Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
Running head: LOCUS OF CONTROL AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution:
A Comparison of Early Adolescents versus Young Adults
Shannon M. Saville and Robert A. Swoap
Warren Wilson College
1
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
Abstract
This study represents the first attempt to compare locus of control (LOC) and conflict resolution
in adolescents and young adults. Participants ages 14-15 and 21-22 (N = 196) were recruited
from 2 high schools and 3 colleges. The participants completed the Adult Nowicki-Strickland
Internal-External Scale and the Conflict Resolution Questionnaire to measure their LOC and
conflict resolution tactics. It was found that LOC was more internal (p = .001) and compromise
was used more (p < .000) by young adults than adolescents, females and males used overt anger
equally (p = .001), and LOC was a predictor of compromise (R2 = .17, p < .000). The current
research suggests that LOC, age, and gender are reliable predictors of conflict resolution tactics,
namely compromise.
2
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
3
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution:
A Comparison of Early Adolescents versus Young Adults
The ages of adolescence and young adulthood are rife with numerous challenges and new
life experiences. Individuals vary in the way they perceive and manage these challenges; some
may change the way they resolve conflicts as they mature. For example, there have been
numerous studies concerning differences found in locus of control (LOC) between genders and
ages (Blanchard-Fields & Irion, 1988; Chubb & Fertman, 1997; Gomez, 1997; Nunn, 1994;
Riechard & Peterson, 1998; Ross & Mirowsky, 2002), as well as studies pertaining to adolescent
conflict resolution tactics (Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kaukiainen, 1992; James & Owens, 2004;
Feldman & Gowen, 1998; Laursen, Finkelstein, & Betts, 2001; Lindeman, Harakka, &
Keltikangas-Jarvinen, 1997; Owens, Daly, & Slee, 2005). However, these constructs have never
been compared in the same study. The primary aim of the current study is to see whether LOC
could be an additional predictor of conflict resolution tactics. If so, LOC could provide another
helpful indicator as to how adolescents and young adults are likely to resolve conflicts, and
therefore guide interventions and education in populations at a higher risk for using less desirable
resolution tactics.
Conflict Resolution
Conflict resolution, as defined by Owens and colleagues (2005), is an action required to
terminate an exchange of mutual opposition. Developmental research has found differences in
conflict resolution tactics between adolescents and young adults. The use of less socially
desirable tactics, such as overt anger, avoidance, distraction, and withdrawal, are thought to be
employed by adolescents more frequently than by young adults; this may be due to decreased
self-control, increased peer influence, and an increased concern with the opposite sex associated
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
4
with this stage of development (Feldman & Gowen,1998; Bjorkqvist et al., 1992; Lindeman et
al., 1997; Gamble, 1994). Young adulthood is marked by a decrease in withdrawal and an
increase in direct problem solving and compromise, in part attributable to the emergence of
prosocial behavior through late adolescence and an increase in moral reasoning (Lindeman et al.,
1997; Gamble, 1994; Owens et al., 2005; Feldman & Gowen,1998).
A meta-analysis of peer conflict resolution, conducted by Laursen et al. (2001),
compared studies evaluating adolescents (ages 11-18) and young adults (ages 19-25).
Researchers divided conflict resolution into compromise, third party intervention, withdrawal,
standoff, and submission. These five subsets could be combined into three categories:
negotiation (compromise and third party), disengagement (withdrawal and standoff), and
coercion (submission). Adolescents used disengagement most and negotiation least while young
adults used negotiation most and coercion least. The majority of studies show a progressive
developmental trend toward negotiation and away from coercion (Laursen et al., 2001).
Gender differences in conflict resolution have also been found. Males have been shown
to exhibit more direct, physical aggression while females have been shown to inflict indirect,
mental discomfort on others (Bjorkqvist et al., 1992). Bjorkqvist et al. (1992) suggested that a
possible reason for these findings is that females usually develop more quickly than males. This
developmental difference often involves verbal and social skills, which are needed for the
utilization of indirect aggression. Females have also been found to be more prosocial and less
aggressive than males (Lindeman et al., 1997). In contrast, one study found that adolescent
females used more overt anger tactics combined with compromise when resolving conflicts,
while males had a higher rate of distraction (Feldman & Gowen, 1998). A study in Australia
found anger to be the same between sexes, but the females used more obliging, avoidance, and
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
5
compromise methods. This may indicate that females are more peaceful and constructive when
resolving conflicts (Owens et al., 2005). The gender findings for withdrawal as a conflict
resolution strategy have been mixed (Bjorkqvist et al., 1992; Lindeman et al., 1997).
