Behaviordata Psychodiagnostic Laboratory Report

Name: 1
Account: a
Subject: 1
Sex: M
Age: 54
Date: 10-21-09
Report: Comprehensive
Inventory: SCI

This is a Comprehensive Clinical Report based on the Shapiro Control Inventory (SCI). It is available only to licensed professionals.

This Behaviordata, Inc., report is a professional consultation composed by computer, following a method designed by psychologists. Like any report based on an inventory, it is subject to error. No decision should be made from this report alone, but only from a consideration of all available information.

The SCI's author is Deane H. Shapiro, Jr., Ph.D., who has been assisted in development of this report by colleagues at Behaviordata, Inc., including the reporting system, editor, and co-author, Robert A. Broenen, Psy.D., the computer analyst and programmer, Roger W. Sward, CDP, the report program developer, Kenneth L. Rider, Ph.D., and the website programmer, Bob H. Stenberg

Copyright © 1992-2007 by Deane H. Shapiro, Jr., Ph.D. All Rights reserved.

Report Organization

This report provides a control profile of the subject which includes four major sectors:

1. First, it provides data regarding his/her current perceptions of a sense of control, both in the general domain and in specific domains.
2. Second, it reports the subject's mode of control status, which describes his/her characteristic cognitive and or behavioral styles of responding to control-related issues.
3. Third, the motivation for control area is presented, including a desire for control scale, information on overcontrol issues, and preferences for ways to deal with domain-specific parameters of concern.
4. Finally, there is information on agency of control, identifying the sources of a person's sense of control.

This report begins with a summary overview of the nine SCI scales and the other information mentioned above in a graphic profile. For interpretation, the subject's scores are compared to a 'healthy normal' comparison group which has been psychiatrically screened, to provide an empirical reference standard against which to interpret the subject's scores. (All graphs in this report are based on standardized scores with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Shaded regions on the graph indicate score ranges that are considered to be significantly out of the range associated with healthy normals.)

Since these scales were both clinically and theoretically derived, and then empirically tested, the information from items in the scales can be directly related to clinical practice. Therefore, this Comprehensive Report proceeds from the general--scale level, to the more specific--item level and other appropriate groupings, in each succeeding section to elaborate on the meanings and implications of the summary information.

Thus, in summary, the SCI control Profile assesses: where a subject has been in his/her life regarding sense of control, how he/she got there, if he/she would like to change, and, if so, in what areas, and by what means.

Figure 1. SCI CONTROL PROFILE

SUMMARY

The subject's SCI Control Profile is presented in Figure 1.

In general, this individual reports having a sense of control in his life which is below that typically found with healthy individuals. This individual's positive sense of control is lower than that of healthy normals. This individual's negative sense of control is greater than that of healthy normals. In the specific domains of his life, overall, he reports feeling a level of control similar to healthy normals.

The following mode of control scales are within the healthy normal range:

5. Quadrant 1, Positive Assertive
6. Quadrant 2, Positive Yielding
7. Quadrant 3, Negative Assertive

The following mode of control scales are not within the healthy normal range:

8. Quadrant 4, Negative Yielding

In other words, in one or more of the above, he tends to choose less healthy, less adaptive ways of thinking and/or behaving about achieving and maintaining control than research has found among healthily functioning persons.

This individual's motivation for control, as measured by the desire for control scale, falls within the healthy normal range. That is, he does not report having an extremely high or extremely low need for control.

This individual's satisfaction level with his general domain modes of control is equal to, or higher than, that of healthy normals.

This individual's satisfaction level with his degree of control regarding specific-domain parameters is below the healthy normal level.

Relative to those specific-domain parameters with which he is not satisfied, his desire to make a change rather than accept them is similar to, or greater than, that of healthy normals.

In terms of agency of control, this individual is similar to healthy normals in his sense of control from others, but below that of healthy normals in sense of control from self.

In summary, this person appears, relative to all the major aspects of control measured by this inventory, to have a control profile which is somewhat similar to that found amoung healthy normals. The scores on about half of the major scales fall within the range which characterizes well functioning individuals. There are concerns in a number of areas which may be causing problems with issues of control. There is, however, a strong control-profile foundation upon which to build.

