General Competence Scale

Abstract

The General Competence Scale (known in Dutch as the Algemene Competentieschaal or ALCOS-12, and occasionally referenced as the ALCOS-12-SF6 or Algemene Competentieverwachting Schaal) is an established psychometric questionnaire designed to evaluate an individual's generalized sense of self-efficacy and perceived personal agency across unpredictable, novel, and demanding life situations. Derived from the seminal General Self-Efficacy Scale developed by Mark Sherer and colleagues (1982), the scale was systematically adapted, refined, and validated for Dutch-speaking populations by Pieter R. Bosscher and I. Baardman (1989), with extensive subsequent validation in older adult cohorts conducted by Bosscher, Smit, and Kempen (1997). The ALCOS-12 conceptualizes general competence not as an aggregate of technical aptitudes, but as a broad, enduring cognitive expectation regarding one's ability to successfully execute behaviors necessary to produce desired outcomes and maintain mastery over life circumstances.

Comprising 12 operationalized items, the instrument is structured around three robust, theoretically and empirically grounded factors: Initiative (Competentie / initiatief nemen; the capacity to initiate goal-directed action without hesitation), Persistence / Effort (Inspanning / volharding; the sustained application of focus and energy in the face of ongoing demands), and Coping with Setbacks / Adversity (Omgaan met tegenslagen; psychological resilience and perseverance when confronting obstacles or failure). Each statement is evaluated on an authentic five-point Likert response format ranging from 1 ("completely disagree") to 5 ("completely agree"). Total composite scores range between 12 and 60 points, where elevated values reflect a higher level of generalized competence expectation and perceived mastery. Extensive psychometric evaluations demonstrate sound internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficients typically ranging from 0.70 to 0.83 across total and subscale dimensions), robust structural validity verified via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and pronounced convergent validity with measures of self-esteem, internal locus of control, functional independence, and health-related quality of life. The ALCOS-12 is widely deployed across clinical psychology, physical rehabilitation, geriatric assessment, and behavioral medicine.

Keywords

General Competence Scale, Algemene Competentieschaal, ALCOS-12, Self-Efficacy, Bandura Social Cognitive Theory, Perceived Agency, Geriatric Assessment, Psychological Resilience, Instrument Validation, Psychometrics, Bosscher and Baardman

Authors

The theoretical and structural lineage of the General Competence Scale traces to original psychometric conceptualizations in the United States and subsequent psychometric adaptations in the Netherlands:

• Mark Sherer, Ph.D., ABPP, FACRM: Senior scientist, clinical neuropsychologist, and primary architect of the original 17-item General Self-Efficacy Scale (SES; 1982). Sherer has served as Director of Research and Associate Vice President for Medical Affairs at TIRR Memorial Hermann and Clinical Professor of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
• Madalynne E. Maddux, Ph.D.: Co-developer of the original General Self-Efficacy Scale (1982), contributing to the empirical operationalization of Bandurian efficacy expectations within personality and clinical assessment frameworks.
• James E. Mercandante, Ph.D.: Co-author of the initial SES validation study (1982), focusing on factor structure extraction and behavioral validation metrics.
• Steven Prentice-Dunn, Ph.D.: Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Alabama; co-investigator on the original 1982 operationalization of general self-efficacy.
• Bob Jacobs, Ph.D. and Ronald W. Rogers, Ph.D.: Co-authors on the seminal 1982 Sherer et al. psychometric project investigating outcome expectancies versus efficacy expectations.
• Pieter R. Bosscher, Ph.D.: Dutch behavioral scientist, psychometrician, and human movement scientist affiliated with the Faculty of Human Movement Sciences and the Department of Clinical Psychology at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Bosscher spearheaded the Dutch translation, factor-analytic refinement, and longitudinal validation of the 12-item ALCOS instrument (1989; Bosscher et al., 1997).
• I. Baardman, M.Sc.: Dutch researcher who collaborated with Bosscher in 1989 to isolate the three-factor 12-item construct from Sherer's original item pool, optimizing internal validity for adult populations.
• Johannes H. Smit, Ph.D. and Gertrudis I. J. M. Kempen, Ph.D.: Prominent Dutch epidemiologists and gerontological methodologists affiliated with the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) and Maastricht University, who co-authored the psychometric confirmation of the ALCOS-12 among community-dwelling and vulnerable older adults.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the General Competence Scale (ALCOS-12) is to quantify an individual's subjective conviction in their capacity to successfully mobilize cognitive, behavioral, and motivational resources when navigating demanding, unfamiliar, stressful, or unpredictable life challenges. In contrast to domain-specific self-efficacy scales—which measure self-efficacy targeted strictly toward targeted actions such as smoking cessation, diabetic dietary adherence, or specific athletic performances—the ALCOS-12 measures a global, generalized personality trait reflecting accumulated life experiences of mastery and emotional regulation.

