TITLE PAGE

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-ESTEEM AND LOCUS OF CONTROL AMONG WELL FUNCTIONING ADOLESCENTS.

BY

IBEME NANCY C.

PSY/2006/021

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCE CARITAS UNIVERSITY, AMORJI NIKE ENUGU.

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN PSYCHOLOGY.

AUGUST, 2010.

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that this work was carried out by Ibeme Nancy .C. of the department of psychology, faculty of Management & social sciences, Caritas University, Amorji Nike, Enugu.

…………………………….. ……………………………….

NWANKWO B.E DATE

SUPERVISOR

……………………………… ………………………………

NWANKWO B.E

HEAD OF DEPARTMENT DATE

…………………………….. ………………………………..

EXTERNAL EXAMINER DATE

DEDICATION

To the Holy Trinity.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I acknowledge my father founder; Most rev prof. Emmanuel Edeh, who gave me a chance to become a student of Caritas University, and who also, encourage all his students to always be the best in all they are doing. My sincere gratitude goes to my Head of department, who is also my supervisor, Mr. Barnabas Nwankwo for all his humble support, toiling day and, night, explaining and correcting my work. Also, I say a big thank you to my lecturers, Prof. Regina Eya, Associate Prof. O.Omeje, Mr Ejike Okonkwo, Uncle J.U Aboh and Mr. Tobias Obi, for all their assistance.

In all these, I cannot fail to show appreciation to my dearest aunt, Rev. Sir Amaka Olisa, who denied herself of many things in other to make my dream a reality. Also to my sisters, Ifeoma, Nkiru and Lawrencia for their wonderful support. I cannot forget in a haste the person that went extra mile to help me to the completion of this work by giving me unimaginable challenges and support; Rev. Sr. Henrietta Okonkwo.

My sincere gratitude goes to my dearest friend, mentor, and role model, Tony David Ekwemozor, who was there for me day and night, and to all my friends; Olisa, Ebuka, Sandra, ij, well wishers and my room girls who encouraged and helped me in one way or the other. I say a big thanks you to all of you.

Finally, my sincere gratitude goes to my source of inspiration; the holy trinity and my dearest patron saint Anthony of Padua. I love you all.

Ibeme Nancy Chinenye.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page - - - - - - - - - i

Certification - - - - - - - - ii

Dedication - - - - - - - - iii

Acknowledgement - - - - - - - iv

Table of Contents - - - - - - - v

List of Tables - - - - - - - - vii

Abstract - - - - - - - - - viii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study - - - - - - 1

Purpose of the Study - - - - - - - 8

Statement of the Problems - - - - - - 8

Operational Definition of Terms - - - - - - 8

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Review - - - - - - - 9

Empirical Review - - - - - - - 22

Summary of the Review - - - - - - 28

Hypothesis - - - - - - - - - 29

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

Participants - - - - - - - - 30

Instruments - - - - - - - - 30

Procedure - - - - - - - - - 32

Design and Statistics - - - - - - - 33

CHAPTER FOUR:

Results - - - - - - - - - 34

Summary of the Finding - - - - - - 35

CHAPTER FIVE

Discussion - - - - - - - - 36

Implication of the study - - - - - - - 40

Limitations of the Study - - - - - - 40

Suggestion for further studies - - - - - - 41

Summary and Conclusion - - - - - 42

References - - - - - - - - 43

APPENDIX I

Research Instruments: Personal Functioning Inventory

Locus of Control scale

Self –esteem scale

APPENDIX II

Table of Pearson Product moment correlation on the relationship between locus of control and self-esteem among well functioning adolescents.

APPENDIX III

Calculation of Pearson Product moment correlation on the relationship between Self-esteem and locus of control among adolescents.

LIST OF TABLE

TABLE I: -Summary table of Pearson product moment correlation coefficient on the relationship between high self esteem and internal locus of control among well functioning older adolescents.

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the relationship between self-esteem and locus of control among well-functioning Adolescents. A total of 100 Adolescents (55 males and 45 females) selected from senior secondary school were used. The participants were within the age range of 15-19 years with a mean age of 17 years. Three set of instrument comprising self-esteem test (Adenyo & Oyefoso 1985) Locus of control test (Criag, Franklin & Andrew 1984) and Kohn, Brien-wood, pukening & Decicco (2003) were used. Correlational research design was adopted while Pearson product moment statistic was used for data analysis. Finding showed that a significant positive relationship exist between high self-esteem and internal locus of control [r(98) = 0.87, P<.01]. Finding was discussed in relation to the literature reviewed and recommendations were also made.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Adolescents experience many problems, including teen pregnancy, alcohol and drug use/abuse and violence, school failure and eating disorder (Callalian, & Stein 2003). The extent and seriousness of these problems may cause social scientists, policy makers and parents to overlook youth who are well functioning: teens that excel in school, have positive family and peer relationships, and have minimal participation in behaviors such as stated above. (Demon, 2004; Moore et al., 2004).

Adolescent has been described as a phase of life beginning in biology and ending in society (Peterson, 1988). Indeed, adolescent may be defined as the period within the life span when most of a person’s biological, cognitive, psychological and social characteristics are changing from what is typically considered child-like to what is considered adult-like (Learner and Spainer, 1980). For adolescents’, this period is a dramatic challenge, one requiring adjustment to changes in the self, in the family, and in the peer group. In contemporary society, adolescent experience institutional changes as well. Among young adolescents, there is a change in school setting, typically involving a transition from elementary school to either junior high school or middle school; and in late adolescence there is a transition from high school to the worlds of work, University or childrearing.

Adolescent is a time of excitement and of anxiety, of happiness and of troubles, of discovery and of bewilderment, and of breaks with the past and yet of links with the future. Adolescence can be a confusing time – for the adolescent experiencing this phase of life; for the parents who are nurturing the adolescent during his or her progression through this period; for adults charged with enhancing the development of youth during this period of life, and with disturbing, historically unprecedented frequency – for adolescents who themselves find themselves in the role of parents. When we searched the literature it became clear that the vast majority of adolescent research reported on the causes and correlates of problem behaviors (Shagle and Barber, 1995; Small and Luster, 1994; Pick and Palos, 1995).

Most research on adolescent focuses on specific problem behaviors, whereas few studies examine the avoidance of multiple forms of risk taking or the determinants of positive development (Moore and Glei, 1995). Positive youth development approach helps in enhancing adolescent development, and for helping youth reach their full potential. This approach recognizes that all adolescents have strengths and that children and youth will develop in positive ways when these strengths are aligned with resources for healthy development in the various settings in which adolescent, live and interact.

Research indicates that the more exposure that adolescents have to positive resources and experiences and where synergy between multiple settings can be established – the more likely it is that they will develop, positively. Therefore, physical and institutional resources present in the social environment (for example, family support) are just as essential for promoting positive youth development as are individual assets (such as skills, talents, self-esteem and resiliency). These resources provide adolescents with routines and structure, as well as opportunities for learning, recreation, and engagement with individuals and their communities.

