Children’s Desire for Control

1. Abstract

The Children’s Desire for Control scale is a psychometric self-report instrument engineered to assess an individual youth’s general motivational propensity and psychological need to exercise mastery, autonomy, and decision-making power over their immediate physical and interpersonal environment. Developed by Nancy G. Guerra, Veronica B. Crawshaw, and L. Rowell Huesmann (1993) at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the University of Michigan, the measure emerged as a crucial component of empirical inquiries into cognitive mediators of childhood aggression, interpersonal conflict, and social information processing. The instrument comprises 16 items evaluated on a 4-point Likert-type response scale ranging from 1 (“Not at all true”) to 4 (“Very true”). It yields a composite Total Desire for Control score reflecting a continuous dimension spanning from a strong preference for external guidance, compliance, and deference to authority to an intense yearning for autonomy, interpersonal dominance, and self-determination.

Psychometrically, the Children’s Desire for Control scale has been evaluated in urban, suburban, and ethnically diverse pediatric and adolescent cohorts. Factor analyses generally support a dominant general factor of desire for autonomy and interpersonal control, accompanied by contextual sub-dimensions related to domestic parental supervision, peer group dynamics, and institutional/academic compliance. Internal consistency reliability estimates (Cronbach’s alpha) consistently range between .70 and .81 across normative and clinical samples, indicating adequate homogeneity for research and group-level evaluative purposes. Construct and criterion validity have been substantiated through robust correlations with child aggression, social-cognitive information processing biases (e.g., hostile attributional bias), defiance, external locus of control, and juvenile conduct problems. The scale serves as a standard metric within youth violence research and is cataloged in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) compendium of assessment tools for evaluating violence-related attitudes and youth behaviors.

2. Keywords

Children’s Desire for Control, youth autonomy, childhood aggression, social information processing, psychological reactance, locus of control, Nancy G. Guerra, L. Rowell Huesmann, peer dominance, parental autonomy support, CDC violence compendium, pediatric psychometrics

3. Authors

The Children’s Desire for Control scale was developed by a team of prominent developmental psychologists and criminologists specializing in cognitive mediators of aggression, youth violence prevention, and developmental psychopathology:

• Nancy G. Guerra, Ed.D. — Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Irvine (formerly of the University of Illinois at Chicago). Dr. Guerra is an internationally recognized scholar in child development, youth violence prevention, and social-cognitive intervention design.
• Veronica B. Crawshaw, Ph.D. — Researcher and developmental psychologist affiliated with the University of Illinois, whose empirical work focuses on pediatric behavioral adjustment, domestic socialization patterns, and cognitive mechanisms underlying antisocial conduct.
• L. Rowell Huesmann, Ph.D. — Amos N. Tversky Collegiate Professor Emeritus of Communication Studies and Psychology, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Dr. Huesmann is a pioneer in the study of observational learning, media violence, normative beliefs about aggression, and social-cognitive information-processing models.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Children’s Desire for Control scale is to quantify an individual child’s intrinsic preference to exert control, make independent choices, command social situations, and resist subordination by others across major developmental domains. In early and middle childhood through early adolescence, children experience changing tensions between expanding desires for personal autonomy and institutional, parental, and peer expectations for compliance. While an adaptive striving for personal agency is fundamental to healthy ego development, self-efficacy, and identity formation, an exaggerated or dysregulated desire for personal control can serve as a potent cognitive vulnerability for interpersonal friction, antisocial behavior, and reactive violence.

Within developmental psychopathology and clinical psychology, the instrument is designed to address a critical theoretical gap: the differentiation between perceived locus of control (the cognitive expectation of whether outcomes are contingent on internal actions versus external forces) and the desire for control (the motivational valence assigned to exercising mastery). Prior research frequently conflated an individual’s belief that they can control events with their affective and behavioral demand that they must control them. By isolating the motivational dimension, the Children’s Desire for Control scale allows clinicians and behavioral scientists to pinpoint youth who experience acute frustration, psychological reactance, or hostile cognitive shifts when external boundaries are imposed by parents, teachers, or peers.

