2. Behaviour is determined to be deliberate,

4. Ability,

5. Level of task difficulty,

7. Stability,

8. Controllability.FOUR ATTRIBUTIONAL FACTORS: Effort, Task Difficulty, Luck, Ability - depending where you place the attribution in the matrix will determine expectations of future performance, shame, pride, etc.<br />STABILITYSTABLEUNSTABLECONTROLINTERNAL EXTERNAL <br /> <br />Perceptual Consistency Model:<br />Perceptual consistency denotes the tendency of animals and humans to see familiar objects as having standard shape, size, colour, or location regardless of changes in the angle of perspective, distance, or lighting. <br />The impression tends to conform to the object as it is or is assumed to be, rather than to the actual stimulus. Perceptual constancy is responsible for the ability to identify objects under various conditions, which seem to be quot;
taken into accountquot;
during a process of mental reconstitution of the known image. <br />Even though the retinal image of a receding automobile shrinks in size, the normal, experienced person perceives the size of the object to remain constant. Indeed, one of the most impressive features of perceiving is the tendency of objects to appear stable in the face of their continually changing stimulus features. Though a dinner plate itself does not change, its image on the retina undergoes considerable changes in shape and size as the perceiver and plate move. What is noteworthy is stability in perception despite gross instability in stimulation. Such matches between the object as it is perceived and the object as it is understood to actually exist (regardless of transformations in the energy of stimulation) are called perceptual constancies.<br />Dimensions of visual experience that exhibit constancy include size, shape, brightness, and colour. Perceptual constancy tends to prevail for these dimensions as long as the observer has appropriate contextual cues; for example, perception of size constancy depends on cues that allow one a valid assessment of his distance from the object. With distance accurately perceived, the apparent size of an object tends to remain remarkably stable, especially for highly familiar objects that have a standard size.<br />left0Psychologists have proposed several explanations for the phenomenon of size constancy. First, people learn the general size of objects through experience and use this knowledge to help judge size. For example, we know that insects are smaller than people and that people are smaller than elephants. In addition, people take distance into consideration when judging the size of an object. Thus, if two objects have the same retinal image size, the object that seems farther away will be judged as larger. Even infants seem to possess size constancy.<br />Another explanation for size constancy involves the relative sizes of objects. According to this explanation, we see objects as the same size at different distances because they stay the same size relative to surrounding objects. For example, as we drive toward a stop sign, the retinal image sizes of the stop sign relative to a nearby tree remain constant - both images grow larger at the same rate.<br />Cognitive dissonance model:<br />Cognitive dissonance is a discomfort caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions. Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. The phrase was coined by Leon Festinger <br />Experience can clash with expectations, as, for example, with buyer's remorse following the purchase of an expensive item. In a state of dissonance, people may feel surprise, dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment. People are biased to think of their choices as correct, despite any contrary evidence. This bias gives dissonance theory its predictive power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational and destructive behaviour.<br />Immaturity / Maturity Theory<br />Chris Argyris<br />The fact that bureaucratic/ pyramidal values (Hierarchy) still dominate most organizations, according to Argyris, has produced many of our current organizational problems.<br />While at Yale, he examined industrial organizations to determine what effect management practices have had on individual behaviour and personal growth within the work environment.<br />Personality changes<br />According to Argyris, seven changes should take place in the personality of individuals if they are to develop into mature people over the years.<br />First, individuals move from a passive state as infants to a state of increasing activity as adults. <br />Second, individuals develop from a state of dependency upon others as infants to a state of relative independence as adults. <br />Third, individuals behave in only a few ways as infants, but as adults they are capable of behaving in many ways. <br />Fourth, individuals have erratic, casual, and shallow interests as infants but develop deeper and stronger interests as adults. <br />Fifth, the time perspective of children is very short, involving only the present, but as they mature, their time perspective increases to include the past and the future. <br />Sixth, individuals as infants are subordinate to everyone, but they move to equal or superior positions with others as adults. <br />Seventh, as children, individuals lack an awareness of a quot;
self,quot;
but as adults they are not only aware of, but they are able to control quot;
self.quot;
<br />Argyris postulates that these changes reside on a continuum and that the quot;
healthyquot;
personality develops along the continuum from quot;
immaturityquot;
to quot;
maturity.<br />These changes are only general tendencies, but they give some light on the matter of maturity. Norms of the individual's culture and personality inhibit and limit maximum expression and growth of the adult, yet the tendency is to move toward the quot;
maturityquot;