More specifically, this client compares favorable to a psychiatrically screened healthy normal group on 8 out of 14, or 57% of all the major aspects of control measured by this inventory. However, there are 6 aspects, or 43% where there is a significant discrepancy from the healthy normal group.

As can be seen from the Figure 1 graph above, these are:

1. Overall Sense of Control.
2. Positive Sense of Control.
3. Negative Sense of Control.
8. Quadrant 4, Negative Yielding.
11. Parameter Satisfaction.
13. Self as Source of Control.

These areas in particular should be further investigated by the clinician.

Even for those scales within the normal range, investigation of scale items which fall outside the normal range, exploration of parameters of concern, and modes for addressing those parameters should be carefully examined by the clinician.

More detailed information on the Scales and additional items is presented in the following sections:

SENSE OF CONTROL

1. OVERALL GENERAL DOMAIN SENSE OF CONTROL (Scale 1)
2. POSITIVE SENSE OF CONTROL ITEMS (Scale 2)
3. NEGATIVE SENSE OF CONTROL ITEMS (Scale 3)
4. OVERALL DOMAIN SPECIFIC SENSE OF CONTROL (scale 4)

Specific Domain vs. General Domain
Specific Domains: Sense of Control
Specific Parameters: Sense of Control

MODES OF CONTROL

5 to 8. THE FOUR MODES OF CONTROL (Scales 5 to 8)

Mode of Control Item Analysis

MOTIVATION FOR CONTROL

9. DESIRE FOR CONTROL (Scale 9)

Item Analysis
The Issue of Overcontrol

10. MODES OF CONTROL

Desire to Change: Item Analysis

11. SPECIFIC PARAMETERS: SATISFACTION, CONCERNS

Level of Satisfaction
Parameters of Concern

12. PREFERRED RESPONSE STYLE IN SPECIFIC PARAMETERS

AGENCY OF CONTROL

13. SELF AS SOURCE
14. OTHERS AS SOURCE

SENSE OF CONTROL

The SCI measures an individual's sense of control in both the general domain and in specific domains. This section provides the subject's scores in both of these areas and compares and interprets them in detail.

GENERAL DOMAIN SENSE OF CONTROL (Scales 1 to 3)

In the general domain, Overall Sense of Control (Scale 1) is a 16-item scale encompassing two more specific scales, Positive Sense of Control (Scale 2) and Negative Sense of Control (Scale 3).

Figure 2 below presents the subject's general domain sense of control profile, Scales 1 to 3.

Figure 2. Sense of Control, General Domain

1. OVERALL GENERAL DOMAIN SENSE OF CONTROL (Scale 1)

The subject's overall sense of control in the general domain, derived from all 16 items relating to sense of control, is lower than that of the healthy normal comparison group. This indicates that he has less than a healthy normal person's level of belief that he has the resources to achieve and maintain control in his life. Perceptions he has about lacking or losing control could be sufficient to restrict thinking and behavior relative to control issues.

2. POSITIVE SENSE OF CONTROL ITEMS (Scale 2)

Scale 2, Positive Sense of Control, consists of 11 items assessing the subject's current overall sense of positive control, e.g.: belief in his ability to attain control in the future if he wished (self-efficacy); his assessment of his ability to utilize the two positive modes of attaining control; his evaluation of the six dimensions of positive control (ability to set meaningful goals, skills to carry out the goals, motivation and determination to follow through, awareness, choice and responsibility (as well as the appropriateness of his level of self-control).

The subject's positive sense of control in the general domain is lower than that of the healthy normal comparison group. This indicates that he does not have their level of belief that he has the resources to achieve and maintain control in his life.

The following items in this scale were positively endorsed, suggesting that these are areas of strength for this person relative to positive sense of control, and are assets on which the therapist can build:

11. I am able to calmly accept that which I am not able to change or alter.
12. I am able to act assertively and decisively to try to change or alter what I want to.
15. I am aware of my own feelings and motivations and recognize how they affect me.
16. I take appropriate responsibility for that over which I have control.
17. I make the appropriate amount of effort and have sufficient discipline to reach my goals.
18. I have the skills and ability to reach my goals.