Developmental scientists have suggested that positive youth development encompasses psychological, behavioral and social characteristics that reflect competence confidence, connection, character and caring compassion. A child or adolescent who develops each of these five features is considered to be thriving. Moreover, developmental scientists believe that these thriving youth develop a sixth one, which is contribution to self, family, community, and civil society. These contributions or competence can be viewed in specific areas, including social, academic, cognitive, health and vocational. Social competence refers to interpersonal skills (such as conflict resolution). Cognitive competence refers to cognitive abilities (e.g. decision making). Academic competence refers to school performance as shown, in part by school grades, attendance, and test scores. Health competence involves using nutrition, exercise, and rest to keep oneself fit. Vocational competence involves work habits and explorations of career choices. Moreso, these adolescents’ exhibit an internal sense of overall positive self worth and self-efficacy. They have positive bonds with people and institutions that are reflected in exchanges between the individual and his or her peers, family, school, relationship. Well functioning adolescents’ exhibit respect for societal and cultural norms, possession of standards for correct behaviors, a sense of right and wrong (morality) and integrity. They also have a sense of sympathy and empathy for others.

Who we are is largely defined by the experiences we have had and how we understand those experiences (McLean, 2007). There is growing evidence in the psychological literature that the narratives of one’s own personal experience are critical for identity and well-being. Individuals who are able to create more coherent and emotionally expressive narratives about stressful events subsequently show lower levels of depression, and anxiety (Fraittaroh 2000); adolescents who tell life narratives that are more redemptive, focusing on how good things emerged from bad, show higher levels of emotional well-being and higher levels of generativist, connecting in positive ways to the next generation (Mc Adams 2001).

Importantly, families that share stories, about parents and grandparents, about triumphs and failures, provide powerful models for children. Children understand whom they are in the world not only through their individual experiences but also through the filters of family stories that provide a sense of identity through historical time (Fivush 1999). Although this idea resonates in the social science literature, there is surprisingly little empirical research examining how knowledge of family stories is related to child outcome.

Several studies show that self-esteem influences academic performance (Clifford, 1964). Research has shown that self-esteem is a better predictor of academic success than measured intelligence (Clifford, 1964). Research aside; common sense dictates that our thoughts influence our feelings and behaviors. Our behavior consequently influences our performance. Life is essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy. Common sense also dictates that a student who has self-doubt and lacks self-acceptance is unlikely to attain academic excellence.

How can a student establish challenging goals if he or she lacks a sense of self-competence or self-efficacy? How can a student concentrate fully on studies if he or she lacks self-approval? Indeed, research does show that underachievers are generally less confident and less ambitious (Goldberg, 1960), less self accepting (Shaw and Alves, 1963), and lack sense of personal worth (Durr and Schmatz, 1964).

Research also shows that feeling worthless can be depressing (Battle, 1990) and depression generally inhibits performance. As stated by Mark R. Leary and Deborah L. Downs (1999 p.112) “People who feel worthy, able and competent are more likely to achieve their goals than those who feel worthless, impotent and incompetent’’. Research also shows that academic achievement influences the level of self-esteem. Successful academic performance enhances self-esteem (Moore, 1996). Similarly, poor academic performance tends to erode students’ level of self-esteem (Gibby and Gibby 1967).

Furthermore, Locus of control, which is a personality construct, refers to an individual’s perception of the locus of events as determined internally by his or her own behaviour vs. fate, Luck or external circumstances. It is a belief about whether the outcomes of our actions are contingent on what we do (internal control orientation) or on events outside our personal control (external control orientation) (Zimbardo, 1985). In general, it seems to be psychologically healthy to perceive that one has control over those things, which one is capable of influencing.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

The purpose of this study is to determine whether there will be a significant positive relationship between high self-esteem and internal locus of control among well functioning adolescents.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The problem of inferiority complex among adolescents is becoming alarming. Often times, we see adolescents doing things against their wish because most of their friends or peers supported that. This attitude makes them to blame society for their failure (external locus of control). Because the action was not their desire, there is every tendency that they will bear the blame. This pattern of life affects their development.

Due to this worry, the present study deem it necessary to know whether most of the adolescents who lack confidence in themselves will attribute their failures to society or themselves.

Therefore, the present study will give answer to this question; Will there be a significant positive relationship between high self-esteem and internal locus of control?

OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS.

SELF-ESTEEM: This is the overall score of an adolescent on the self-esteem scale. Scores above the mean score of 59.42 is high self-esteem, whereas scores below the mean score of 59.42 is low self-esteem.

LOCUS OF CONTROL: This is the overall score of an older adolescent on the locus of control scale. Scores above the mean score of 57.33 is external locus of control, whereas scores below the mean score of 57.33 is internal locus of control.

WELL FUNTIONING: This is the overall score of an older adolescent on the personal functioning scale. Scores above the mean score of 100.13 indicates adequate adaptive coping style, whereas scores below the mean score of 100.13 indicates unadaptive coping style.

OLDER ADOLESCENTS: These are participants who are between the biological ages of 15-18.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Adolescents are faced with challenges and opportunities hitherto unimaginable by their parents and grand parents. Adolescents experience demands for coping skills and adaptations to an unprecedented rate of social change and are best by multiple pressures, temptations, and perceived barriers to which they are compelled to respond and simultaneously to maintain a sense of self with intact boundaries and an emerging sense of presence and focus in the adult environment.

THEORETICAL REVIEW

SELF DETERMINATION THEORY (SDT)

Adolescents are centrally concerned with motivation – how to move themselves or others to act. Everywhere, parents, teachers, coaches and managers struggle with how to motivate those that they mentor and individuals struggle to find energy, mobilize effort and persist at the tasks of life and work.

Adolescents are often moved by external factors such as reward systems, grades evaluations or the opinions they fear others might have of them. Nevertheless, adolescents frequently are motivated from within by interests, curiosity, care or abiding values. These intrinsic motivations are not necessarily externally rewarded or supported but nonetheless they can sustain passions, creativity and sustained efforts, which are well functioning attitudes. The interplay between the extrinsic forces acting on persons and the intrinsic motives and needs inherent in human nature is the territory of self-Determination Theory. (Ryan and Deci 2000).

The theory assumes that people are active organisms, with evolved tendencies toward growing mastering ambient challenges, and integrating new experiences into a coherent sense of self. These natural developmental tendencies do not however, operate automatically, but instead require ongoing social nutrients and supports. That is the social context can either support or thwart the natural tendencies toward active engagement and psychological growth or it can catalyze lack of integration, defense and fulfillment of need substitutes. Therefore, it is the dialectic between the active organism and the social contest that is the bass for social determination. Theory’s predictions about behaviour, experience and development.

Within the self-determination theory, the nutriments for healthy development and functioning are specified using the concept of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness. The extent to which these needs are steadily satisfied, the individuals will develop and function effectively and experience wellness, but the extent to which these are thwarted, people will experience ill being and non-optimal functioning. (Deci and Ryan 1985).