In clinical and physical rehabilitation contexts, assessing generalized competence is critical for forecasting rehabilitation adherence, coping strategies, and functional trajectories. Patients recovering from cerebrovascular accidents (stroke), traumatic brain injury, acute myocardial infarction, or major orthopedic surgeries must continually confront physical limitations, plateauing functional recovery, and frustrating rehabilitation milestones. Patients exhibiting elevated ALCOS-12 scores show significantly greater intrinsic motivation, participate more actively in physical and occupational therapies, and demonstrate decreased vulnerability to post-injury reactive depression. Conversely, low scores identify individuals at elevated risk of behavioral passivity, learned helplessness, treatment non-adherence, and catastrophic cognitive appraisals of their symptoms.

Within gerontology and active aging initiatives, the ALCOS-12 is heavily utilized to examine how older adults adapt to biological aging, chronic multi-morbidity, sensory decline, loss of social networks, and changes in autonomous living. Rather than focusing solely on objective physical functioning (such as activities of daily living or grip strength), the ALCOS-12 captures subjective control and psychological resilience. It empowers clinicians, social workers, and geriatricians to discern whether an older person's functional dependency stems from biological impairment or a psychological breakdown in perceived competence and behavioral initiative. In occupational and educational settings, the instrument provides an index of personal initiative, project execution, and grit when navigating structural organizational changes or complex educational curricula.

Psychological Construct

The psychological construct evaluated by the ALCOS-12 is generalized competence expectation, grounded in cognitive-motivational theories of perceived control, mastery, and self-efficacy. Generalized competence denotes a macro-level cognitive schema regarding one's overarching agency. Rather than asking "Can I solve this specific statistical problem?", generalized competence reflects the internal premise: "Whatever difficulties emerge, I possess the adaptive repertoire to confront, process, and ultimately resolve or adapt to them."

The scale models this psychological phenomenon across three foundational, correlated subscales:

1. Initiative (Competentie / initiatief nemen)

The Initiative dimension reflects the respondent's perceived capability to autonomously originate and launch novel courses of action. It measures the latency between formulating an intention and translating that intention into concrete behavioral output, indexing the avoidance of procrastination, dread, or behavioral avoidance when confronting unscripted challenges. High scorers on Initiative proactively seize control of circumstances, view novel opportunities without debilitating apprehension, and demonstrate high decisiveness. For example, an individual who agrees with the sentiment that they immediately embark on a task once a decision is made exemplifies high self-regulatory initiative.

2. Persistence / Effort (Inspanning / volharding)

The Persistence or Effort dimension evaluates the sustained investment of mental, physical, and emotional resources over time, particularly when a task is monotonous, mentally taxing, or requires prolonged attention. It taps into executive functioning, self-discipline, and conscientiousness. Individuals scoring high in Persistence resist distraction, finish ongoing tasks before disengaging, and do not abandon goals due to the mere requirement of sustained hard work. A prototypical expression of this dimension is maintaining concentration on a demanding assignment until it has reached complete execution.

3. Coping with Setbacks / Adversity (Omgaan met tegenslagen)

The Adversity dimension evaluates resilience, distress tolerance, and psychological recovery following initial failure, environmental barriers, or unexpected complications. While Initiative and Effort concern proactive goal initiation and maintenance, Coping with Setbacks concerns the reactive capacity to withstand failure without succumbing to demoralization or rapid goal disengagement. Individuals with high scores in this domain display an internal, modifiable attributional style: an initial failure is perceived as a signal to alter strategies or increase effort, rather than a definitive indictment of intrinsic unworthiness or insurmountable external fate.

Theoretical Framework

The foundational bedrock of the General Competence Scale is Albert Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1997). In Bandura's triadic reciprocal causation model, human functioning is the product of continuous, dynamic interactions between cognitive/personal factors, environmental influences, and behavioral patterns. Central to this system is the mechanism of personal agency: among the mechanisms of agency, none is more central or pervasive than beliefs of personal efficacy.

Bandura carefully distinguished between two cognitive appraisals:

• Outcome Expectancy: The judgment of the likely consequence that a given behavior will produce (e.g., "If an individual adheres to a rehabilitation regimen, physical mobility will improve").
• Efficacy Expectation: The conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior required to produce the outcomes (e.g., "Do I possess the capacity, willpower, and focus to execute this grueling rehabilitation program daily?").

According to social cognitive theory, efficacy beliefs dictate whether people think self-enhansingly or self-debilitatingly, how well they motivate themselves, how much effort they expend, whether they persevere in the face of obstacles, and how much stress they experience in demanding circumstances. Bandura posited four principal informational sources through which efficacy expectations are constructed: enactive mastery experiences (the most influential source, based on authentic past successes), vicarious experiences (observing social models), verbal/social persuasion (realistic encouragement from significant others), and physiological and affective states (interpreting somatic stress, anxiety, or stamina).

