Universidad del Zulia - Facultad de Humanidades y Educación

ISSN 1315-4079 ~ Depósito legal pp 199402ZU41

Vol. 24 (1,2,3) enero – diciembre 2017 Edición Especial: 41-66

carlos.mayora@correounivalle.edu.co; nfernandez@usb.ve

Resumen

El objetivo de este estudio fue adaptar la Academic Locus of Control Scale for College Students

(Trice, 1985) a una población de estudiantes universitarios venezolanos, así como, evaluar la

confiabilidad y validez de la escala traducida. Se administró dicha adaptación a una muestra de

179 estudiantes de la Universidad Simón Bolívar. Se llevaron a cabo análisis estadísticos, tales

como el coeficiente de Cronbach y el análisis de componentes principales. Adicionalmente, se

estudiantes universitarios.

Validation of a Spanish adaptation of Trice´s academic

locus of control scale for college students

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to adapt the Academic Locus of Control Scale for College

Students (Trice, 1985) to a population of Venezuelan university students, as well as, evaluating

issues of reliability and validity of the translated scale. The resulting Spanish adaptation of the

ALC was administered to a sample of 179 students from Universidad Simón Bolivar. Statistical

analysis such as Cronbach and Principal Components Analysis, were conducted. Additionally,

Keywords: Academic Locus of Control, validity, reliability, back-translation, college students.

in their lives. While some tend to perceive that fate, luck, other people and other external forces

control what happens to them; others perceive themselves to exert such control. Such perceptions

of control are labeled as locus of control or LOC (Rotter, 1966). Traditional views on the LOC

construct describe it as a dichotomic variable, with individuals showing a tendency towards either

an external or an internal orientation. Over the years, this approach has changed. Current views

on the construct tend to describe it as multidimensional, dynamic and contingent (Lefcourt, 1981;

Levenson, 1973; Nowicki and Strickland, 1971; Russell, 1982; Weiner, 1985). In other words,

Bono, 2001; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovich and Topolnytsky, 2002;), health (Wallston and Wallston,

1978; Wallston, Wallston and Devellis, 1978) to learning and academic achievement (Findley and

Cooper, 1983; Nunn and Nunn, 1993; Stipek and Weisz, 1981). Considering the variety of

domains in which LOC has been researched and its contingent nature, an array of scales to

measure it has been developed (Halpert and Hill, 2011).

For example, Rotter’s original scale (Rotter, 1966) was designed to measure general life’s

expectancies; Nowicki and Strickland’s (1971) scale measures LOC specifically in children; and

self-reports). More recently, Halpert and Hill (2011) have identified and reviewed a total of 28

measures of LOC classified in 5 broad categories. In short, the abundance of existing scales for

measuring LOC evidences the breadth of research on the construct, its wide-ranging application

Jones and Agnew, 1993, Trice, 1985). According to this assumption, internals, who consider they

have control over their life, will take responsibility for their failures, monitor and adjust their

behavior and regulate their performance. Externals, on the other hand, will display a more passive

behavior, since they consider their academic results depend on their professors, luck, fate and

other external factors.

With the exception of a few studies (Cassidy, 2012; Findley and Cooper, 1983), most

empirical research supports the assumption that internal LOC is related positively to academic

achievement both at school (Nunn and Nunn, 1993; Shepherd, Owen, Fitch, and Marshall, 2006;

Sisney, Strickler, Tyler, Wilhoit, Duke, and Nowicki, 2000) and college (Curtis and Trice, 2013;

Ghasemzadeh and Saadat, 2011; Hasan and Khalid, 2014; Trice, 1985). Furthermore, an indirect

This brief introduction shows that the there is ample research on the relationship between

LOC and academic achievement. Yet, further research on this area is still called for. First of all, a

recent review of the literature (Mayora and Fernandez, 2015) reveals an uneven geographical

LOC or scales developed by the authors without considering already existing and validated

academic LOC scales. Particularly, our search of such studies have found that, for example,

Trice’s Academic Locus of Control Scale for College Students (ALC) has not been translated into

Spanish or used in any Latin American context.

its proven validity and reliability among North American college students (Curtis and Trice,

2013; Trice, 1985; Trice, Ogden, Stevens and Booth, 1987) and non-American populations (see