According to the SDT, the type of environment an adolescent grows in such as controlling autonomy and supportive impact functioning and wellness as well as performance and persistence. In addition, supports for relatedness and competence are seen as interactive with volitional supports in fostering engagement and value within specific settings, and within domains of activity. (Deci and Ryan, 2000).

SELF-EFFICACY THEORY

Perceived self-efficacy is defined as people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives. Self-efficacy beliefs determine low people feel, think, motivate themselves and behave. Such beliefs produce these diverse effects through four major processes. They include cognitive, motivational, affective and selection processes (Schwarzer 1992).

According to this theory, a strong sense of efficacy enhances human accomplishment and personal well being in many ways. Adolescents with high assurance in their capabilities, approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than as threats to be avoided. Such an efficacious outlook fosters intrinsic interest and deep engrossment in activities. They set themselves goals and maintain strong commitment to them. Such activities include their academics, leadership and group endeavors like sports (Bandura 1986).

They heighten and sustain their efforts in the face of failure. They quickly recover their sense of efficacy after failures or setbacks. They attribute failure to insufficient effort or deficient knowledge and skills, which are acquirable. Such an efficacious outlook produces personal accomplishments, reduces stress and lowers vulnerability to depression.

In contrast, people who doubt their capabilities shy away from difficult tasks, which they view as personal threats.

They have low aspirations and weak commitment to the goals they choose to pursue. When faced with difficult tasks, they dwell on their personal deficiencies, on the obstacles they will encounter and all kinds of adverse outcomes rather than concentrate on how to perform successfully. They slacken their sense of efficacy following failure or setback. Since they view in sufficient performance as deficient aptitude it does not require much failure for them to loose faith in their capabilities. They fall easy victim to stress and depression.

Moreso, this theory asserts that the family plays a major role in determining how well functioning an adolescent will be in life. This is due to the fact that the family helps adolescents to develop, appraise and test their physical capabilities, their social competencies, their linguistic skills, and their cognitive skills for comprehending and managing the many situations they encounter daily. People’s beliefs about their efficacy can be developed by four main sources of influence. These include: mastery experiences, social models, social persuasion and reduction of people’s stress reactions which involves the alteration of their negative emotional proclivities and the interpretation of their physical states. (Bandura, 1991 a).

SELF ESTEEM THEORY

This theory asserts that everyone has an intrinsic ‘value’ that they feel they are worth and as human beings we constantly strive to improve or increase that value.

It is related to the ego and those with “low self esteem” are said to be suffering from an inferiority complex”. In practical terms, people with better self-esteem generally feel worthy of a good life and all that entails while those with low self –esteem feel they are of less value.

Low self-esteem or possessing an inferiority complex is often attributed to self-defeating behaviors. The reason being that accomplishing the task that someone intends or attempts will give the person a feeling of better self-esteem, which will conflict with the low self-esteem the person feels about himself subconsciously. He therefore sabotages his success to keep himself where he is comfortable in this case his self esteem.

One simple yet interesting way to determine if one has good or poor self-esteem is to observe how one reacts when faced with someone in a troubling or ignorant situation. A person with poor self-esteem will feel the urge to put down or condescend to the person. In extreme cases of very low self-esteem, the person might even try and push the person down further by ridiculing or preying on them and victimizing them.

This is in contrast to how a person with good self-esteem would act. A person with high self-esteem when faced with a person showing ignorance or confusion or trouble will try and help the person. An individual with high self –esteem might even take the person under his wing for a short time to educate or enlighten them to the mistakes they are making. (http://www.articlebase.com/health-articles/what-is-selfesteem-theory-853611.html).

ATTRIBUTION THEORY

This theory is concerned with how individuals interpret events and how this related to their thinking and behaviour. Heider (1958), was the first to propose a psychological theory of attribution but Weiner and Colleagues (e.g. Jones et al, 1972; Weiner, 1974, 1986) developed a theoretical framework that has a major research paradigm of social psychology.

Weiner focused his attribution theory on achievement (Weiner, 1974). He identified ability, effort task difficulty, and luck as the most important factors affecting attributions for achievement. Attributions are classified along three causal dimensions: Locus of control, stability and controllability. This theory is closely, associated with the concept of motivation. There is a strong relationship between self-concept and achievement.

Weiner stated that, “Causal attributions determine affective reactions to success and failure. For example, one is not likely to experience pride in success or feelings of competence, when receiving an ‘A’ from a teacher who gives only that grade, or when defeating a tennis player who always loses…. On the other hand, an ‘A’ from a teacher who gives few high grades or a victory over a highly rated tennis player following a great deal of practice generated grate positive effect” (Weiner 1980. Pg 362).

Adolescents with higher ratings of self-esteem and with higher school achievement tend to attribute success to internal stable, uncontrollable factors such as ability while low esteem adolescents will contribute their failure to either external, unstable, controllable factors such effort or external, uncontrollable factors such as task difficulty. Attribution theory explain the difference in motivation between well functioning and non-functioning adolescents.

According to this theory, well functioning adolescents will approach rather than avoid tasks relating to succeeding because they believe success is due to high ability and effort, which they are confident of. Thus, failure doesn’t affect their self esteem but success builds pride and confidence., On the other hand low or non-functioning adolescents avoid success-related chores because they tend to (a) doubt their ability and /or (b) assume success is related to luck or to “who you know” or to other factors beyond their control. Thus, even when successful, it isn’t as rewarding to the low functioning adolescent because he/she doesn’t feel responsible that is, it doesn’t increase his/her pride and confidence.

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

The main idea in Julian Rolter’s social learning theory is that personality represents an interaction of the individual with his or her environment. One cannot speak of a personality, internal to the individual that is independent of the environment. Neither can one focus on behaviour as being an automatic response to an objective set of environmental stimuli. Rather, to understand behaviour, one must take both the individual (i.e., his or her life history of learning and experiences) and the environment (i.e., those stimuli that the person is aware of and responding to) into account. Rotter describes personality as a relatively stable set of potentials for responding to situations in a potential way.

Rotter sees personality, and therefore behaviour as always changeable. Change the way the person thinks, or changes the environment the person is responding to, and behaviour will change. He does not believe there is a critical period after which personality is set. But, the more life experience you have building up certain sets of belief, the more effort and intervention required for change to occur. Rotter conceives of people in an optimistic way. He sees them as being drawn forward by their goals, seeking to maximize their reinforcement, rather than just avoiding punishment. Rotter has four main components to his social learning theory model predicting behaviour. These are behaviour potential expectancy, reinforcement value, and the psychological situation.

POTENTIAL EXPECTANCY: It is important to note that expectancy is a subjective probability, because one common source of pathology is irrational expectancies. There may be no relationship whatsoever between the person’s subjective assessment of how likely a reinforcement will be and the actual, objective probability of the reinforcer occurring.