While Bandura initially emphasized that efficacy expectations are primarily situation-specific, personality and psychometric theorists such as Sherer et al. (1982) and Bosscher and Baardman (1989) posited that a lifetime of varied mastery experiences crystallizes into a generalized, trait-like cognitive schema. When individuals encounter wholly novel environments where no specific, domain-tied track record exists, they rely on this generalized competence expectation. The ALCOS-12 captures this generalized schema, operating as an assessment of overarching self-regulatory capability and perceived mastery over life.

Validity

The validity of the ALCOS-12 has been extensively scrutinized and corroborated across clinical, community-dwelling, and geriatric samples:

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity has been established by correlating ALCOS-12 scores with theoretically convergent constructs. Studies by Bosscher and Baardman (1989) and Bosscher, Smit, and Kempen (1997) revealed moderate-to-strong positive correlations with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (typically ranging from $r = .52$ to $.61$), reflecting that generalized efficacy is intrinsically linked to positive global self-regard. Similarly, significant positive correlations have been consistently documented with the Pearlin Mastery Scale ($r = .48$ to $.58$), confirming that the ALCOS-12 measures personal mastery and control over one's life course.

Conversely, the scale demonstrates robust negative correlations with measures of psychological distress, anxiety, and depressive symptomatology. When correlated against the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the ALCOS-12 demonstrates statistically significant inverse relationships ($r = -.38$ to $-.52$), illustrating that individuals with a fragile sense of personal competence are more vulnerable to affective dysregulation and depressive withdrawal.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity has been confirmed through comparisons against measures of cognitive functioning (such as the Mini-Mental State Examination; MMSE) and objective physical metrics in older cohorts, where correlations remain low ($r < .20$). This underscores that the ALCOS-12 captures subjective self-efficacy beliefs rather than raw cognitive ability or biological impairment. Furthermore, factor-analytic investigations evaluating the ALCOS-12 alongside locus of control measures (such as Levenson's Internal-External Control Scales) confirm that generalized competence forms a statistically separable construct from beliefs regarding external chance or powerful others.

Criterion and Predictive Validity

Predictive validity is demonstrated by the scale's ability to forecast behavioral health outcomes. In longitudinal studies of physical rehabilitation, baseline ALCOS-12 scores significantly predict active engagement in occupational therapy, recovery of independent functional mobility six months post-discharge, and greater adherence to outpatient regimens. In geriatric epidemiology (e.g., studies using the LASA cohort), higher general competence expectations prospectively buffer the negative impact of chronic physical disease on subjective well-being and life satisfaction.

Reliability

The ALCOS-12 exhibits sound internal consistency and temporal stability across diverse populations, establishing it as a reliable instrument for individual and group assessment:

Internal Consistency

In the original psychometric validation of the Dutch instrument by Bosscher and Baardman (1989) involving adult cohorts, the overall scale demonstrated a Cronbach's alpha ($lpha$) coefficient of 0.76. Subsequent large-scale investigations among older adults by Bosscher, Smit, and Kempen (1997; $N = 2,504$) reported a total scale alpha of 0.69 to 0.73, meeting acceptable psychometric criteria for broad-bandwidth psychological inventories. When evaluated by individual subscales across general and clinical populations, typical reliability coefficients are:

• Initiative Subscale (3 items): $lpha = 0.64 – 0.74$
• Persistence Subscale (4 items): $lpha = 0.63 – 0.73$
• Setbacks / Adversity Subscale (5 items): $lpha = 0.66 – 0.78$

While individual subscale alphas are occasionally modest due to the brief item count per factor (3 to 5 items), mean inter-item correlations consistently reside within the optimal range ($r = .25$ to $.45$), indicating high conceptual coherence without redundant phrasing.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability evaluations reveal moderate-to-high test-retest reliability across diverse testing intervals. Studies evaluating intervals ranging from two weeks to six months yield intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Pearson correlation values ranging from $r = .68$ to $.81$ in stable adult populations. This stability confirms that the ALCOS-12 evaluates an enduring, trait-like cognitive orientation rather than a transient, fluctuating emotional state.

Factor Analysis

The factor structure of the ALCOS-12 was established to resolve long-standing psychometric debates surrounding the original 17-item General Self-Efficacy Scale (Sherer et al., 1982). While Sherer et al. initially proposed a broad unidimensional construct or two unrefined factors, empirical replications frequently encountered conflicting cross-loadings and unstable secondary factors.