end of the continuum with age.<br />The Locus of Control Theory<br />Locus Of ControlBy Dr. Julian Rotter<br />The Locus of Control is a concept in psychology originally developed in the 1950s. The two ‘loci’, as established by the theory, are the internal and external loci. The Locus of Control represents how a person’s decision making ability is influenced; essentially, those who make choices primarily on their own are considered to have internal loci, while those who make decisions based more on what others desire are said to have external loci. People with external loci are generally more apt to be stressed and suffer from depression as they are more aware of work situations and life strains. Women tend to have more of an external locus than men. A more internal locus of control is generally seen as desirable. Having an internal locus of control can also be referred to as “personal control”, “self-determination” etc. Males tend to be more internal than females.People higher up in organizational structures tend to be more internal. Internal locus protects against submission to authority and are more resistant to others influence (but tend to be more premature and less sympathetic than externals). Those with a high internal locus of control have better control of their behavior and tend to exhibit more political behaviors than externals and are more likely to attempt to influence other people; they are more likely to assume that their efforts will be successful. They are more active in seeking information and knowledge concerning their situation than do externals. The propensity to engage in political behavior is stronger for individuals with a high internal locus of control than for those who have a high external locus of control.Attribution Theory, describes the process of people crediting forces outside the self as key factors in determining thoughts or behavior. Example; One may believe cocaine is necessary to complete tasks. In this case, the person is attributing personal accomplishments to the effects of cocaine, rather than their own will. Similarly, one may think they NEED coffee to pay attention. If you constantly attribute your own impact to outside factors, particularly non-human ones, you may become dependant on excuse-making. Attribution theory is also prevalent in gauging the abilities of others.<br />Locus of Control: Rotter 1954<br />Julian Rotter observed people in therapy and noticed that:<br />Different people, given identical conditions for learning, learn different things<br />Some people respond predictably to reinforcement, others less so, and some respond unpredictably<br />Some people see a direct and strong connection between their behaviour and the rewards and punishments received<br />The core of his approach is called Expectancy Value Theory: the basic assumption is that your behaviour is determined not just by the presence or size of reinforcements, but by the beliefs about what the results of your behaviour are likely to be i.e., how likely you are to get the reinforcement.<br />Thus, locus of control is conceptualised as referring to a unidimensional continuum, ranging from external to internal:<br />External Locus of ControlIndividual believes that his/her behaviour is guided by fate, luck, or other external circumstancesInternal Locus of ControlIndividual believes that his/her behaviour is guided by his/her personal decisions and efforts.<br />Is an internal locus of control desirable?<br />In general, it seems to be psychologically healthy to perceive that one has control over those things which one is capable of influencing. <br />In simplistic terms, a more internal locus of control is generally seen as desirable. Having an Internal locus of control can also be referred to as quot;
self-agencyquot;
, quot;
personal controlquot;
, quot;
self-determinationquot;
, etc. Research has found the following trends:<br />Males tend to be more internal than females<br />As people get older they tend to become more internal<br />People higher up in organisational structures tend to be more internal.<br />However, its important to warn people against lapsing in the overly simplistic view notion that internal is good and external is bad (two legs good, four legs bad?). There are important subtleties and complexities to be considered. For example:<br />Internals can be psychologically unhealthy and unstable. An internal orientation usually needs to be matched by competence, self-efficacy and opportunity so that the person is able to successfully experience the sense of personal control and responsibility. Overly internal people who lack competence, efficacy and opportunity can become neurotic, anxious and depressed. In other words, internals need to have a realistic sense of their circle of influence in order to experience 'success'.<br />Externals can lead easy-going, relaxed, happy lives.<br />The Locus of Control Theory postulates that every human being has a quot;
placequot;
- the locus where he/she feels the control of his/her life rests; this place or locus of control can either be internal or external; and it is this position that creatively determines how much quot;
in controlquot;
an individual feels about his/her life. <br />People with an internal locus generally feel that they have control over their lives and circumstances; they take initiative and seek to positively change their lives. Individuals with an external locus feel that their lives are controlled by circumstances; they feel dis-empowered to do anything about their lives leaving everything to quot;
fatequot;
. <br />These people may come from the same family; may have the same jobs and live in the same community - but with two different sets of beliefs. If I asked you which of the two groups would be happiest in life, you certainly wouldn't have to think long and hard to give an answer. People with an internal locus of control are generally the happiest in life; even in the midst of negativity, they still feel they are in control and that they have within them the ability to make the change. The ones with an external locus of control easily succumb to feelings of helplessness in times of difficulty; they are generally the most miserable in society. <br />