Concurrent validation of the levels of attribution and change (LAC) scale

Abstract

This study examined the temporal reliability and concurrent validity of the LAC Scale, a multidimensional measure of the loci of causal attributions, in a sample of 95 college students. Test‐retest coefficients for the 10 subscales averaged.78 for a 2‐week interval and.70 for 4 weeks. Six of seven hypotheses related to concurrent validity were supported empirically, including predicted interrelations between the LAC and social desirability, distress severity, psychological‐mindedness scores, and the expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire. It is concluded that the LAC Scale is an internally and temporally reliable instrument that possesses concurrent validity and that measures attributional dimensions largely independent of the ASQ.

Levels of Attribution and Change in a High-Security Correctional Population

“…Consistent with earlier reports (Norcross et al, 1984;Norcross & Magaletta, 1990) the ten subscales within the LAC have very good internal consistency, with Cronbach alpha's ranging from .75 to .91. Many of the intercomponent correlations are significantly large, and all of the coefficients are positive.…”

“…Test-retest coefficients for the LAC subscales averaged .78 for a 2-week interval and .70 for 4 weeks in a college sample (Norcross & Magaletta, 1990). Strong internal consistency across three independent samples (with coefficients averaging .87, .84, and .87) has also been reported (Norcross, Prochaska & Hambrecht, 1985).…”

“…The Levels of Attribution and Change (LAC) scale is one instrument that can expand the current scope of the literature as it provides a more specific multidimensional assessment of the content within one's causal attributes (Norcross & Magaletta, 1990;Norcross, Prochaska, Guadagnoli & DiClemente, 1984;Norcross, Prochaska & Hambrecht, 1985). The LAC is a problem attribution tool borne out of the Transtheoretical Model of Change (Prochaska, 1984(Prochaska, , 1991Prochaska, DiClemente & Norcross, 1992) and is based on the position that individuals often attribute their problems to multiple and varying sources (DiClemente, McConnaughy, Norcross & Prochaska, 1986).…”

Effects of counselors' etiology attributions on college students' procrastination.

“…Exploratory factor analysis did not suggest that these changes substantially altered the LAC's factor structure. Retest reliability for the LAC averages .70 at a 4-week interval (Bellis, 1993), and the LAC's discriminant validity is supported by its low correlation with the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ), a measure of causal dimensions (Norcross & Magaletta, 1990), and with the Causal Dimension Scale in the current sample.…”