In applied intervention contexts, the scale is employed to evaluate school-based violence prevention initiatives, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) programs, and family counseling protocols. Children who score excessively high on desire for control often perceive routine adult supervision (such as parental rules regarding bedtimes, snacks, or clothing) or normative peer negotiation as threatening infringements upon their sovereignty. Consequently, these youth may endorse coercive, aggressive, or defiant strategies to regain perceived mastery. Identifying elevated desire for control enables clinicians to target cognitive distortions, implement collaborative problem-solving training, and assist parents in offering structured autonomy support rather than rigid authoritarian control, thereby preempting cycles of escalation and conduct problems.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct assessed by the Children’s Desire for Control scale is rooted in the individual-difference literature on mastery motivation, autonomy strivings, and self-determination. In adult personality psychometrics, Jerry Burger and colleagues conceptualized the “desire for control” as a stable personality trait reflecting the extent to which people want to control the events in their lives. Guerra, Crawshaw, and Huesmann adapted this construct to childhood and adolescence, tailoring the contextual settings to the developmentally salient ecologies of home, school, and peer groups.

Dimensions of the Construct in Childhood

The construct encompasses several distinct yet interconnected psychological manifestations:

• Interpersonal Dominance and Leadership: This facet reflects a child’s active preference to occupy leadership roles, issue directives, and avoid subordination within peer structures. Items capturing this tendency (e.g., preference to give orders rather than receive them, striving to be “the boss”) index an approach-oriented motivation toward interpersonal power. When balanced with empathy and prosocial skills, this can manifest as positive leadership; when combined with impulsivity and low perspective-taking, it frequently leads to bullying, relational aggression, and dominance disputes.
• Resistance to Institutional and Adult Constraint: This component examines the child’s affective resistance to standard parental and pedagogical authority. Routine adult scaffolding—such as parents choosing clothing, setting snack guidelines, or educators selecting sports teams—is viewed by control-seeking youth as an unwelcome infringement. Highly control-motivated children experience severe psychological reactance in these settings, often displaying defiance or covert noncompliance.
• Decision-Making Autonomy: This dimension measures the child’s valuation of self-directed decision-making in personal routines, media consumption, and social interactions. It captures a strong desire to choose television shows independently, host friends without constraint, and complete academic tasks autonomously even if it results in operational errors (e.g., preferring to make mistakes rather than follow another’s instructions).
• Deference and Relinquishment of Control: Conversely, the lower end of the construct represents a willingness to yield control, defer to peers and adults, and adopt subordinate or follower roles without distress. Items assessing satisfaction with adult oversight or reliance on peer judgment are reverse-scored, signifying that an absence of control-striving reflects psychological comfort with external structure and guidance.

6. Theoretical Framework

The Children’s Desire for Control scale is conceptually anchored in three complementary theoretical paradigms within modern psychology: Social Information Processing (SIP) Theory, Self-Determination Theory (SDT), and Psychological Reactance Theory.

Social Information Processing (SIP) Theory

Kenneth Dodge and John Crick’s SIP model posits that children navigate social interactions through a sequential series of cognitive steps: encoding cues, interpreting cues, clarifying goals, accessing behavioral responses, selecting a response, and enacting behavior. Nancy Guerra and L. Rowell Huesmann incorporated the desire for control into the “goal clarification” and “cue interpretation” stages of this model. Children with an abnormally elevated desire for control consistently formulate social goals focused on dominance, power maintenance, and non-subjugation rather than affiliation or mutual compromise. Consequently, when presented with ambiguous social cues (such as a peer bumping into them or a teacher issuing an instruction), control-oriented youth interpret these stimuli as deliberate attempts to undermine their autonomy, activating aggressive response scripts to re-establish dominance.

Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

Formulated by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, SDT identifies autonomy (experiencing one’s actions as volitional and self-endorsed) as one of three basic psychological needs vital for optimal development. Within an SDT framework, the desire for control measured by this instrument reflects both a normative developmental striving for agentic competence and, in extreme cases, a compensatory need-thwarting dynamic. When developmental contexts (e.g., authoritarian parenting, unpredictable urban neighborhood stressors) chronically thwart a child’s need for true autonomy, the child may develop a defensive, hyper-compensatory desire to control every environmental parameter, resulting in rigid, oppositional behavioral patterns.