In addition to age and gender differences found among conflict resolution tactics, the type
of relationship requiring resolution and whether or not the conflict studied is hypothetical or real
also influences which tactic is used. Voluntary relationships, such as those between romantic
partners and friends, are more conducive to negotiation tactics, while coercion is used more for
sibling and acquaintance relationships (Laursen et al., 2001). Laursen et al. (2001) also found
that negotiation was preferred more in hypothetical conflict scenarios, while coercion was used
more in actual conflicts. This disparity may be due to the social desirability of certain tactics
such as compromise and negotiation, making these tactics what most people would like to use,
even if in reality other methods of resolution are employed.
Locus of Control
Gomez (1997) describes locus of control (LOC) as the degree to which people think they
or other factors control events in their lives. Internal locus of control (ILOC) is characterized by
the belief that people have control over their own life events, while external locus of control
(ELOC) is characterized by the belief that outside sources control what happens to them, whether
it be powerful others, chance, or fate (Gomez, 1997). LOC is a continuous, rather than a
dichotomous variable, and can vary between situations (Chubb & Fertman, 1997).
ILOC has been examined in many age-comparison studies, including comparisons
between children, adolescents, young adults, middle age adults, and elderly adults (BlanchardFields & Irion, 1988; Chubb & Fertman, 1997; Gomez, 1997; Nunn, 1994; Riechard & Peterson,
1998; Ross & Mirowsky, 2002). Chubb & Fertman (1997) found an interaction between gender
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
6
and grade for LOC in adolescents. Adolescent boys were found to first have a decrease in
internalization between 9th and 10th grades, and then have an increase in internalization between
10th grade and one year post-high school, with the biggest shift occurring between the 10th and
11th grades. Girls had their largest increase in internalization between 9th and 10th grades and
maintained an overall ILOC throughout adolescence. In general, as adolescents grow older,
LOC becomes more internal (Chubb & Fertman, 1997; Gomez, 1997; Nunn, 1994; Riechard &
Peterson, 1998). This internalization is theoretically related to the increased responsibility,
independence, and self-control associated with the transition to young adulthood. The observed
gender differences may be related to sex differences with the onset of puberty.
Some gender LOC comparisons in adults show women to be more external (Nunn, 1994;
Ross & Nirowsky, 2002), while still others find men to be more external (Blanchard-Fields &
Irion, 1988). Gender differences have been found in LOC when comparing older adults (over
the age of 65), with men being more internal. These findings are potentially explained by
generational differences, such as older women’s increased economic dependence and decreased
career opportunities; this disparity has not been found in younger subjects (Ross et al., 2002).
According to Chubb & Fertman (1997), most adult studies do not find a significant difference in
LOC between genders.
The aim of the current research is to compare male and female adolescents to young
adults using the constructs of conflict resolution and locus of control. It is theorized that the
progression toward independence that occurs during these developmental stages will result in
LOC and conflict resolution differences. It is hypothesized that: 1) LOC becomes more
internalized as a person grows older; 2) conflict resolution relies more on compromise as age
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
7
increases; 3) males show more direct forms of resolution (overt anger) than females; 4) there will
be a significant correlation between ILOC and compromise.
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
8
Method
Participants
One hundred and ninety-six students from North Carolina volunteered to participate in
this study (132 female, 63 male, and 1 unspecified gender). There were 110 high school
participants (14-15 years old) and 86 college participants (21-23 years old). Participants were
obtained through random sampling (via the primary researcher contacting every fifth
teacher/professor from the selected schools’ websites) and through convenience sampling. The
ethnic distribution of participants was as follows: 85.2% White European American, 6.1%
African American, 4.6% Hispanic, 3.1% Asian American, and .5% Native American.
