Internal vs. external control time perspective and delay of gratification of high and low ego strength groups

Abstract

PROBLEM concerning ego strength emphasizes lack of agreement as to what constitutes ego strength and the poor interrelationships obtained between various measures designed to assess it. This raises a question whether any consistent differences can be observed between groups differing in ego strength. This study compares high and low ego strength groups on three measures: Internal vs. External Control, Time Perspective, and Delay of Gratification. Previous studies('. report a stronger belief in Internal Control, a more extended Time Perspective, and a stronger tendency for Delayed Gratification as being more characteristic of functioning persons rather than those rated relatively high on severity of psychological disturbance. METHOD Much of the current Subjects.A pool of male and female introductory psychology students was used to obtain 45 high and 45 low ego strength Ss. Ss scoring below T score of 50 on Barren's(') Scale were identified as low ego strength (LEs); those scoring above T 50 as high ego strengths (HEs). Ss were matched on I& and age ( Table 1). Measures.A. Internal vs. External Control (1-E). Rotter's(6) InternalExternal Control Questionnaire consists of 29 forced choice items including 6 filler items and is designed to measure one's basic belief in Internal us. External control of reinforcements. The total number of External choices checked constituted the I-E score.Wallace's technique was used to obtain two measures of TP: Future (FTP) and past (PTP). Each S was asked to state 10 things that he thought he would do or he thought would happen to him, and afterwards to specify how far in the future he envisioned each event. This procedure was repeated to obtain PTP, with S being asked to state 10 things that he has done or have happened to him in the past. Ss were asked not to spend much time selecting, but to report those things that occurred to them on first thought.C. Delay of Gratification (DG). An hypothetical choice was used. It consisted of presenting the S with four plastic poker chips and asking him to assign monetary value to these chips. After the value of the chip was obtained, the S was given a choice between one chip now or two later. If the later choice was preferred, the S was asked how long he would be willing to wait to obtain the doubled reward.The three measures Es, I-E, and TP were group administered. Somewhat later, Ss chosen on the basis of the Es scores were asked to participate in a larger experiment, part of which included the DG measure, which was administered individually. A t the same session, the information and similarities subscales of the WAIS were given to estimate I&. Table 1 presents a summary of data for HEs and LEs groups. Highly significant differences between HEs and LEs groups were obtained on the I-E measure (t = 3.6; df = 88; p < .001). HEs Ss have a more extended median FTP and PTP than the LEs Ss, with equal range for both groups (PTP = 1 hr. -15 years; FTP = 1 hr. -50 years). However, using the median for a combined HEs and LEs group B. Time Perspective ...

The Reliability and Validity of Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Scores in Academically Talented Adolescents

“…A. Greene & DeBacker, 2004;Miller & Brickman, 2004;Phalet, Andriessen, & Lens, 2004;Simons et al, 2000;Simons et al, 2004), delay of gratification (Bembenutty & Karabenick, 2004;Shybut, 1970), delinquency (Oyserman & Markus, 1990a, 1990b, and academic achievement (e.g., Anderman, Anderman, & Griesinger, 1999;de Volder & Lens, 1982;Groth, 1973;Honora, 2002;Shell & Husman, 2001;Teahan, 1958). However, the emphasis on the future has resulted in a relative neglect of the potential importance of adolescents' past and present TPs.…”

Internality: an Educational Imperative

“…The findings have demonstrated that although the world cannot be neatly divided into externals and internals, a high degree of internality correlates closely with personal well-being. At least four studies revealed that persons with a high belief in internal control are more confident and have higher levels of self-esteem (Abramowitz, 1969;Fish & Karabenick, 1971;Hersch & Scheibe, 1967;Platt & Eisenman, 1968;Reznikoff, Bridges, & Hirsch, 1972;Roberts, 1971;Shybut, 1970;Warehime & Woodson, 1971). One study found internals to be less prone to depression (Abramowitz, 1969), and another reported them to be less suicide prone (Williams & Nickels, 1969).…”