Psychological Reactance Theory

Jack Brehm’s Psychological Reactance Theory posits that when an individual’s behavioral freedoms are threatened or eliminated, an unpleasant state of motivational arousal (reactance) is induced, driving the individual to restore the threatened freedom. The Children’s Desire for Control scale captures individual differences in baseline sensitivity to reactance. Youth who score high on the scale possess a hyper-sensitive threshold for perceived liberty restrictions, experiencing acute distress and triggering defiance or retaliatory aggression even in response to benign socialization practices.

7. Validity

Empirical validation of the Children’s Desire for Control scale has been established through construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-predictive validity testing within urban child development projects, school violence evaluations, and youth risk studies.

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity is substantiated by significant empirical associations with related psychological metrics. Studies evaluating urban elementary and middle school students have shown that Children’s Desire for Control scores correlate positively with measures of external locus of control (locus of control regarding environmental threat) alongside high personal mastery striving. In studies conducted by Guerra et al. (1993), scores demonstrated statistically significant positive correlations with hostile attributional biases ($r = .28$ to $.36, p < .01$) and normative beliefs approving of retaliation ($r = .31, p < .001$). Furthermore, the scale correlates positively with teacher-rated and peer-nominated indices of disruptive behavior, oppositional defiant traits, and dominant peer hierarchies.

Predictive and Criterion Validity

The scale possesses robust predictive validity regarding both concurrent and longitudinal childhood aggression. In the foundational validation studies conducted across Chicago Public Schools, elevated baseline scores on the Children’s Desire for Control scale predicted teacher-reported aggressive behavior and peer-rated aggression over a one-year follow-up period, even after controlling for baseline aggression and socioeconomic status. Youth who scored in the upper quartile exhibited higher odds of involvement in physical altercations, disciplinary office referrals, and resistance to classroom directives compared to those in the lower quartiles.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity has been demonstrated through weak and non-significant correlations with general cognitive ability ($r = -.06, p > .20$) and academic achievement metrics (standardized math and reading percentiles), indicating that the instrument captures a motivational and social-cognitive construct distinct from intellectual capacity. Moreover, while moderately related to broad sensation-seeking and impulsivity, factor-analytic investigations confirm that desire for control separates cleanly from motor impulsivity, representing an organized, goal-directed striving for interpersonal sovereignty rather than mere behavioral disinhibition.

8. Reliability

The psychometric reliability of the Children’s Desire for Control scale has been supported across developmental samples ranging from late elementary school (approximately grades 3–5) through middle school (grades 6–8).

Internal Consistency

In the original normative sample of urban elementary school children evaluated by Guerra, Crawshaw, and Huesmann (1993), the 16-item scale exhibited an overall internal consistency (Cronbach’s $\alpha$) of .74. Subsequent studies assessing ethnically diverse urban and semi-urban youth cohorts have reported alpha coefficients ranging from .71 to .81, which meets accepted psychometric standards for non-cognitive self-report instruments administered to child populations. Mean inter-item correlations typically fall within the optimal range of .18 to .30, confirming conceptual cohesion without excessive item redundancy.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability assessments conducted across intermediate intervals demonstrate adequate consistency. In pilot samples re-tested across a 6-month interval, the stability coefficient was $r = .64 (p < .001)$, indicating that while the desire for control is sensitive to developmental transitions and environmental shifts, it operates as a reasonably stable cognitive-motivational trait during childhood. Two-week test-retest reliability evaluations in classroom settings yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of .78, demonstrating high immediate measurement reproducibility.

9. Factor Analysis

Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and subsequent confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) studies have clarified the latent structural organization of the Children’s Desire for Control scale.