Participants were not compensated for their participation.
Measures
Locus of control.
The Adult Nowicki-Strickland Internal-External Control Scale (ANSIE; see Appendix A)
is a widely used measure for LOC and has strong test-retest reliability (r = .83) and construct
validity (r = .68). It is a 40-item “yes or no” scale that measures a participant’s degree of either
internal (own behavior) or external (fate or chance) LOC. Higher scores indicate a more external
LOC. Sample questions are as follows: “Are some people just born lucky?” and “Most of the
time, do you find it useless to try to get your own way at home?”
Conflict resolution.
The Conflict Resolution Questionnaire (see Appendix B) was adapted from Feldman and
Gowen (1998) and Charlton (2001) by James and Owens (2004). It is a 28-item scale that
measures six styles of conflict resolution: overt anger, compromise, avoidance, social support,
obliging, and distraction. Answers to conflict resolution behaviors are on a five-point Likert
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution
9
scale ranging from “Never” (0) to “Very Often” (4). Reliability of the subscales range from α =
.61 (distraction) to α = .85 (overt anger). Examples of resolution behaviors included: “Try to
reason,” “Clam up and hold my feelings inside,” and “Get angrier the more I talk.”
Procedure
Approval for research was first obtained through the researcher’s college Institutional
Review Board. Permission from schools and educators was then requested in a letter sent to
principals, teachers, and professors. The primary researcher visited three colleges and two high
schools, which had given permission, to administer the research packets. For the high school
participants, informed consent documents were sent to teachers prior to test administration. Both
parents and students signed and returned the consent forms to the school before the researcher’s
arrival. College participants were handed the informed consent document upon the researcher’s
arrival to review and sign if they wished to participate. The informed consent was reviewed in
every class before the research packets were handed out.
The research packets consisted of an instruction form, a demographics form, the ANSIE,
and the Conflict Resolution Questionnaire and took approximately 15 minutes to complete.
Time was given during class to complete the packets. For the students who did not want to
participate and/or did not have their informed consent, a brief and voluntary reading was
provided discussing interesting psychological phenomena. When all students were finished with
their packets, a debriefing form was distributed which further explained the nature of the
research and provided a website where the results of the study would be posted.
Results
Questionnaires were scored and then entered and analyzed using SPSS (15th ed.). An
alpha level of .05 was used to analyze the following hypotheses.
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 10
Hypothesis 1
A 2 X 2 (Gender X Age) factorial ANOVA was conducted to determine whether or not
participants differed in locus of control scores. ANSIE scores showed a significant main effect
for age F(4, 191) = .81, p = .001, with adolescents exhibiting a more external LOC (see Table 1).
Neither gender nor the interaction between age and gender showed a significant effect.
Hypothesis 2
A 2 X 2 (Gender X Age) factorial ANOVA was conducted to determine if participants
varied on the usage of compromise. A significant main effect was found for both gender
F(4,191) = 2.65, p < .05, and age F(4,191) = 2.65, p <.001, but not for the interaction between
the two. Young adults and females used compromise more often than did adolescents or males
(see Table 2).
Hypothesis 3
A 2 X 2 (Gender X Age) factorial ANOVA was conducted to determine the degree to
which participants used overt anger as a conflict resolution tactic. In contrast to the hypothesis,
there was not a significant difference between male and female use of this tactic. There was,
however, a significant main effect for age F(4, 191) = 3.48, p = .001, with adolescents using
overt anger more often than young adults (see Table 3). There was not a significant interaction
effect.
Hypothesis 4
A linear multiple regression analysis was conducted to analyze the degree LOC, age, and
gender predict compromise. Using stepwise method, LOC entered the equation first and
accounted for 17% of the variance within compromise (p < .000). When combined with gender
and age, 23% of the variance within compromise was accounted for (see Table 4).