The following items in this scale were not as highly endorsed as the screened normals, suggesting that these may be areas of vulnerability for this person relative to positive sense of control, and deserve further clinical investigation:

1. I have a positive sense of control in my life.
2. If I decide to, I have the ability to make changes in order to gain more control over my life.
13. I am able to choose and make decisions about the important things in my life.
14. I am able to set clear, realistic, and meaningful goals.
33. I have the right degree of self-control.

This individual reports having a level of self-control which is similar to, or greater than, that of healthy normals. This can be considered an asset.

3. NEGATIVE SENSE OF CONTROL ITEMS (Scale 3)

Scale 3, Negative Sense of Control, consists of 5 items measuring whether the subject feels he is losing control in areas where he once had it, is losing self-control, lacks control of his environment--other people and situations, and is controlled too much by other individuals.

The subject's negative sense of control in the general domain is greater than that of the healthy normal comparison group. This indicates that his perceptions about lacking or losing control are great enough to restrict perceptions and behaviors relative to sense of control.

The following items in this scale were endorsed in a healthy manner, suggesting that these are areas of strength for this person relative to negative sense of control, and are positives upon which the clinician can build:

7. I lose control of myself.
8. I lack control of my environment (other people, situations).
29. I feel that I am losing control in areas where I once had control.

The following items in this scale were endorsed in a manner indicating a frequency higher than that of the healthy comparison group, suggesting that these may be areas of vulnerability for this person relative to negative sense of control, and should be further investigated by the clinician:

9. I am too passive and helpless.
26. Others have too much control over me.

4. OVERALL DOMAIN SPECIFIC SENSE OF CONTROL (Scale 4)

The overall domain-specific sense of control scale is a 25-item scale assessing particular areas where a subject may feel in or out of control. The scale can be scored overall, combining all 25 items (Scale 4). It can also be interpreted at the domain level, in which responses to the 25 items can be examined as grouped into areas or domains, as follows:

- Body: eating behavior, physical exercise, bodily functions, general physical appearance, weight, and sexuality
- Mind: Thoughts and attention as well as stress and sadness
- Inter-personal relations: friends, significant other, children, and family of origin
- Self
- Career: employment situation, work habits, spending habits
- Environment
- Other: drug and alcohol consumption, smoking, violent behavior, gambling, and time management

Additionally, the 25 parameters of control encompassed by this scale can be examined and interpreted individually. Figure 3 below presents the subject's specific domain sense of control, shown as an overall domain-specific score, and in each of the seven domains.

Figure 3. Domain-Specific Sense of Control Scale

Overall Domain-Specific Sense of Control

Overall, in the specific domain, the subject reports feeling in control similar to the healthy normal comparison group.

Specific Domain vs. General Domain

For comparative purposes, the subject's general domain and specific domain sense of control scores are presented together in Figure 4:

Figure 4. Domain-Specific Sense of Control Scale

A comparison of this individual's overall sense of control in the general domain and in the specific domains indicates that he feels in control when examining the specific domains of his life, but overall, in the general domain, has a lower sense of control than healthy normals. This should be examined by the clinician, in terms of the discrepancy between the client's negative global attitudes about control compared to positive domain-specific feelings.

Specific Domains: Sense of Control

Relative to specific domains, he reports having a sense of control comparable to healthy normals in the following domains:

Sense of Control, Body
Sense of Control, Relationships
Sense of Control, Self
Sense of Control, Environment
Sense of Control, Other

The subject indicates that his sense of control is below what is typical of healthy normals in the following domains:

Sense of Control, Mind
Sense of Control, Career

The section below, which investigates sense of control relative to specific parameters of these domains, will provide the clinician additional detail regarding the sources of theses domain-related sense of control scores.

Specific Parameters: Sense of Control

It is useful to examine the total number of specific parameters in which the subject reported being to some extent in control. Individuals in the SCI healthy comparison group reported feeling in control in about 18 of the parameters (or 75%)--and some even as high as 100%. (However, there was a wide range in the group's response pattern, with some reporting being in control in as few as 11, or 44% of the parameters.)