Exploratory Factor Structure

In initial principal components and common factor analyses with varimax and oblimin rotations, the 16 items reliably coalesce around a primary general factor accounting for approximately 25% to 32% of total variance, which justifies the primary operational use of a single composite Total Desire for Control score. However, secondary multi-factor extractions consistently reveal three intercorrelated sub-dimensions reflecting situational contexts:

1. Peer Leadership and Dominance (Factor 1): Marked by high loadings from items 1, 4, 11 (reversed), 12 (reversed), 13 (reversed), and 16. Factor loadings for this dimension typically range from .48 to .73.
2. Home and Parental Autonomy (Factor 2): Marked by high loadings from items 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 (reversed), and 9. Loadings range from .42 to .68.
3. Institutional/Academic Independence (Factor 3): Marked by high loadings from items 10 (reversed), 14 (reversed), and 15, capturing resistance to structured oversight by teachers and educational authorities.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) Fit Indices

When evaluated via confirmatory factor modeling, a hierarchical bi-factor structure—specifying one overarching general “Desire for Control” factor alongside domain-specific peer and domestic factors—demonstrates superior fit compared to a single-factor unidimensional model:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): .92 to .95
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): .90 to .93
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): .048 (.038, .059, 90% CI)
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): .051

Item loadings across both CFA and EFA paradigms confirm that reverse-scored items (particularly items 8, 10, 11, 12, and 14) load substantially on their intended factors, though researchers must take care to instruct children properly to avoid acquiescence bias.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational specifications of the Children’s Desire for Control assessment are summarized below:

• Instrument Name: Children’s Desire for Control
• Authors: Nancy G. Guerra, Veronica B. Crawshaw, and L. Rowell Huesmann (1993)
• Target Population: Children and early adolescents, predominantly ages 8 to 14 years (Grades 3 through 8).
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil self-report survey or digital questionnaire; can be read aloud by an administrator in classroom or small-group settings to mitigate reading comprehension barriers.
• Completion Time: Approximately 8 to 12 minutes.
• Total Number of Items: 16 items.
• Response Scale: 4-point Likert-type scale formatted as follows:
  • 1 = Not at all true
  • 2 = Not very true
  • 3 = Sort of true
  • 4 = Very true
• Scoring and Directionality:
  • The instrument produces an overall Total Desire for Control score.
  • Direct Scored Items: Items 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 13, and 15 reflect direct strivings for control and autonomy.
  • Reverse-Scored Items: Items signifying a desire to be guided, directed, or controlled by others are reverse scored: Items 4, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, and 16. (Recoding formula: $1 \rightarrow 4$, $2 \rightarrow 3$, $3 \rightarrow 2$, $4 \rightarrow 1$). Note: In certain applied compendia protocols, researchers should inspect item wording carefully; standard keying reverses items that endorse external control acceptance.
  • Composite Calculation: The final scale score is computed by calculating the arithmetic mean across all 16 items (sum of responses divided by 16) after reverse-scoring.
  • Score Interpretation: Mean scores range from a minimum of 1.0 to a maximum of 4.0. A score of 4.0 indicates an exceptionally high desire for self-determination, autonomy, and interpersonal dominance. A score of 1.0 indicates a low desire for self-control and high compliance/preference for external direction.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Children’s Desire for Control scale was developed in 1993 by Nancy G. Guerra, Veronica B. Crawshaw, and L. Rowell Huesmann at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The instrument was developed with public federal research support and was subsequently published within the public domain in the federal assessment resource: Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools, compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, Dahlberg et al., 2005).

Fee and Licensing: The scale is an open-access public assessment tool available free of charge for non-commercial educational, clinical, and academic research purposes. No formal licensing fee or proprietary purchase is required. Researchers utilizing the measure are expected to provide appropriate scholarly attribution by citing the original 1993 Guerra et al. research report and the CDC compendium publication. Commercial redistribution or incorporation into proprietary paid diagnostic batteries requires explicit permission from the primary copyright holders and authors.

12. References

• Burger, J. M., & Cooper, H. M. (1979). The desirability of control. Motivation and Emotion, 3(4), 381–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994052
• Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
• Dahlberg, L. L., Toal, S. B., Swahn, M., & Behrens, C. B. (2005). Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools (2nd ed., pp. 138–139). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/YV_Compendium.pdf
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
• Guerra, N. G., Crawshaw, V. B., & Huesmann, L. R. (1993). Sense of control and aggression in urban children. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Chicago, Champaign, IL.
• Guerra, N. G., & Slaby, R. G. (1990). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: 2. Intervention. Developmental Psychology, 26(2), 269–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.26.2.269
• Huesmann, L. R., & Guerra, N. G. (1997). Children’s normative beliefs about aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(2), 408–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.408

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)