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 11
Table 1
Mean ANSIE Scores by Gender and Age
Adolescents
Young Adults
Female
M = 14.07
(SD = 4.71, n = 81)
M = 11.39
(SD = 4.21, n = 51)
Overall average by
gender
M = 13.04
(SD = 4.69, n = 132)
Male
M = 13.03
(SD = 4.59, n = 29)
M = 10.88
(SD = 4.43, n = 34)
M = 11.87
(SD = 4.60, n = 63)
Overall average by
age
M = 13.80*
(SD = 4.68, n = 110)
M = 11.12*
(SD = 4.30, n = 86)
M = 12.62
(SD = 4.70, n = 196)
Note. Maximum score = 40. Higher scores indicate more external LOC.
*p = .001.
Table 2
Mean Compromise Scores by Gender and Age
Adolescents
Young Adults
Female
M = 2.74
(SD = 0.69, n = 81)
M = 3.28
(SD = 0.55, n = 51)
Overall average by
gender
M = 2.95*
(SD = 0.69, n = 132)
Male
M = 2.58
(SD = 0.85, n = 29)
M = 2.88
(SD = 0.69, n = 34)
M = 2.74*
(SD = 0.78, n = 63)
Overall average by
age
M = 2.70**
(SD = 0.73, n = 110)
M = 3.12**
(SD = 0.63, n = 86)
M = 2.88
(SD = 0.72, n = 196)
Note. Maximum score = 4.
*p < .05. **p < .001.
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 12
Table 3
Mean Overt Anger Scores by Gender and Age
Adolescents
Young Adults
Female
M = 1.86
(SD = 0.75, n = 81)
M = 1.45
(SD = 0.59, n = 51)
Overall average by
gender
M = 1.70
(SD = 0.72, n = 132)
Male
M = 1.87
(SD = 0.84, n = 29)
M = 1.53
(SD = 0.47, n = 34)
M = 1.69
(SD = 0.68, n = 63)
Overall average by
age
M = 1.86*
(SD = 0.77, n = 110)
M = 1.48*
(SD = 0.54, n = 86)
M = 1.70
(SD = 0.70, n = 196)
Note. Maximum score = 4.
*p = .001.
Table 4
Stepwise Multiple Regression Analysis for Predicting Compromise
R
R square
LOC
.42**
LOC & gender
LOC, gender, & age
*
p < .05. ** p < .000.
.17
Adjusted R
square
.17
Standard error of
the estimate
.659
.46*
.21
.20
.646
.49*
.24
.23
.633
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 13
Discussion
The current study marks the first attempt to analyze both locus of control and conflict
resolution tactics in adolescents and young adults. The results indicate that LOC is a predictor of
compromise for these populations, providing further support for predicting and encouraging
desirable conflict resolution tactics. Consistent with previous literature, the hypotheses that LOC
would be more internal for young adults than for adolescents and that young adults would rely on
compromise more than adolescents were supported. These findings form a logical progression:
if young adults exhibit a more internal LOC, in part due to increased independence, etc., and
internal LOC predicts compromise, then young adults should be more likely than adolescents to
use compromise in conflict situations.
It is interesting to note that males and females did not differ in their usage of overt anger,
which is in opposition to what was hypothesized. The current findings are also in opposition to
previous studies that have found differences between genders. One possible explanation for this
may be attributed to the common definition of overt anger as direct, physical aggression, a trait
that is commonly attributed more to males. Bjorkqvist and colleagues (1992) note that “women
[are] not less aggressive if the readiness to inflict mental pain [is] considered” (p. 118). The lack
of a statistical difference between genders in overt anger in this study may indicate equal usage
between genders, but perhaps in different forms.
One possible limitation to this study concerns the sample sizes among the age and gender
groups. Due to the nature of random sampling, obtaining equal representations of
adolescent/young adult and male/female participants could not be controlled. This led to sample
sizes ranging from 29 (adolescent males) to 81 (adolescent females), which could have
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 14
potentially had a negative consequence for effect sizes. Perhaps increased control for equality in
sampling variance in the future could lead to stronger significance for research findings.