Ibrahim, 1996). Finally, as Dornyei and Taguchi (2010) have pointed out, the process of

translating instruments often seems to be taken lightly by researchers, even when this process is

of crucial importance for the validity of the instruments being adapted.

achievement or behaviors that lead to it. It is noteworthy, though, that many of these studies have

used general-life scales to measure the LOC construct such as Rotter’s (1966) or Levenson’s

Multidimensional-Multiattributional Causality Scale (MMCS), the aforementioned Trice’s (1985)

Academic Locus of Control Scale for College Students (ALC) and Arocha and Lezama’s (2007)

Academic Locus of Control Inventory (ILCA the original acronym in Spanish). Other academic-

specific scales, such as Crandall’s Intellectual Achievement Responsibility Questionnaire

(Crandall, Katkovski and Crandall, 1965) and Krampen’s (1988) Domain-specific IPC Scales, do

not meet the requirement of being originally intended for college students.

Lefcourt’s MMCS was originally designed to measure LOC in college students in two

domains: achievement and affiliation. It was not originally intended to measure academic LOC,

but since it was intended for “the beginning university undergraduate” (Lefcourt, 1981: 250), the

achievement domains refers specifically to academic achievement and study-related situations.

dimension, but also includes a stability dimension. In addition, internal and external causes are

consistent with common causal attributions (effort, ability, situation/context and luck) identified

in attributional theory.

subscale. The achievement scores of the MMCS correlate positively and significantly with

Rotter’s I-E LOC Scale (coefficients ranging between .23 and .62). Lefcourt himself

acknowledged that “social desirability can be a contaminating influence in the assessment of

locus of control” (1981: 254) when using the MMCS especially in the achievement-externality

subscale. The validity of this scale for measuring LOC in college students has been established in

several studies (Lefcourt, von Baeyer, Ware and Cox, 1979; Powers and Rossman, 1983; Powers,

Douglas, Lopez, and Rossman, 1985). As for the predictability of the results of this scale and

academic achievement, Lefcourt et al. (1979) found that the scale did not predict achievement-

related behaviors, while Kanoy, Wester and Latta (1990) found that high achieving female college

students scored higher on the internality subscales of the MMCS.

course. Test-retest reliability was .92 over a five-week interval and internal consistency was .70

using the KR-20 coefficient. Results of the study showed the scale to predict study behavior, to

correlate with other LOC scales, to correlate with achievement motivation, and to have non-

have been found most of the time, results vary. For instance, Carpenter (2010) studied a sample

of 132 students in graduating classes from four Midwestern, baccalaureate of nursing programs.

The schools were both private and public institutions located within the same state. The study

aimed at determining whether LOC was predictive of students’ performance on the ATI

Comprehensive Predictor Exam and the National Council Licensure Examination-Registered

Nurse (NCLEX-RN). Internality was found to be significantly related to the NCLEX-RN. Also,

logistic regression showed that a student with an internal LOC was 6.7 times more likely to pass

the NCLEX-RN. However, regression analysis showed that other variables, such as anxiety,

organization, self-regulation, and prior knowledge, were best at predicting success on the ATI

Comprehensive Predictor Exam.

instructional dissent (Buckner and Finn, 2013), Internet addiction and social self-efficacy

(Iskender and Akin, 2010) and attachment security (Kurland and Siegel, 2013).

The properties of the ALC have also been tested with students from different cultural and

of Education and the Department of Albanian Literature, at the University of Vlora Ismail

Qemali.

Recently, Curtis and Trice (2013) revised the ALC to investigate its factor structure as well as

to confirm its current pertinence. 322 psychology students from a competitive-admission,

midsized southeastern university volunteered. Four factors were produced from the principal

component analysis, named hopelessness, distractibility, poor student attitude, and impaired

planning. Seven items from the original scale did not load significantly on any of these four

factors; therefore, upon content and technical examination, their elimination was suggested.

McDonals’ statistic showed high estimates of internal consistency for all factors. The internal

consistency reliability of the revised overall scale (α= .68) was similar to that of the 28-item scale

were considered (planning, hopelessness, distractibility and attitudes). This result suggests that, in

contrast to the most common structures of current LOC scales, based on attributions or domains,

the resulting scale is ordered in terms of motivational/educational content.

qualitative interviews of 100 college students from different universities in Caracas. Originally,

the inventory was conceptually based on Levenson multidimensional perspective of LOC, and so

the proposed factorial structure predicted three factors: internal, powerful others and chance.