REINFORCEMENT VALUE: As with expectancy, reinforcement value is subjective, meaning that the same event or experience can vastly differ in desirability, depending on the individual’s life experience. Punishment from a parent would be negatively reinforcing to most children, and something to be avoided. The least amount of reinforcement that still has a positive value is known as the minimal goal. If people achieve an outcome that equals or exceeds their minimal goal, they will feel that they have succeeded. When the level of reinforcement falls below an individual’s minimal goal, hat reinforcement feels like failure. People differ in their minimal goals. Thus, the same outcome may represent success to one person (with a lower minimal goal) while it feels like failure to another person (with a higher minimal goals).

Person exhibiting a particular behaviour is a function of the probability that, that behaviour will lead to a given outcome and the desirability of that outcome. If expectancy and reinforcement value are both high, then behaviour potential will be high. If either expectancy or reinforcement value is low, then behaviour potential will be lower.

PSYCHOLOGICAL SITUATION: For example, knowing that someone is a generally hostile person allows us to make predictions that this individual will be hostile toward a range of people. Across situations, this person is likely to be more hostile to others than someone who is low in hostility.

Furthermore, people with a strong internal locus of control believe that the responsibility for whether or not they get reinforced ultimately lies with themselves. Internals believe that success or failure is due to their own efforts. In contrast, externals believe that the reinforcers in life are controlled by luck, chance or powerful others. Therefore, they see little impact of their own efforts on the amount of reinforcement they receive. Locus of control is not an either or proposition, because it is a generalized expectancy. It will predict people’s behaviour across situations. However, there may be some specific situations where people, for example, who are generally external, behave like internals. That is because their learning history has shown them that they have control over the reinforcement they receive in certain situations, although overall they perceive little control over what happens to them. Again, one can see the importance of conceiving of personality as the interaction of the person and the environment.

EMPIRICAL REVIEW (RELATED RESEARCH)

Kearney (1991) reviews, that the onset of adolescence – the period of transition between childhood and adulthood is usually accompanied by dramatic and often difficult changes in the life of a young person. Biological, cognitive, social and environmental factors all contribute to influence an adolescents personal development and self-esteem. Studies have shown that adolescent girls tend to have lower self-esteem and more negative assessment of their physical characteristics and intellectual abilities than boys have.

Furthermore, in all these challenges, some adolescents have undoubtedly shown some positive developmental outcomes and healthy life choices. It is also necessary to know that so many factors have been reviewed to contribute to these positive developmental outcomes.

Douglas, Scott and William (2005), have reviewed that some familial influences have contributed to their positive developmental outcomes and healthy life choices. A family system perspective was used to conceptualize their review. More than 300 teenagers were surveyed about family influences on adolescent outcomes. The result indicated that teen’s religiosity; parental warmth, parental monitoring, and a low occurrence of stressful life events were related to teen depression, participation in risky behaviors, and parental-teen conflict.

In another study by Daniel (2002), the association between family functioning and adolescent adjustment was examined, using 1,519 Chinese adolescents. The results showed that family functioning was significantly related to measures of adolescent psychological well being (existential well-being, life satisfaction, self-esteem, sense of mastery, general psychiatric mobility), school adjustment (perceived academic performance, satisfaction with academic performance, and school conduct), and problem behaviour (delinquent and substance abuse behaviour). Family functioning was generally more strongly related to measures of adolescent adjustment for adolescents with economic disadvantage than for adolescents without economic disadvantage.

Suniya (1991) pointed out some factors that allow adolescents to maintain socially competent behaviors. 144 students were examined. Scores on a negative life events scale operationalized stress, and definitions of social competence were based on peer ratings, teacher ratings, and school grades. Moderator variables examined included intelligence, internal locus of control, social skills, ego development, and positive life events. Following theoretical models by Garmezy and Rutter, distinctions were made between compensatory factors (which are directly related to competence) and protective vulnerability factors (which interact with stress in influencing competence). Ego development was found to be compensatory against stress. Internality and social skills proved to be protective factors, while intelligence and positive events were involved in vulnerability processes.

In a review done by Joseph and Moore (1998) the exploration of the meaning and function of attachment organization during adolescent and its relationship to multiple domains of psychosocial functioning was examined in a sample of 131 at risk adolescents. Attachment Organization was assessed using Adult attachment interview; multiple measures of functioning were obtained from parents, adolescents and their peers. Security displayed in adolescents’ organization of discourse about attachment experiences was related to competence with peers (as reported by peers) lower levels of internalizing behaviors (as reported by adolescent), and lower levels of deviant behavior (as reported by peers and by mothers). Preoccupation with attachment experiences, seen in angry or diffuse and unfocused discussion of attachment experiences was linked to higher levels of both internalizing and deviant behaviors.

Daniel (1997) reviewed a study using 365 Chinese adolescent. The sample responded to instruments measuring their family environment, psychological well-being, school adjustment, and problem behavior. Measures of the family environment include perceived paternal and maternal parenting styles, family functioning, and conflict with father and mother. Results from bivariate and canonical correlation analyses showed that in general, adolescent conflict were significantly related to scores on measures of psychological well-being (general psychiatric mobility, life satisfaction, purpose in life, hopelessness, and self esteem) school adjustment (perceived academic performance and school conduct), and problem behaviour (smoking and psychotropic drug abuse). The findings suggested that family factors play an important role in influencing the psychosocial adjustment, particularly the positive mental health of Chinese adolescents.

In a review by Suniya and Edward (1992) interactions between intelligence and psychosocial factors were examined in terms of influences on social competence among 144 adolescents. Psychosocial variables examined included ego development, locus of control, and positive and negative life events. Definitions of social competence were based on peer ratings,. Teacher ratings, and school grades. Results indicated that unlike their less intelligent peers, intelligent youngsters showed higher competence levels, at high versus low levels of both ego development and internal locus of control. Findings were interpreted in the context of socio-cultural influences on academic achievement among disadvantaged adolescents.

Thomas – Brantley (1988) investigated the relationship between self –esteem and academic achievement in a group of 150 high, medium, and low achievers at a large midwestern public high school. The study disclosed a positive correlation between self-esteem and academic achievement, and also revealed secondary achievements, gender and race.

Jennifer, Sanel, Laura and Kamini (2004) reviewed that self esteem can be important in terms of how one thinks, feels and responds to stressful life events. Results showed a relationship between low self esteem and feelings of depression and hopelessness in adolescence Besides a positive correlation between self-esteem and academic achievement, the report notes that the study found no significant differences between males and females or between races, with respect to self -esteem.

Jennifer and Brenda (2004) investigated the associations between self-esteem, family challenge, and indication of adolescent achievement: high school grades and extracurricular involvement. Research on self-esteem and on family challenge has linked both of these factors to achievement in adolescents, but studies have not simultaneously examined the effects of these factors on achievement. The study finds that family challenge and self-esteem are correlated with one another, and examines the effects of each of these factors on achievement while controlling on the other factor. Controlling on self-esteem, family challenge was positively associated with grades in school, was marginally associated with extracurricular participation. Controlling on family challenge, self-esteem was not found to be predictive of grades or extracurricular involvement in longitudinal analysis, but some evidence was found for a relationship in the opposite direction, with grades in 10^th grade predicting self-esteem in 12^th grade. Results also suggest differences in academic achievement and

extracurricular participating by race / identity, implications of these finding for the role of family challenge and self-esteem in the positive development of adolescents.