Future research should focus on finding additional factors relating to conflict resolution
tactics. The three independent variables used in this study (LOC, gender, and age) only
accounted for 23% of the variance within compromise, leaving much room for additional
predictors. Suggestions for these additional factors include: socio-economic status, ethnicity,
cultural differences, type of conflict, type of relationship in conflict, and degree of personal
responsibility. As mentioned previously, voluntary relationships in conflict, such as romantic
partnerships, are usually resolved using negotiation (Laursen et al., 2001). Additionally,
hypothetical conflicts, as were used in this study, tend to elicit socially desirable responses, such
as negotiation. Actual conflicts are reported to be resolved using coercion most often (Laursen et
al., 2001). Social desirability effects should be researched further in the future, as they were not
addressed in the current study.
Locus of control is just one of potentially many factors contributing to the use of different
conflict resolution tactics. It may be helpful for conflict mediators and school officials to be
cognizant of individual variances in adolescents and young adults and the effects these
differences may have on which conflict resolution tactics are used. Knowing that having a more
internal LOC is related to compromise, mediators and school officials could attempt to provide
opportunities that would encourage internalization of LOC, such as increased opportunities for
decision making. This internalization could make it more likely that individuals will use more
socially desirable conflict resolution tactics, such as compromise, leading to improved social
interactions in the future.
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 15
In addition, schools and community programs could provide workshops and resources to
teach students socially desirable conflict resolution tactics. This learning process may also have
the effect of internalizing LOC, furthering the chances of students using compromise to resolve
conflicts. Teachers and administrators may be in a unique position to alter interactions between
students through education and modeling that would lead to a more harmonious and safe learning
environment.
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 16
Appendix A
ANSIE – Form C
YES NO
___
___ 1.
Do you believe that most problems will solve themselves if you don’t fool with them?
___
___
2.
Do you believe that you can stop yourself from catching a cold?
___
___
3.
Are some people just born lucky?
___
___
4.
Most of the time, do you feel that getting good grades means a great deal to you?
___
___
5.
Are you often blamed for things that just aren’t your fault?
___
___
6.
Do you believe that if somebody studies hard enough, he or she can pass any subject?
___
___
7.
Do you feel that most of the time it doesn’t pay to try hard because things never turn out right
anyway?
___
___
8.
Do you feel that if things start out well in the morning that it’s going to be a great day, no matter
what you do?
___
___
9.
Do you feel that most of the time parents listen to what their children have to say?
___
___
10. Do you believe that wishing can make good things happen?
___
___
11. When you get criticized, does it usually seem it’s for no good reason at all?
___
___
12. Most of the time do you find it hard to change a friend’s mind/opinion?
___
___
13. Do you think that cheering, more than luck, helps a team to win?
___
___
14. Do you feel that it is nearly impossible to change your parents’ mind about anything?
___
___
15. Do you believe that your parents should allow you to make most of your own decisions?
___
___
16. Do you feel that when you do something wrong there’s very little you can do to make it right?
___
___
17. Do you believe that most people are just born good at sports?
___
___
18. Are most of the other people your age and sex stronger than you are?
___
___
19. Do you feel that one of the best ways to handle most problems is just not to think about them?
___
___
20. Do you feel that you have a lot of choice in deciding who your friends are?
___
___
21. If you find a four-leaf clover, do you believe that it might bring good luck?
___
___
22. Do you often feel that whether or not you do your homework has much to do with what kinds of
grades you get?
___
___
23. Do you feel that when a person your age is angry with you, there’s little you can do to stop him or
her?
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 17
___
___
24. Have you ever had a good luck charm?
___
___
25. Do you believe that whether or not people like you depends on how you act?
___
___
26. Will your parents usually help you if you ask them to?
___
___
27. Have you ever felt that when people were angry with you, it was usually for no reason at all?
___
___
28. Most of the time, do you feel that you can change what might happen tomorrow by what you do
today?
___
___
29. Do you believe that when bad things are going to happen they just are going to happen no matter
what you do to try to stop them?
___
___
30. Do you think that people can get their own way if they just keep trying?
___
___
31. Most of the time, do you find it useless to try to get your own way at home?
___
___
32. Do you feel that when good things happen, they happen because of hard work?
___
___
33. Do you feel that when somebody your age wants to be your enemy, there’s little you can do to
change matters?