Examining the total number of specific parameters in which the subject reported being in control (either slightly, moderately, or very), his responses fall in the range associated with healthy, normal functioning. Of the 25 parameters measured, he reported being in control in 22, or 88% of them. Clinically, these areas listed below can be considered areas of strength relative to control issues in his life.

38. Eating behavior (Moderately in control)
39. Physical exercise (Moderately in control)
40. The way my body functions (Moderately in control)
41. Physical appearance (general) (Moderately in control)
42. Body Weight (Moderately in control)
43. Sexuality (Moderately in control)

44. My thoughts (Very in control)
45. Attention/Concentration (Moderately in control)

48. Relationships (friends) (Slightly in control)
49. Relationship with significant other (or none) (Moderately in control)
50. Relationship with my children (or no children) (Slightly in control)
51. Relationship with my family of origin (Moderately in control)

52. The way I feel about myself (Slightly in control)

54. Spending habits (Slightly in control)
55. Work habits (Very in control)

56. The place where I live (Moderately in control)

57. Drug usage (Very in control)
58. Alcohol consumption (Very in control)
59. Smoking (Very in control)
60. Violent behavior (Very in control)
61. Gambling (Very in control)
62. Management of time (Moderately in control)

Examining the total number of specific parameters in which the subject reported being out of control (either slightly, moderately, or very), his responses fall in the range associated with healthy, normal functioning. Of the 25 parameters measured, he reported being out of control in 3, or 12% of them. Clinically, these areas listed below can be considered areas of vulnerability relative to control issues in his life.

46. Stress (Very out of control)
47. Sadness (Slightly out of control)

53. Employment situation (or not employed) (Moderately out of control)

MODES OF CONTROL

This section of the SCI report addresses an individual's modes of control, that is, his characteristic cognitive and/or behavioral styles of responding to control-related issues.

5-8. THE FOUR MODES OF CONTROL (Scales 5 to 8)

The SCI identifies four modes of control, based upon two combinations of two different dynamic characteristics, representing polar opposites, or ends of a continuum. They are:

Thus, four modes are derived, representing the four combinations possible. They can be considered as quadrants of a four-part model:

Quadrant 1. Positive Assertive
Quadrant 2. Positive Yielding
Quadrant 3. Negative Assertive
Quadrant 4. Negative Yielding

MODE OF CONTROL STYLES

The subject was asked to indicate how accurately each of 49 words or phrases which suggested mode of control styles described his. Here, his scores on each of the four mode of control scales are presented as derived from his responses to those words and phrases as applied to himself.

Figure 5 below presents the subject's mode of control scores (Scales 5 through 8).

Figure 5. Mode of Control Preferences

As can be noted from the graph, the subject's endorsed mode of control styles which are in the range of the healthy normal comparison group are:

5. Quadrant 1, Positive Assertive
6. Quadrant 2, Positive Yielding
7. Quadrant 3, Negative Assertive

Any scale listed here suggests a psychologically healthy style of control, and can be considered a strength in adaptive functioning.

The subject's scores on the remaining scales fell outside that range:

8. Quadrant 4, Negative Yielding

Any scale noted here is less adaptive as a style of functioning. The clinician may want to consider how to decrease the client's reliance on negative styles and to strengthen the more positive modes.

INTERPRETATION OF PROFILE CONFIGURATIONS

The client is using both positive modes of control with a positive frequency which compares favorably with the healthy normal group. The client is also using the negative assertive mode in a low frequency which compares favorably with the helathy normal group. However, he is using the negative yielding mode in a frequency higher than the healthy normal group. Because research shows that psychologically healthy individuals favor and use both positive assertive and positive yielding strategies, the clinician should reinforce the high and adaptive use of the two positive modes of control, reinforce the low use of the negative assertive mode; then seek to focus on finding ways to explore the client's understanding, and causes of the high negative yielding mode, and then work to encourage the decrease of that mode.

MODE OF CONTROL ITEM ANALYSIS

Following is a listing of the items which make up each of the four Mode of Control scales, along with the subject's endorsements. The listing is provided as an additional diagnostic aid for the clinician. Items of interest can be discussed with the client to gain more specific insights into his self-perceptions about his modes of control.

Quadrant 1. Positive Assertive

The client's responses to the following items were:

Quadrant 2. Positive Yielding

The client's responses to the following items were:

Quadrant 3. Negative Assertive

The client's responses to the following items were:

Quadrant 4. Negative Yielding

The client's responses to the following items were:

Items equal to the normal group are strengths on which to build for each mode. Items lower than normal for positive assertive and positive yielding are areas for further discussion with the client. Items higher than normal for negative assertive and negative yielding are likewise areas for further clinical investigation.

MOTIVATION FOR CONTROL

This section addresses the control-related motivational factors in the subject's life. These include: a) desire for control as a component of a motivational vector regarding the importance of having control in his life, b) areas of concern about control issues, c) degree of satisfaction with modes of control, and d) preferences for ways to deal with areas of concern regarding control.

9. DESIRE FOR CONTROL (Scale 9)

The Desire for Control scale (Scale 9) measures, in the general domain, the extent to which one aspires to achieving and maintaining control. Scale 9 consists of 11 items assessing the extent to which one aspires to achieve and maintain control, both over oneself and over others and the environment. The scale includes such items as: the subject's fear of losing control, the importance of giving the appearance of being in control, efforts for control, and the need for achievement and power. The subject's score on this scale is presented graphically in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6. Desire for Control

Desire for Control

The subject's score on the Desire for Control scale falls within a broad range which represents that of healthy normals. This means that it is neither too high (which would suggest a preoccupation with getting and maintaining control), nor too low (which would indicate a notable lack of desire for control).

Item Analysis

It may be useful for the clinician to examine the specific items in the Desire for Control scale which the subject has endorsed within the normal range, above, and below that range.

The subject endorsed these items within the healthy normal range

4. I have a strong desire to be in control.
24. It is important for me to be in control of myself.
36. I have the right degree of self-control.

The subject endorsed these items above the healthy normal range, suggesting an unusually high desire for control in these areas:

6. I fear losing control.
25. It is important for me to be in control of others: people and situations.
30. Achievement is important to me.
31. I like things around me to be ordered and dislike ambiguity and the unknown.
32. Before making a difficult decision I like to gather as much information as possible.
37. I want to control my anger better.

The subject endorsed these items below the healthy normal range, suggesting an unusually low desire for control in these areas:

3. I make a great deal of effort in order to try to stay in control of my life.
27. Others have too much control over me.

Relative to self-control, the subject reported being satisfied.

The Issue of Overcontrol

The SCI contains items of potential clinical interest as related to motivation for control specifically regarding the issues of overcontrol and the desire to have less control. These items involve: the desire to let go of control, the beliefs one is too aggressive and overcontrolling, has too much self-control, holds one's anger in even when wanting to express it, wants less self-control, and seeks risks, excitement, and adventure.

On the following items, the subject's score was comparable to the healthy normal group:

10. I am too aggressive and over-controlling.

On the following items, the subject's score was significantly higher than that of the healthy normal group:

28. I seek risks, excitement, and adventure.
34. I have too much self-control.
35. I hold my anger in even when I want to express it.

On the following items, the subject's score was significantly lower than that of the healthy normal group:

5. I wish I could let go of control.

The clinician may wish to examine these responses for additional information regarding the subject's feelings about having too much control, either over self and/or others.

10. MODES OF CONTROL: SATISFACTION LEVEL AND DESIRE TO CHANGE

The SCI asked the subject to indicate whether he wanted to stay the same in terms of various words or phrases reflecting each of his four mode of control options, or whether he would prefer to change. If he wished to change, he indicated whether he wanted an attribute to be more, or less characteristic of himself.

Level of Satisfaction

The subject's expressed level of satisfaction for each of the four modes of control was calculated and compared with healthy normals. The satisfaction level is calculated as a percentage for each quadrant, and as a total for all four modes of control. Healthy normals express an overall satisfaction level relative to their modes of control greater than 50%.

The subject's scores relative to satisfaction and desire to change are presented in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Satisfaction and Desire to Change

This individual's overall level of satisfaction with the way he employs the four modes of control falls within the range found among healthy normals. This indicates that he is generally satisfied with how he employs these various modes of control in his thinking and behavior. This may be viewed by the clinician as an area of psychological health for the client, particularly if his mode of control scores tend to fall in the healthy range. It is suggested that the clinician examine his scores on each of the four modes, to see whether the client should, in fact, not be satisfied with his modes of control, and is engaging in some self-deception in this regard.

It can be useful to examine the subject's level of satisfaction with each of the four modes of control in table 1, and how each affected--either positively or negatively--his overall level of satisfaction relative to his modes of control. In areas where he reported low satisfaction, the clinician's attention is called to the paragraphs below, which provide further information about his desire to change his modes of control.

Desire to Change

For the 49 mode of control descriptors, if the subject was not totally satisfied with the degree to which each characterized him, he was asked to report whether he wanted that descriptor to become more or less characteristic of him. This indicates a desire to change the frequency of adopting that mode of control style. It can be calculated not only as to direction (more or less), but also as to extent of change. These figures, like those for satisfaction, are also presented in percentages.

Generally, if an individual is not satisfied with his or her modes of control, research has indicated that motivations to change modes of control are in the direction of psychological health if they are in the following directions:

Quadrant 1, Positive Assertive: increase (endorsed as more)
Quadrant 2, Positive Yielding: increase (endorsed as more)
Quadrant 3, Negative Assertive: decrease (endorsed as less)
Quadrant 4, Negative Yielding: decrease (endorsed as less)

The clinician may find it helpful to review with the client his modes of control profile (Figure 5), in conjunction with his mode satisfaction level, his desire to change any modes, and the direction and degree of such desire to change. Such a discussion can lead to insights into the client's styles of thought and behavior, and suggest areas for specific mode of control related treatment interventions.

Item Level Analysis of Mode Satisfaction Level and Desires to Change

Analysis of specific mode of control items can show where the subject is satisfied, and where there is positive desire to change (that is, more Quadrants 1 and 2, less Quadrants 3 and 4). If a person wants less of an item in Quadrant 1 or 2, or more of an item in Quadrant 3 or 4, this can serve as a red flag (-) to the clinician for further inquiry.

Quadrant 1. Positive Assertive

Quadrant 2. Positive Yielding

Quadrant 3. Negative Assertive

Quadrant 4. Negative Yielding

11. SPECIFIC PARAMETERS: SATISFACTION AND CONCERNS

The subject indicated his level of satisfaction with his degree of control regarding each of the 25 parameters which make up the 7 domains. Degree of satisfaction was indicated by reporting a parameter to be not a concern. Among healthy normals, a typical overall level of satisfaction with the specific parameters is around 60%, but with a wide range--from around 35% to 80%. Or, in raw numbers, a healthy normal individual tends to report no concern for about 15 of the 25 parameters measured, but the normal range extends from about 9 to about 20 parameters.

Level of Satisfaction

This individual reports no concern, or being satisfied, in 7, or about 28% of the specific domain parameters. This falls below the range associated with healthy normals, and may be considered a psychological disadvantage for him. It will probably be useful for the clinician to examine the specific parameters of concern with him, and his desires regarding how to deal with these concerns (see below).

In the following parameters the subject does not feel a control-related concern. The therapist can reinforce and build upon these strengths.

Relationships:

76. Relationship with my family of origin

Other:

82. Drug usage
83. Alcohol consumption
84. Smoking
85. Violent behavior
86. Gambling
87. Management of time

Areas of Concern

Relative to the specific parameters surveyed, the subject reports that 18 of the 25 specific parameters of control, or 72% were of concern to him. Most healthy normal individuals report at least a few parameters to be of concern--and often many more.

The number of parameters of concern to this individual falls above the broad range typical of healthy normals, suggesting an unusually high number of concerns for him in the specific domains. It is suggested that the clinician review theses concerns with him to look for areas where his distress can be relieved through appropriate interventions.

Following is a list of all the parameters which the subject reported as being of concern:

Body:

63. Eating behavior
64. Physical exercise
65. The way my body functions
66. Physical appearance (general)
67. Body Weight
68. Sexuality

Mind:

69. My thoughts
70. Attention/Concentration
71. Stress
72. Sadness

Relationships:

73. Relationships (friends)
74. Relationship with significant other (or none)
75. Relationship with my children (or no children)

Self:

77. The way I feel about myself

Career:

78. Employment situation (or not employed)
79. Spending habits
80. Work habits

Environment:

81. The place where I live

Parameters Not in Control - But Not a Concern

The subject reported no areas that met this criterion.

12. PREFERRED RESPONSE STYLE IN SPECIFIC PARAMETERS

If the subject did not report being satisfied, he was asked whether his preferred response style was to make a change or to accept that particular parameter.

Relative to the 18 parameters about which he expressed concern, he reported wanting to change his situation by action in 10 of them, or 55%. In the remaining 8 areas of concern, or 44%, rather than making changes, he stated a willingness to accept them. Among healthy normals, the response preference is to change in areas of concern, rather than to accept them, by a margin of 80% to 20%.

Active Change/Alter:

63. Eating behavior
64. Physical exercise
69. My thoughts
71. Stress
72. Sadness
73. Relationships (friends)
74. Relationship with significant other (or none)
77. The way I feel about myself
78. Employment situation (or not employed)
80. Work habits

Accept:

65. The way my body functions
66. Physical appearance (general)
67. Body Weight
68. Sexuality
70. Attention/Concentration
75. Relationship with my children (or no children)
79. Spending habits
81. The place where I live

The subject's preferred mode of response to domain-specific areas of concern is to change them to be more to his liking. This is fairly typical, at least in western cultures. It may be useful for the clinician to examine his mode of control scores in the general domain; if they are consistent, they will indicate a relatively higher score for one or both of the assertive modes (Quadrant 1, Positive and/or Quadrant 3, Negative) than for the yielding modes (Quadrants 2, Positive and/or Quadrant 4, Negative).

In general, psychological health requires a certain flexibility regarding how one addresses parameters of concern. The clinician should review with the client all of the parameters of concern, and the mode with which the client wishes to address them. The clinician needs to determine whether the client's acceptance is wisdom or passivity; and whether the client's intent to change suggests positive, active empowerment, or overcontrolling efforts and desires. If the concern and mode seem appropriate, the clinician can then work with the client on specific mode-by-parameter interventions.

13 to 14. AGENCY OF CONTROL: SELF AND OTHERS AS SOURCE

The original instrument assessing human control by Julian Rotter in the 1960's provided a single output: whether as a generalized expectancy locus of control is perceived to reside within the self or external to the self. Second generation tests, such as Wallston's Health Locus of Control demonstrated that sources of control such as self and other are not mutually exclusive. For this reason, the SCI offers source of agency of control information. The SCI determines to what extent one's sense of control emanates from one's own efforts, and to what extent it comes from others. Figure 7 below presents a comparative graph of sources of sense of control. The scores lists below the graph give further definition as to the specific types of other sources of control.

Figure 7. Source of Control, General Domain

Other Sources of Control

21. My sense of control comes from family and friends. (Occasionally)
22. My sense of control comes from the government and society. (Never)
23. My sense of control comes from a higher power (God, religion, spiritual beliefs). (Rarely)

This individual reports experiencing his sense of control coming from his own efforts to a lower degree than found in healthy normals. However, he reports that control is coming from others to an extent comparable to or higher than that of healthy normals. It is suggested that the clinician investigate why the subject senses such a low degree of control from self. There may be too much of a feeling of a need for reliance on others, to the exclusion of one's own efforts. This profile is frequently seen in persons with depression or low self-esteem. On the other hand, this profile may reflect a healthy feeling of interconnectedness, control by a higher power, and/or a religious belief. This specific profile is not necessarily a concern, but should at least be investigated further by the clinician.

Answers: