No abstract

A theoretical analysis of the structure and dynamics of human motor functioning is presented from the perspective of a general theory of individuality. Within multifactor-systems theory, the structural units of the six systems of integrative personality (i.e., sensory, motor, cognitive, affect, style, and value) are hierarchical factor structures. Integrative functioning, both within and among systems, is described via the principles of general systems and information-processing theory. Our theoretical synthesis of the structure and dynamics of human motor functioning involves conceptualizing the hierarchy of motor factors as: (a) the basic dimensions of individual differences in the motor domain, (b) classes of decomposable motor programs that specify the spatio-temporal organization of behavior, and (c) decomposable classes of processing components entailed by motor programs. Some of the implications for understanding the role of affect in motor functioning and some research suggestions were presented.

Correlations between scores on the Adult Locus of Control Scale and a number of personality scales supported the hypothesis that the control scores are related to need achievement, anxiety, psychopathology, socioeconomic status, ethnic group membership, and intellectual ability. There was some evidence that locus of control scores are also related to teacher effectiveness.

Multifactor-system theory is a general conception of the structure, dynamics, and development of individual differences in integrative personality. The structure and dynamics of individuality are analyzed from an information-processing conceptual framework in which personality, or the total psychological system, is conceived as a hierarchically organized composite of six interacting systems: sensory, motor, cognition, affect, style, and value. In Part I of this three-part series on multifactor-system theory, each of the six systems is analyzed as a multidimensional hierarchy.The study of individual differences represents something of an enigma in the history of modern psychology. On the one hand, We wish to acknowledge the grant support provided by the National Research Council, the Alberta Human Resources Research Council, and the University of Alberta. But we are especially indebted to Canada Council for the generous and extended financial backing provided to J. R. Royce since 1968. This includes a sabbatical leave grant for the academic year 1972-1973. The Individuality Project, under whose auspices the work reported herein was undertaken, constitutes a unique experiment in theory construction in that it is the product of a group effort. The project director is particularly indebted to Arnold Powell, senior research associate, who has not only made impressive and massive contributions to the project but who has also served as a model of what a theory construction collaborator should be. His style of thinking and working has been an inspiration to all who have contributed to the project. It is clear that he is to be credited with much of the esprit de corps and the consequent success of the project. We are also indebted to the other major contributors to the project: Stephen Diamond, research associate, and Burt Voorhees, mathematical research associate. Other collaborators include research associate Allan Buss and graduate research assistant Gregory Kearsley, both of whom made important contributions during the early stages of the project. Others who have contributed include research associates George Kawash and Warren Klare and graduate research assistants Michael Katzko, John McDermott, Donald Schopflocher, and Douglas Wardell. Less extensive contributions have been made by research assistants Peter Holt, Kenneth Meehan, this field of investigation is one of the oldest in scientific psychology-beginning with the study of the personal equation (Boring, 1950)-and provides the scientific backbone of contemporary applied psychology. On the other hand, modern psychological laboratories seem nearly unanimous in their insistence that individual differences be rele-Steve Nicely, and John Wozny. Finally, we are indebted to the following staff members of the Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical Psychology for their continual critical feedback over the past 15 years: Richard Jung, W. W. Rozeboom, Herman Tennessen, Kellogg Wilson, and Teddy Weckowicz. However, we owe a special vote of indebtedness to Leendert Mos, C...

Correlations between the Intellectual Achievement Responsibility Questionnaire and several measures of academic achievement did not support the hypothesis that this scale measures locus of control attitudes in intellectual-academic achievement situations. Support was obtained for the hypothesis that a measure of more generalized locus of control attitudes was related to academic achievement.