Item 16 (“when you do something wrong there’s very little you can do”), Item 29 (“when bad things are going to happen they just are going to happen”), and Item 31.
2. Factor 2: Interpersonal and Peer Relations (Eigenvalue: 2.1 – 2.9; accounting for ~9% of variance). Features prominent loadings on Item 12 (“hard to change a friend’s mind”), Item 23 (“when a person your age is angry with you, there’s little you can do”), Item 25 (reversed), Item 33, and Item 36 (“when someone doesn’t like you there’s little you can do”).
3. Factor 3: Superstition and Luck (Eigenvalue: 1.8 – 2.4; accounting for ~7% of variance). Dominated by Item 3 (“born lucky”), Item 10 (“wishing can make good things happen”), Item 21 (“four leaf clover”), Item 24 (“good luck charm”), and Item 40 (“better to be smart than lucky”, reversed).
4. Factor 4: Academic and Competence Mastery (Eigenvalue: 1.3 – 1.7; accounting for ~5% of variance). Includes Item 6 (“study hard enough… can pass any subject”), Item 22 (“doing homework has much to do with grades”), Item 32 (“good things happen because of hard work”), and Item 38 (“planning ahead makes things turn out better”).
5. Factor 5: Parental / Systemic Power (Eigenvalue: 1.1 – 1.4; accounting for ~4% of variance). Highly loaded on Items 9, 14, 15, 35, and 39, indexing perceived autonomy versus subservience within family and structural authorities.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Model Fit

Confirmatory factor analyses testing a higher-order model (wherein a superordinate generalized locus of control factor subsumes correlated subdimensions of Fatalism, Interpersonal Control, Luck, and Mastery) generally demonstrate superior fit compared to a strict, single-factor unidimensional model. Standardized CFA indices for the four-factor correlated model typically yield acceptable fit metrics: Comparative Fit Index ($ ext{CFI}) ge .91$, Tucker-Lewis Index ($ ext{TLI}) ge .90$, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation ($ ext{RMSEA}) le .054$ (90% CI: .048–.060), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual ($ ext{SRMR}) le .058$. While researchers predominantly calculate the composite total score for overarching classification, utilizing domain-specific subscale scoring provides enhanced diagnostic precision in clinical and organizational research.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The complete instrument and its structural specifications are detailed below:

• Tool Name: The Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale (ANS-LOC / ANSIE)
• Author(s): Stephen Nowicki, Jr., Ph.D., and Bonnie R. Strickland, Ph.D. (Adult adaptations with Marshall P. Duke, Ph.D.)
• Item Count: 40 items
• Format / Administration: Self-administered paper-and-pencil questionnaire or digitized computer-based assessment; individually or group administered.
• Target Population: Adults and college students (aged 16 years and older; fifth-grade reading level minimum).
• Response Options: Dichotomous forced-choice format: “Yes” or “No”.
• Administration Time: Approximately 10 to 15 minutes.
• Scoring Instructions:
  • The instrument is keyed such that 1 point is awarded for every answer indicative of an external locus of control.
  • An answer indicative of an internal locus of control is awarded 0 points.
  • External Keyed “YES” (24 Items): 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 36, 37, 39.
  • External Keyed “NO” (16 Items): 2, 4, 6, 9, 13, 15, 20, 22, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 38, 40.
• Score Interpretation:
  • Total Score Range: 0 to 40 points.
  • Higher Scores (e.g., 18–40): Indicate a progressively stronger External Locus of Control (belief that life events, reinforcements, and consequences are governed by fate, chance, luck, or powerful external figures).
  • Lower Scores (e.g., 0–12): Indicate a strong Internal Locus of Control (belief that one’s personal behavior, effort, and competence dictate outcomes).
  • Intermediate Scores (e.g., 13–17): Represent a normative, balanced attributional perspective (bi-local control), acknowledging personal agency while recognizing environmental and systemic constraints.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The foundational research regarding the Nowicki-Strickland scales was initially presented at the 79th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association in 1971, with formal peer-reviewed publication of the child scale in 1973 and the adult extension systematically introduced by Duke and Nowicki in 1973/1974.

In accordance with the scholarly intent of the authors, the Adult Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale was placed into the academic public domain and educational repository (accessible via ERIC Document ED058933) to foster clinical, educational, and empirical behavioral research. No commercial licensing fee or proprietary purchase is required for non-commercial academic research, pedagogical use, or clinical assessment. Researchers and psychological practitioners may utilize, reproduce, and translate the scale items provided that proper bibliographic citation is accorded to Stephen Nowicki, Jr., Bonnie R. Strickland, and Marshall P. Duke in all associated publications and scholarly reports. Commercial software aggregators or for-profit clinical distribution systems should obtain written permission from the primary copyright holders or the Department of Psychology at Emory University.

12. References

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
• Duke, M. P., & Nowicki, S. (1973). A preschool and primary internal-external control scale. Developmental Psychology, 9(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035079
• Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1037/10628-000
• Lefcourt, H. M. (1982). Locus of Control: Current Trends in Theory & Research (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Levenson, H. (1974). Activism and powerful others: Distinctions within the concept of internal-external control. Journal of Personality Assessment, 38(4), 377–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.1974.10119988
• Nowicki, S., Jr., & Duke, M. P. (1974). A locus of control scale for college as well as non-college-adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 38(2), 136–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.1974.10119950
• Nowicki, S., Jr., & Strickland, B. R. (1971). A Locus of Control Scale for Children. Paper presented at the 79th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED058933
• Nowicki, S., Jr., & Strickland, B. R. (1973). A locus of control scale for children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 40(1), 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033978
• Nowicki, S., Jr., & Strickland, B. R. (1978). The Nowicki–Strickland Personal Reaction Survey for 7th–12th graders. Emory University, Department of Psychology.
• Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1037/10788-000
• Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976
• Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548

13. Items of the Scale