motivational analysis of organizations

involve continual exposure. Episodic antecedents are very important events that occur
over a relatively short period of time (MacDonald, 1973).
Although relatively little research has been done concerning accumulative events,
three important factors have been identified: (a) social discrimination; (b) prolonged,
incapacitating disability; and (c) parental child-rearing practices. Lefcourt (1966) states
that in all the reported ethnic studies, groups whose social position is one of minimal
power on the basis of class or race tend to score higher in the direction of external
control. Studies of the deaf have established a relationship between long-term physical
disability and externalism. Evidence pertaining to the effects of parental child-rearing
practices is more substantial, although it primarily is self-reported data regarding the
subject’s childhood experiences. More direct observation of parent-child interactions is
needed. Many studies report that externals describe their parents as higher in the use of
physical punishment, affective punishment, denial of privileges, and overprotection.
Internals, on the other hand, describe their parents as setting predictable standards, using
more principled discipline, and being more warm and democratic. In general, internals
have been exposed to parental behaviors that foster independence and a belief in being
able to manage oneself in order to predictably achieve desired outcomes. There also is
some evidence that sex-role stereotyping and social discrimination lead women, as a
group, to be more external than men (Rotter, 1966; Feather, 1968).
Episodic antecedents are events of great importance to a person that occur over a
relatively short period of time. Examples of these events are natural disasters such as
earthquakes or tornadoes, a serious automobile accident, or the death of a loved one.
National and worldwide events such as severe recession, inflation, and international
affairs also appear to have an impact on internality-externality (Reichard, 1975).
INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERNALS AND EXTERNALS
Characteristics of internals and externals have been identified through both clinical
reports and research. Internals are likely to describe themselves as active, striving,
achieving, powerful, independent, and effective. Although externals may describe
themselves similarly, they are more likely to describe themselves in opposite terms
(Hersch & Scheibe, 1967).
Internality has been found to be positively associated with indices of social
adjustment and personal adjustment (Hersch & Scheibe, 1967). There also is evidence
that internals are more achievement oriented, less anxious, less dogmatic, more trusting,
less suspicious of others, less apt to use sensitizing modes of defenses, and more selfconfident
and insightful. Internals, however, tend to resort to more self-blaming
behavior than do externals. Because externals do not perceive outcomes as being the
result of their actions, they assume less responsibility or blame. In betting situations,
internals are more cautious and conservative than externals; they are “percentage
players” in risk situations. Reichard (1975) provides detailed references to research
evidence.
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 19, 2nd Edition. Copyright © 1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 27