SUMMARY OF THE REVIEW

From the literature reviewed, one could say that high self-esteem promotes good academic achievement. In addition to that most of the earlier researchers also observed that individuals with internal locus of control tend to function better in all aspect of life than those with external locus of control.

In addition, most of the theories reviewed were of the ascertion that intrinsic motivation inspires one to move ahead than extrinsic motivation. In other words, people with high level of intrinsic motivation will perform better in academic achievement and other things and will always like to accept blames for their failure than those who depend more on extrinsic motivation.

HYPOTHESES.

There will be no significant positive relationship between high self-esteem and internal locus of control on well functioning adolescents.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 200 well-functioning Adolescents comprising 100 males and 100 females were used for the study. The participants who were randomly selected using simple random sampling of 10^th case were within the age range of 15 – 19 years with a mean age of 17 years. The participants were selected among the senior school student of classes I & II of Command Secondary School and City College Secondary School both in Enugu.

INSTRUMENTS:

Three set of instrument were used in this study. They are Personal Functioning Inventory (PFI) Kohn, Brien – wood, pickening (2003); it is 30 item inventory with likert response format designed to measure adaptive coping, psychological coping strategies, adaptation to specific stressors and style of dealing with personal problems. It has response format of strongly Agree 5 points, Agree 4 points, Undecided 3 points, Disagree 2 points and strongly disagree 1 point. Thus a highest possible score of 150 and a least possible score of 30 could be obtained by any given respondent. The instrument has a Crombach alpha reliability of 0.91 and validity coefficient of 0.8 by Umeh (2004). Score below the mean score of 70 is regarded as poor functioning.

The second instrument is self-esteem scale by Adaniji & Oyefoso (1985). It is a 15 item questionnaire with likert response format of SA(5) A (4) U(3) D(2) SD(1) designed to measure high and low self-esteem. That is how an individual rates him/herself and his/her perception on how people perceive him/her. A highest possible score of 75 and a least possible score of 15 could be obtained by any given respondent. For the sample of this study, score above 59.42 indicate high self-esteem while below indicated low self-esteem. Adanijo and Oyefoso (1985) obtained the validity of the instrument as well as split-half reliability of 0.76 and crombach alpha of 0.72.

The third instrument used is locus of control by inventory by Craig Franklin & Andrew (1984). It is a 17-item questionnaire designed to measure internal and external locus of control. A score on the test ranges from 17-85. Score above 57.33 indicate internal locus of control while below indicates external locus of control. Ibeagha (2004) obtained a split – half reliability of 0.73.

PROCEDURE

A total of 350 copies of well-functioning test were distributed to select well-functioning adolescents for the research. This was done in Command Secondary School and city College Secondary School after approvals were given by the authorities of the two schools.

However, only 209 adolescents were screened as well functioning adolescents out of the 550 that were recruited for the exercise simple random sampling technique was used to select the sample. Thus only 112 were selected and administered the self-esteem scale and locus of control scale. Finally; only 100 copies that were correctly filled and returned were used for data analysis.

DESIGN/STATISTICS.

Based on two independent variables observed and measured in a linearly relationship, correlational research design was adopted, while Pearson product moment correlational coefficient statistics was used for data analysis.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

Table 1: Summary table of Pearson product moment correlation co-efficient on the relationship between high self-esteem and internal locus of control among well functioning Adolescents.

Df	N	Ex	Ey	Ex2	Ey2	Exy	r	P
98	100	3696	3726	141218	143110	141569	0.87	*

Note * = significant at P<.01

From table one above, r calculated value of 0.87 is found to be greater than r critical value of o.46 at p<.01 indicating a significant positive relationship. Thus, the hypothesis which stated that there will be no significant positive relationship between high self-esteem and internal locus of control among adolescents was rejected. This means that a significant positive relationship exist between high self-esteem and internal locus of control visa viz low self-esteem and external locus of control among adolescents.

SUMMARY OF THE FINDING

Findings of this study were summarized as follows:

A significant positive relationship was found to exist between high self-esteem and internal locus of control visa viz low self-esteem and external locus of control among adolescents.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION

Obviously the only hypothesis tested in this study yielded significant outcome. The hypothesis which stated that “There will be no significant positive relationship between high self-esteem and internal locus of control” was rejected. This means that a significant positive relationship exist between high self-esteem and internal locus of control. From the findings of the study, it is observed that adolescents with high self-esteem tend to have internal locus of control while those with low self-esteem have external locus of control.

As participants score on self-esteem is moving upwards, indicating high self-esteem, their score on locus of control continue to move upward as well indicating internal locus of control. This is a clear indication that no positive relationship exist between high self-esteem and external locus of control. Rather a positive relationship could be said to exist between high self-esteem and internal locus of control while a positive relationship could be said to exist between low self-esteem and external locus of control. In other words, adolescent who see themselves as the cause of most of their problems rather than environmental factors also believe that they are superior. They have faith in themselves; they value themselves and also belief that people perceive them positively. The outcome of this study maybe correct because one of the criteria of better adjustment in life is by accepting mistakes with a view to dealing with them. When one believes that he is the cause of a particular problem, obviously, such person will definitely know how to deal with it due to experience. On the other hand, if an individual attributes his/her problem to environmental factor, such a person will lack the boldness of dealing with such problem. When this is done, such individual will be arrived on what people will be saying about him as a result of that. A thought that he/she will always attribute to be negative about him/her (low self-esteem). On the other hand, people who always feel inferior and as well think that others talk negative about them will always attribute their predicaments to people around them. For instance, a girl who beliefs that she is ugly will always think that males who look at her do that as mockery. She can never belief that anything good about her will come out of public mouth. With this type of perception, if unfortunately a man refused to marry her as a result of one negative behaviour or the other, such a person will find it difficult to believe that the failure of the marriage is her factor. Instead she will blame her God for making her ugly.

In such a situation, it will be very difficult for such individual to change that undesirable behaviour. On the contrary, if the girl beliefs that beauty is not the only positive virtue a woman could posses, she will definitely look inward and observe other good qualities in her such as intelligence, good interpersonal relationship etc. She will also believe that people will also see these good virtues in her and admire her on the bases of that. With this type of perception (high-self-esteem) such individual will never blame God if she encounters similar experience. Instead she will look at her self as the cause (internal locus).

In time with the findings of this study, Mandy (1999) reported that those with high self-esteem and internal locus tend to perform well academically. This is because they attribute the cause of their failure/success to their factor. Findley & Cooper (1983) reported a high correlates of internal locus of control with high academic achievement. On the other hand, those with external locus may not strive to achieve because they believe that failure is their destiny. Above all, Purkey (1970) reported a positive correlation between high self-esteem and academic achievement. Argan, Peter, Sandra & Herman (2009) also reported the important self-esteem in academic achievement, social functioning and psychopathology among adolescents.