Bosscher and Baardman (1989) conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principal component extraction and oblique rotation on Dutch samples. Their findings eliminated five psychometrically unstable or low-loading items from the original 17-item pool, resulting in an optimal, parsimonious 12-item solution exhibiting three clean, distinct dimensions:

• Factor 1: Coping with Setbacks / Adversity (Items 3, 4, 8, 9, 12) — Accounts for the largest share of common variance, capturing psychological resilience when confronted with negative feedback, failure, and unforeseen impediments.
• Factor 2: Persistence / Effort (Items 5, 6, 7, 10) — Captures sustained focus, continuous effort, and the avoidance of cognitive or behavioral fatigue during ongoing tasks.
• Factor 3: Initiative (Items 1, 2, 11) — Taps into the swift translation of intentions into proactive behavior and the readiness to engage novel challenges.

Subsequently, Bosscher, Smit, and Kempen (1997) tested this 12-item, three-factor structure using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) within a sample of 2,504 community-dwelling older adults (ages 55 to 89). Structural equation modeling confirmed that the three-factor oblique model exhibited superior fit relative to a unidimensional general factor model. Typical goodness-of-fit indices reported in empirical evaluations demonstrate strong structural validity:

• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): $le 0.051$ (indicating close fit)
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): $ge 0.94$
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): $ge 0.93$
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): $le 0.046$

Standardized factor loadings across all 12 items uniformly exceed 0.40, with the vast majority ranging between 0.50 and 0.74, verifying that each operationalized item contributes meaningfully to its assigned latent factor without problematic multi-collinearity or substantial cross-loadings.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Test Type: Self-report psychological questionnaire / psychometric rating scale.
• Target Population: Adults, older adults (geriatric populations), rehabilitation patients, and clinical cohorts.
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil self-completion, digital/online psychometric testing, or structured clinical interview administration for individuals with mild visual or motor limitations.
• Completion Time: Approximately 3 to 5 minutes.
• Item Count: 12 standardized items.
• Subscale Allocation:
  • Initiative (Initiatief nemen): Items 1, 2, 11.
  • Persistence (Inspanning / volharding): Items 5, 6, 7, 10.
  • Coping with Setbacks (Omgaan met tegenslagen): Items 3, 4, 8, 9, 12.
• Authentic Response Scale:
  5-punts Likertschaal:
  • 1 = helemaal niet mee eens
  • 2 = niet mee eens
  • 3 = niet mee eens/niet mee oneens (neutraal)
  • 4 = mee eens
  • 5 = helemaal mee eens
• Scoring and Transformation Rules:
  • Positively phrased items (1, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12) are scored directly from 1 to 5.
  • Negatively phrased items (2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10) must be reverse-scored prior to composite aggregation: $1=5, 2=4, 3=3, 4=2, 5=1$.
  • Total score is computed by summing all 12 recoded items, yielding a composite score range of 12 to 60.
  • Subscale scores are obtained by calculating the sum or mean of the items comprising each specific factor.
  • Higher total and subscale scores denote greater levels of generalized competence expectation, perceived personal control, and psychological agency.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The underlying General Self-Efficacy Scale was initially published in 1982 by Mark Sherer and colleagues. The Dutch ALCOS-12 adaptation was standardized and published by Pieter R. Bosscher and I. Baardman in 1989, followed by its geriatric psychometric validation in 1997 by Bosscher, Smit, and Kempen.

The ALCOS-12 is widely treated in the international psychometric and medical literature as an open-access clinical and academic assessment tool. No proprietary licensing fees or royalties are required for non-commercial academic research, public health surveillance, or clinical therapeutic use. Researchers and healthcare practitioners deploying the ALCOS-12 are expected to maintain instrument integrity by administering the validated items without unauthorized textual alterations and to cite the primary validation sources (Bosscher & Baardman, 1989; Bosscher, Smit, & Kempen, 1997; Sherer et al., 1982) in all resulting scientific reports and presentations.

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
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.
• Bosscher, R. J., & Baardman, I. (1989). De algemene competentieschaal: Een betrouwbare en valide schaal voor het meten van competentieverwachtingen [The General Competence Scale: A reliable and valid scale for measuring competence expectations]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden, 44(7), 338–342.
• Bosscher, R. J., Smit, J. H., & Kempen, G. I. J. M. (1997). Algemene competentieverwachtingen bij ouderen: Een onderzoek naar de psychometrische kenmerken van de Algemene Competentieschaal (ALCOS) [General competence expectations in the elderly: A study of the psychometric properties of the General Competence Scale (ALCOS)]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden, 52(5), 239–248.
• Kempen, G. I. J. M., Miedema, I., Ormel, J., & Molenaar, W. (1996). The assessment of disability with the Health Survey questionnaire: Internal consistency and construct validity of the SF-36 in a Dutch elderly population. Social Science & Medicine, 43(4), 479–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00407-6
• Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). NFER-NELSON.
• Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51(2), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)