However, pilot tests of the scale and factorial analysis rejected the proposed factorial structure

and produced a bidimensional structure, internality and externality.

The final version of the ILCA was field validated with a non-probabilistic sample of 557

Venezuelan college students, aged 17 to 29, enrolled in different universities in Caracas. All items

loaded significantly on one of the two factors proposed (internality vs. externality) and these two

factors, in turn, explained 36% of the total variance in the sample. The internal reliability of the

instrument (Alpha Cronbach) was estimated at 0.78 for the externality dimension and 0.88 for the

As for reliability, this study found barely acceptable levels of internal consistency as measured

by the Alpha Cronbach index. Trice’s (1985) original scale reported KR-20 internal consistency

index of 0.70, Ibrahim (1996) reported the Omani version reached an Alpha Cronbach reliability

structure of the present study with the factorial structure of the original English version of the

scale. This comparison is shown in table 3, with items that are consistently distributed in both

scales highlighted in bold face.

with hopelessness. Yet, other items that in this study load on the same factor such as items 21 (“I

can be easily talked out of studying”) and 24 (“I keep changing my mind about my career goals”)

seem unrelated to feelings of hopelessness. In the face of these discrepancies, the following

easily distracted from studying because they feel hopeless about their future. Likewise, this

increased feeling of hopelessness can also be a reason to change their minds about career goals.

Venezuela has experienced in recent years one of the largest exodus in its history especially

among college graduates and undergraduates (AFP, 2015; Tovar, 2015). The decision to leave

one’s own country because of uncertainty and hopelessness regarding one’s own future might

translate into constant decision-changing regarding one’s general and academic goals. It must be

highlighted, though, that this explanation is only speculative and needs to be confirmed in future

studies.

Factor 2 in Curtis and Trice was labeled distractibility and it comprises items that refer to how

easily students get distracted from studies and academic duties such as item 26 (“There has been

the current situation in the country. As political and economic instability rises, students might be

reconsidering their priorities and as emigration sets as a feasible future path, current grades and

academic duties might be pondered and reevaluated as priorities.

lack of commitment towards academic duties such as effort and attendance. Due to the evident

disparity in the items loading this third factor, it is not possible to use the same label.

Regarding the fourth factor, it can be seen that the original factor and the one resulting here

are too different to compare. The fourth factor resulting in the current study includes only two

items and both seem to be related to intrinsic motivation (item 15: “I consider myself highly

motivated to achieve success in life” and item 25: “I feel I will someday make a real contribution

to the world if I work hard at it”). This contrasts significantly with the fourth factor in the original

English version of the scale whose authors labeled as impaired planning.

Finally, in the original factorial analysis of the English version, six items were excluded while

in the current study there were 13. In both studies, items 1 (“College grades most often reflect the

such issues might not be that relevant. In this particular study, cultural and contextual differences

might explain this result. The items were written by North American students in the 80’s and their

attitudes and perceptions regarding academic performance might be very different from those of

principal component analysis revealed a four-factor structure that considerably differs from the

factorial structure of the original English version. The factorial structure of most LOC scales

tends to be based on dimensions (internal vs. external), attributions or domains (Curtis and Trice,

2013) while the structure of the ALC was found to be based on motivational/educational content.

The structure of the Spanish version is also based on motivational/educational content. Yet, only

one factor seems to be consistent with the structure of the original (namely hopelessness) while

the other three factors reflect very different orientations (distractibility vs. priorities; poor student

attitude vs. lack of commitment; and impaired planning vs. intrinsic motivation). Furthermore, in

this study the number of items loading on factors 2, 3 and 4 are considerably scarce and the

numbers of items excluded is considerably large.

study academic LOC among Venezuelan students and probably among other Latin American

college populations. However, further studies in which the limitations herein reported are

[Venezuelan crisis leads to professors exodus from college classrooms]. El Espectador.

exodo-de-docentes-aulas-unive-articulo-597272.

Agnew, Nelvia; Slate, John; Jones, Craig and Agnew, David. (1993). Academic behaviors as a

Journal. Vol. 37, N° 2, pp. 24-27.