From the discussions above, one could say that high self-esteem correlates with internal locus of control among adolescents. The present study is of the opinion that adolescents who lack confidence in themselves will always attribute their failure to luck or other environmental factors. While those who have confidence in themselves will not only rate themselves high before the public but will also attribute their failure to their personal fault with a view to solving it.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

Findings of this study have obvious implications. First and foremost, the present study exposed the relationship between self-esteem and locus of control. The present study may also be regarded as therapy. This is because with the findings of this study, adolescents have learnt the negative impact of lack of confidence in themselves as well as projecting their failure to luck or other environmental factors. With the findings of this study, stake holders in secondary education will promote self-confidence among adolescents. This will help boost their self-esteem.

In addition, the present study will also serve as an empirical study for future researchers.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The present study has obvious limitations first and foremost, only one hundred adolescents were used out of myriads of adolescents. A problem that was attributed to lack of finance. The

Furthermore, considering the fact that locus of control have no significant influence on well functioning older adolescents in caritas university, further studies can compare this findings with that of other institutions.

researcher could not cover much school due to lack of finance. In addition, limited time could not allow the researcher to cover much location. This is because the research was conducted when the researcher was preparing for her degree exam.

SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER STUDIES

Future researchers should carry similar studies in other localities to ascertain the external validity of the present study. In addition to that, they should also increase the sample.

Above all, the present study was conducted among well functioning adolescents, therefore there is need to carry similar study among non-well functioning adolescents.

I also suggest that gender differences should be taken into consideration in conducting future research.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

From the findings of this study one could say that a significant positive relationship exist between self-esteem and locus of controls with high self-esteem correlating with internal locus of control and low self-esteem correlating with external locus of control.

The researcher also concludes that high self-esteem goes hand in hand with internal locus of control while low self-esteem goes with external locus of control.

REFERENCES

Arjan, E. R., Peter M., Sandra, M. & Herma, P.S. (2006). Changing Self-esteem in Children and Adolescents. Neitherlands. Journal of Psychology, 62(1): 26-33.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of thought and action: A social Cognitive Theory. Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice –Hall.

Bandur,. A. (1991a). Self-efficacy Mechanism in Physiological activation and Health–Promoting Behaviour. In J. Madden iv(ed). Neurobiology of Leaving, emotion and affect. New York: Raven.229-270.

Basgall, C. R & Snyder, G. (1988). Relationship between Material Church Attendance and Adolescent Mental Health and Social Function. American Psychiatric Association, 50:799-805.

Battle, A. (1990). Selective Recall of Positive and Negative Feedback; Self-control behaviours – Journal of Abnormal psychology 86, 379-388.

Burger. G. (1992). Learning theory and personality Dynamics. Ronald Press. New York.

Callaham, S.V. (2003). Learning Theory and behaviour. Wiley. New York.

Clifford, S. A (1964). Cause of Termination and Self-efficacy Expectations as Related to Unemployment Status. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, the University of Toledo, Toledo, OH.

Craig, A. R., Franklin, J.A., & Andrews, G. (1984). A Scale to Measure Locus of control of behaviour. British Journal of Medical psychology, 57:173-180.

Daniel, N. (1997). Self-report Measures of Family Functioning: Extensions of a factorial Analysis. The family process Institute 33(2): 203-216.

Daniel, S.L (2002). The development of social comparism motivation among Preschoolers: Evidence of a Stepwise Progression. Merrill- Palmer Quarterly of Behaviour and Development, 28; 413-425.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human behaviour, plennm :New York:

Deci, E.L. & Ryan. R.M (2000). The “What” and “Why” of Goal pursuits: Human needs and the Self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227 – 268.

Demon L. R. (2004). Self-blame, Self-esteem, and adjustment of Adolescents. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; 57;1059 – 1068.

Donglas A. A., Scott. S. H & William H.M., (2005). Family predictors of Well-Functioning Midwestern Adolescents. Great Plants Research, 15: 267-78.

Downs, G.W (1979). Toward a Theory of Innovation. Administration and Society, 10: 379-408.

Durr, S. & Schmatz, F. (1964). The Role of Homework and Skill acquisition in the Outcome of group Cognitive therapy. Behaviour therapy, 21; 281-292.

Elkins, N. S., (2004). The Myth of Adolescent Culture. American Sociological Review, 20; 680-684.

Findley, S. & Cooper V. (1983). Academic Locus of control: A relevant Variable at tertiary level. Higher Education Journal,5,(8)251-257.

Firush, N. (1999). Self-esteem and Social Support Mediators of Stress on mental health following a natural disaster. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 9:58-86.

Fraitaroh, E. (2000). The Chinese view of Modeling. Human Development, 18: 333-352.

Gibby, & Gibby, (1967). The Relation of Self-esteem and Assertiveness to Willingness to Engage in Activities. Psychology of women quarterly, 12; 91-98.

Goldbery, E. (1960). The Structure of Science. , Brace and World. New york: Harcourt.

Gordon, F. (1977). Social Network and Recovery: One year after impatient treatment. Journal of substance Abuse treatment, 8; 143-152.

Heider F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relation : Wiley. New York

Ibeagha, P. N. Balogun, S. K., & Adejuoron, G.A., (2004). Resiliency of Inner-city Oruba University Undergraduates in South Western Nigeria. Kamla-Raj Studies of Tribes and Tribals, 2 (2); 125-129.

Jennifer. E. & Brenda. F. (2004). Self-directed Contact Desensitization. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology ,45 ,730 – 738.

Jennifer, M.C; Sanel, P; Lanra, F; & kamini, M. (2004). The Relation of Age ,Gender, Ethnicity and Risk behaviours to Self – esteem among Students in Nonmainstream School . Adolescence, fall.

Jones .E. E; Kannouse, H .H; Kelly, R.E; Nirbett, S, & Weiner, B. E. (1972). Attribution; Perceiving the Causes of Behaviour. Morristown, NJ : general learning press.

Joseph, P. A, & Moore, C. (1998). Attachment and Adolescent Psychosocial Functioning. Child development , 69 (5) = 1406-1419.

Kearney, C.A. (1999). Gender Differences and Self-esteem . J Gend specif med, 2 (3) : 46-52..

Koenig, A; clements .E,; Alloy. J. (1992). Mind and Emotion- New York ;Wiley.

Kohn, P.M.; O’Brien wood, C,; pickering, D.I, & Decicco, T.L. (2003) .The Personal Functioning Inventory = A reliable and valid measure of adaptation in coping. Canadian journal of behavioral science,35 (2), 111- 123.

Learner, M.R & Spainer, S.C. (1980). Self – efficacy, Social anxiety and Inhibition in interpersonal encounters . journal of social and clinical psychology.18(12) 200-209.

Mandy, (1999). Locus of control and its impact on Education. Advanced social psychology spring.

Mark .E., Leary .F., Debora .A., Down .C., (1999). Benefit of Behavioral Psychotherapy, Annual series of European research in behaviour.

McAdams .G. (2001). Perceived Competence as a Moderator of the Relationship Between Role clarity and Job performance. A test of two hypotheses. Organizational behaviour and human performance 34,379 –386.