___
___
34. Do you feel that it’s easy to get friends to do what you want them to do?
___
___
35. Do you usually feel that you have little to say about what you get to eat at home?
___
___
36. Do you feel that when someone doesn’t like you there’s little you can do about it?
___
___
37. Do you usually feel that it is almost useless to try in school because most other students are just
plain smarter than you are?
___
___
38. Are you the kind of person that believes that planning ahead makes things turn out better?
___
___
39. Most of the time, do you feel that you have little to say about what your family decides to do?
___
___
40. Do you think it’s better to be smart than to be lucky?
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 18
Appendix B
Indicate by circling the appropriate number (from 0 to 4) how often you do the following things during a
disagreement or conflict with peers.
Conflict Resolution Behaviors
Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Quite
Often
Very
Often
1. Try to reason
0
1
2
3
4
2. Talk to a brother or sister
0
1
2
3
4
3. Get angry and yell
0
1
2
3
4
4. Put the other person’s needs first
0
1
2
3
4
5. Hurt other person’s feelings
0
1
2
3
4
6. Try to be funny and make light of it
0
1
2
3
4
7. Get sarcastic
0
1
2
3
4
8. Apologize to other person
0
1
2
3
4
9. Clam up and hold my feelings inside
0
1
2
3
4
10. Listen and try to understand
0
1
2
3
4
11. Get angry and walk away
0
1
2
3
4
12. Give in to what the other person wants
0
1
2
3
4
13. Walk away and discuss later
0
1
2
3
4
14. Bring in or try to bring in a friend
0
1
2
3
4
15. Get cool and distant/ Give cold shoulder
0
1
2
3
4
16. Talk to a friend
0
1
2
3
4
17. Tell myself it is not important
0
1
2
3
4
18. Try to avoid talking about it
0
1
2
3
4
19. Try to work out a compromise
0
1
2
3
4
20. Make other person feel bad
0
1
2
3
4
21. Talk to a parent
0
1
2
3
4
22. Watch TV or play video games
0
1
2
3
4
23. Get angrier the more I talk
0
1
2
3
4
24. Bring in or try to bring in someone (to help)
0
1
2
3
4
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 19
25. Try to smooth things over
0
1
2
3
4
26. Stay angry a long time
0
1
2
3
4
27. Talk to a teacher
0
1
2
3
4
28. Distract yourself or the other person through entertainment or relaxation
0
1
2
3
4
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 20
References
Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K., & Kaukianen A. (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight?:
developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior,
18, 117-127.
Blanchard-Fields, F., & Irion, J. (1988). The relation between locus of control and coping in two
contexts: age as a moderator variable. Psychology and Aging, 3(2), 197-203.
Chubb, N., & Fertman, C. (1997). Adolescent self-esteem and locus of control: a longitudinal
study of gender and age differences. Adolescence, 32(125), 113-121.
Feldman, S., & Gowen, L. (1998). Conflict negotiation tactics in romantic relationships in high
school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27(6), 691-718.
Gamble, W. (1994). Perceptions of controllability and other stressor event characteristics as
determinants of coping among young adolescents and young adults. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 23(1), 65-86.
Gomez, R. (1997). Locus of control and Type A behavior pattern as predictors of coping styles
among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(3), 391-398.
Laursen, B., Finkelstein, B., & Betts N. (2001). A developmental meta-analysis of peer conflict
resolution. Developmental Review, 21, 423-449.
Lindeman, M., Harakka, T., & Keltikangas-Jarvinen L. (1997). Age and gender differences in
adolescents' reactions to conflict situations: aggression, prosociality, and withdrawal.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26(3), 339-53.
Nunn, G. (1994). Adult learners' locus of control, self-evaluation and learning temperament as a
function of age and gender. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 21(3), 260-266.
Owens, L., Daly, A., & Slee P. (2005). Sex and age differences in victimization and conflict
Locus of Control and Conflict Resolution 21
resolution among adolescents in a south australian school. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 1-12.
Riechard, D., & Peterson, S. (1998). Perception of environmental risk related to gender,
community socioeconomic setting, age, and locus of control. Journal of Environmental
Education, 30(1), 11-21.
Ross, C., & Mirowsky, J. (2002). Age and the gender gap in the sense of personal control. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 65(2), 125-47.