Mclean .B. G. (2007). Preclicting the Performance of Dental hygienic behaviours. An examination of the fishbeing and ajzan model and self efficacy expectations. Journal of appeared social psychology. 18, 114 – 128.

Millian, W. (2004). Long term follow up of Behavioural Self – control Training Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 53,249 –261.

Moore, R. (1966). Cue exposure with Coping Skills treatment for Adolescents. A Preliminary Investigation . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 61, 1011 –1019.

Moore .F. (2004) .The Overjustifiation effect. A developmental test of Self – perception interpretation. Journal of personality and Social psychology, 40 , 809 –821.

Moore .G. & Glei . M . (1995). Comparature Validity of two Measures of Self – efficancy in predicting Academic goals and Performance. Educational and Psychological measurement , 54,516 –529.

Nowicki .C. & Round.F. (1971). Self – rated Health . A Predictor of Morality among the elderly . American Journal of Public health , 72, 800 – 808.

Pesterson . F. (1988). The Relation between group Collusiveness and Performance .An Intergration . psychological bulletin , 115,210 –227.

Pick .N. & Palos .J. (1995). Relation of Self – esteem beliefs to Academic Outcome. A meta – analytic Investigation . journal of Counseling psychology, 38,30 –38.

Purkey, W.W. (1970) . Self concept and Social achievement . prentice – hall , inc – 91.

Ryan .R.M. & Deci, E.L.(2000). Self – determination theory and The facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation , Social development and Well being. American psychologist 55 , 68 –78.

Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self –efficacy: Thought control of action Washington, DC. Hemisphere.

Shagle .S. & Barber. B. (1999). Development and Validation of the Computer Self – esteem education. Psychological Measurement, 49, 893 – 899.

Shaw .E. & Alves .F. (1963). Bouncing back in the World Series. Bulletin of the Psychodynamic society ,29,131 –132.

Small .S. and T. luster. (1994). Adolescent sexual activity. An ecological , risk – factor approach . Journal of marriage and Family , 56 – 181 –92 .

Stein .B. L ,; Cox, S.; Kataoka, H .;Rhodes, & K .vestal (2003). Prevalence of Child and Adolescent exposure to Community Violence. Clinical child and family psychology Review, 6. 47 – 264.

Suniya S. L. & Edward .2.(1992). Intelligence and Social competence among high rate Adolescents .Development and Psychopathology, 4. 287 – 299.

Towbes . E .(1989).Effects of externally Mediated goal setting on Intrinsic motivation. A Laboratory experiment. Journal of applied psychology , 65 ,202 –210.

Umeh C.S. (2004) .The Impact of Personality characteristics on Students, adjustment on Campus. Unpublished ph .D. Research monograph, department of psychology , university of Lagos .

Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and Attribution theory. .Morristown NJ. General learning press.

Weiner B. (1980).Human motivation – NY – Holt , Rinehart and wiriston

Weiner, B. (1986). An Attributional theory of Motivation and Emotion. New York: Springer-verlag.

Zimbardo.E. (1985). Achievement Motivation; Conceptions of ability. Subjective experience, Task choice, and Performance. Psychological Review,91,328-346.

APPENDIX 1

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT ON PERSONAL FUNCTIONING.

PFI

Department of psychology,

Faculty of management &Social Science,

Caritas University Amorji Nike,

Enugu State.

15^th May, 2010

Dear respondent,

This is strictly for older adolescent persons. There are neither right nor wrong answers because this is just for research purpose. Remember your response will be treated with utmost confidentiality.

SECTION A

Gender:……………………. Age (last birthday): ……………… Ethnicity:……………

SECTION B

INSTRUCTION: the following statements are about individual styles of dealing with personal problems. Please read each statement carefully and indicate the frequency of your feeling by SHADING only one of the numbers in front of the statements. The numbers stand for:

1. Strongly Disagree

2. Disagree

3. Undecided

4. Agree

5. Strongly Agree

1. I have no problem staying calm during differences of opinion with my friends ………………………………………………………

2. Even remotely possible threatening events worry me ……….…………………………………………….

3. I don’t get too upset by occasional social rejection ……...…………………………………………….

4. I tend to worry too much about my problems, even ones which eventually go away by them selves… …………………………………………………

5. if I think somebody wants to harm me, I often loose my cool……………………………………………….

6. I can relax and enjoy myself even when waiting to find out about something important. …………………………………….

7. I’ ve learnt not to get down on myself for minor mistakes I make..……………………………………………….

8. The personal limitations of people I deal with often exceed the limits of my patience …………………………………….

9. when my rights are threatened, I get too upset to act in the most effective way …………………………

10. When things go badly. I find it hard to avoid even the worse disaster …………………………

11. I often loose my cool and detachment in dealing with interpersonal issues …………………………………

12. I resist getting bitter over minor slights by others ………..………………………………………….

13. I rarely permit criticism to get me angry………………………………………………….

14. when my productivity at work/school wavers or falls, I try to keep my cool……………………………………

15. I can’t stop dwelling on people’s criticism of me. Whether it seems valid or not …………………………

16. under pressure, I tend to make hasty decisions …………………..………………….

17. I keep my temper under control in business negotiations .. ……………………………………….

18. I’ve been known to magnify my personal problems beyond their real level of seriousness………………….

19. when I’m waiting to find out about something important, I just can’t get it out of my mind……………………..

20. I try to be fully informed and thoughtful about the decisions I have to make ………………………………

21. past embarrassment tend to haunt me for a long time……………..………………………………………….

22. I generally stay cool, even when I think somebody else wants to harm me …………………………………..

23. I often find it impossible to control my anger …………………………………………………………

24. I generally learn form my mistakes more than I let them upset me………………………………………………

25. Quite often, being emotionally upset affects my dealing with major problems in my life……………………….

26. I rarely permit others to manipulate my anger to their own ends ...………………………………………………..

27. I’ m often very practical in dealing with day to day problems ……...………………………………………..

28. Minor physical ailments don’t upset me much …………………………………………………………..

29. if I can’t control when something bad is going to happen, I try not to worry about it ………………………

30. I try to be calm and fair in dealing with interpersonal issues …………………………………………….

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT ON SELF-ESTEEM

SES

SECTION C

Below are a number of statements about how various topics affect your personal beliefs. There is no right or wrong answer. For every item there are a large numbers of people who agree or disagree. Could you please put in the appropriate space the choice you believe to be true?

Answer all the questions. The numbers stand for:

1. = Strongly Agree

2. = Agree

3. = Undecided

4. = Disagree

5. = Strongly disagree

1. I always try to lead any group I find myself in……………..……………………………………..

2. My effort always produce poor results………………………………………………

3. In order to get along and be liked ,I tend to be what people expect me to be rather than my true self ……………………………… …….. ……….

4. I rely on my friends or others to advise me on how to solve my personal problems…………………………………

5. When I am in a group, I am unlikely to express opinion because I fear others may not think well of me………………………………………….

6. I think I look inferior to so many of my friends……………...………………………

7. If I hear that somebody expresses a poor opinion of me , I do my best to please him /her …………………..…………………………

8. I think I am confident enough to speak in front of a group ………..………………………………………

9. I feel self conscious when I am with people who are superior to me at work or at school ……………………………

10. I sometimes criticize myself afterward after having acted silly or inappropriate in some situations………………………

11. I become panicky much I think of something I might do wrong in future ………………………………

12. I do not believe much in my abilities……………………..

13. When I am in a group, I do not usually say much for fear of saying the wrong thing………………………..

14. Although people sometimes compliment me, I feel that I do not deserve the compliment ………………………………

15. I live too much by other people’s standard………………………..

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT ON LOCUS OF CONTROL

LOCS

SECTION D

Below are a number of statements about how various topics affect your personal beliefs. There are no right or wrong answers. For every item there are a large number of people who agree or disagree. Could you please put in the appropriate space the choice you believe to be true?

Answer all the questions. The numbers stand for:

1. = Strongly Agree

2. = Agree

3. = Undecided

4. = Disagree

5. = Strongly Disagree

1. I can anticipate difficulty and take action to avoid them………………....

2. A great deal of what happens to me is probably just a matter of chance………………………..

3. Everyone knows that luck or chance determine one’s future ………………………………………..

4. I can control my problem(s) only if I have outside support…………..……………………

5. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work……………………………………..

6. My problem (s) will dominate me all my life……………………………………….

7. My mistakes and problems are my responsibility to deal with ………………………………………….

8. becoming a success is a matter of handwork, luck has little or

nothing to do with it………………………………

9. My life is controlled by outside actions or events ………………………. …………………

10. people are victims of circumstances beyond their control …………………………………………….

11. To continually manage my problems I need professional hand ………………………………………..

12. When I am under stress the tightness in my muscle is due to things outside my control ………………………………

13. I believe a person can really be a master of his fate ………………………………….…

14. It is impossible to control my irregular and fast brightening when I am having difficulties ………………………

15. I understand why my problem(s) varies so much from one occasion to the next ……………………………

16. I am confident of being able to deal successfully with future problems………………………………

17. In my case maintaining control over my problem(s) is due mostly to luck …………………………………..

APPENDIX II

Table of Pearson product moment correlation on the relationship between self-esteem and locus of control among adolescents.

S/No	X Self-esteem	Y Locus of control	X²	Y²	XY
	74	41	5476	1681	3034
	70	40	4900	1600	2800
	59	52	3481	2704	3068
	61	42	3721	1764	2562
	71	53	5041	2809	3763
	47	43	2209	1849	2021
	46	49	2116	2401	2254
	49	45	2401	2025	2205
	47	48	2209	2304	2256
	50	46	2500	2116	2300
	59	60	3481	3600	3540
	73	6	5329	3969	4599
	74	61	5476	3721	4514
	75	72	5625	5184	5400
	68	62	4624	3844	4216
	47	71	2209	5041	3337
	53	80	2809	6400	4240
	58	64	3364	4096	3712
	50	70	2500	4900	3500
	45	69	2025	4761	3105
	69	65	4761	4225	4485
	70	68	4900	4624	4760
	71	66	5041	4356	4686
	73	72	5329	5184	5256
	70	78	4900	6084	5460
	41	57	1681	3249	2337
	49	73	2401	5329	3577
	50	73	2500	5329	3650
	45	58	2025	3364	2610
	49	67	2401	4489	3283
	46	75	2116	5625	3450
	54	63	2916	3969	3402
	45	76	2025	5776	3420
	55	75	3025	5625	4125
	43	74	1849	5476	3182
	74	62	5476	3844	4588
	69	79	4761	6241	5451
	75	71	5625	5041	5325
	68	80	4624	6400	5440
	73	77	5329	5929	5621
	73	50	5329	2500	3650
	72	49	5181	2401	3528
	72	54	5181	2916	3888
	66	52	4356	2704	3432
	62	55	3844	3025	3410
	51	55	2601	3025	2805
	52	56	2704	3136	2912
	49	44	2401	1936	2156
	53	47	2809	2206	2491
	50	48	2500	2304	2400
	56	51	3136	2601	2856
	47	50	2209	2500	2350
	55	40	3025	1600	2200
	53	51	2809	2601	2703
	52	53	2704	2809	2756
	59	41	3481	1681	2419
	71	54	5041	3025	3834
	65	42	4225	1764	2730
	63	46	3969	2116	2898
	72	56	5184	3136	4032
	70	44	4900	1936	3080
	68	45	4624	2025	3060
	61	4	3721	1849	2623
	75	45	5625	2025	375
	61	41	3721	1681	2501
	73	44	5329	1936	212
	65	42	4225	1764	2730
	71	47	5041	2209	3337
	62	51	3844	2601	3162
	60	43	3600	1849	2580
	56	49	136	2401	2744
	57	64	3249	4096	3648
	47	79	2209	6241	3713
	45	61	2025	3721	2745
	49	60	2401	3600	2940
	55	78	3025	6084	4290
	55	70	3025	4900	3575
	53	65	2809	4225	3445
	46	69	2116	4761	2254
	51	59	2601	3481	3009
	45	66	2025	456	2970
	52	68	2704	4624	3536
	47	67	2209	4489	3149
	54	44	2916	1936	2376
	48	55	2304	3025	2640
	74	47	5476	2209	3478
	66	40	4356	1600	2640
	61	52	3721	2704	3172
	63	48	3969	2304	3024
	67	41	4489	1681	2747
	73	50	529	2500	3650
	59	45	3481	2025	2655
	70	49	4900	2401	3430
	61	44	3721	1936	2684
	65	44	4225	1936	2860
	70	81	4900	6561	5670
	73	62	5329	3844	4526
	60	63	3600	3969	3780
	71	84	5041	7056	5969
	68	70	4624	4900	4760
	åx = 3696	åY = 3726	åx² = 141218	åy² = 143110	åxy = 141569

APPENDIX III

Calculation of Pearson product moment correlation on the relationship between self esteem and locus of control among adolescents.

Self – esteem locus of control

X Y

Ex = 3696 Ey = 726 Ex² = 141218 Ey² 143110 Exy = 141569

r = Nåxy - åxåy

[Nåx² – (åx)²] [Nåy²– (åy)²]

r = 100 x 141569 – 3696 x 3726

100 x 141218 – 3696² x 100 x 143110 - 3726²

r = 14156900 – 13771296

14121800 – 13660416 x14311000 – 13883076

r = 385604

461384 x 427924

r = 385604

19749186816

r = 385604

444341.30

= 0.87

Update News, Read articles

Thursday, March 16, 2017

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-ESTEEM AND LOCUS OF CONTROL AMONG WELL FUNCTIONING ADOLESCENTS

BY

NWANKWO B.E DATE

SUPERVISOR

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

CHAPTER FIVE

APPENDIX I

APPENDIX II

APPENDIX III

LIST OF TABLE

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

APPENDIX 1

PFI

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT ON SELF-ESTEEM

SES

SECTION C

SECTION D

No comments: