Furnham Parental Locus of Control Scale

Abstract

The Furnham Parental Locus of Control Scale (FPLOC) is a specialized psychological instrument designed to assess the extent to which parents attribute the outcomes and psychological adjustment of their children to specific sources of control. Drawing heavily on the generalized theory of locus of control, this scale measures beliefs across several dimensions: parental internal control (the parent believes their actions determine the child’s adjustment), control by powerful others (external agents like teachers, psychologists, or politicians), and chance/fatalism (outcomes determined by luck or fate). The FPLOC provides researchers and practitioners with a robust measure for understanding parental attribution styles, which are crucial predictors of parenting behaviors, involvement, and self-efficacy.

Keywords

Parental Locus of Control, Locus of Control, Child Adjustment, Parenting Style, Attribution Theory, Psychological Assessment, Adrian Furnham

Authors

Adrian Furnham

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Furnham Parental Locus of Control Scale is to quantify individual differences in parents’ perceptions of responsibility and influence regarding their children’s development and well-being. By measuring these attributions, the scale aims to distinguish between parents who feel highly efficacious and those who feel helpless or externally driven.

Specifically, the instrument is designed to isolate various external and internal factors that parents believe govern their child’s life trajectory, ranging from personal effort and careful parenting to societal influences, educational systems, genetic predisposition, and sheer luck. This detailed differentiation allows for targeted interventions in parenting programs that address specific areas of perceived lack of control.

Construct

The scale measures the construct of Parental Locus of Control (PLOC), an adaptation of Rotter’s generalized Locus of control theory applied specifically to the domain of parenting. The construct posits that parents differ in the degree to which they believe they possess control over their children’s outcomes. This concept is typically divided into three primary subscales:

• Internal Control: The belief that the parent’s own behaviors, efforts, dedication, and knowledge are the determining factors in securing a child’s positive development and adjustment.
• Powerful Others: The belief that external authorities or influential groups (e.g., teachers, psychologists, government, friends) hold significant power over the child’s outcomes, diminishing the parent’s role.
• Chance/Fatalism: The belief that outcomes are random, accidental, or determined by luck, fate, or uncontrollable forces (e.g., genetics or God), rendering parental effort largely irrelevant.

Validity

While specific psychometric validation studies must be referenced in detail for definitive conclusions, the FPLOC is generally expected to demonstrate strong construct validity, aligning well with established measures of parental self-efficacy and attribution styles. Studies utilizing similar scales suggest that high scores on the Internal subscale correlate positively with proactive parenting behaviors, higher levels of involvement, and greater reported satisfaction with parenting roles.

Conversely, high scores on the Powerful Others or Chance subscales are typically associated with parental stress, learned helplessness, and potentially less consistent disciplinary or educational engagement. Criterion validity is supported when PLOC scores predict actual child outcomes, such as academic achievement or behavioral problems, mediated through parental behavior.

Reliability

Reliability estimates, often derived from studies conducted by Furnham and colleagues, generally indicate that the FPLOC possesses good internal consistency across its subscales, typically yielding Cronbach’s alpha coefficients in the acceptable range (often above 0.70). Test-retest reliability is also expected to be satisfactory, reflecting the stable nature of underlying parental attribution beliefs over time, particularly in non-clinical samples.

Factor Analysis

Empirical studies involving factor analysis of the FPLOC typically support the hypothesized multi-dimensional structure of the Parental Locus of Control construct. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis usually confirms the separation of items into the three distinct factors: Internal, Powerful Others, and Chance. This factorial structure is crucial as it allows researchers to analyze specific external and internal attributions independently, providing a nuanced understanding beyond a simple internal-external dichotomy.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire, Psychological Inventory

Format: Likert-type scale, typically ranging from strong agreement to strong disagreement (e.g., 6-point or 7-point scale).

Language Available: Primarily English (original development language).

Population Group: Parents and caregivers.

Age Group: Adults (parents/guardians).

Population Details: Suitable for general population studies investigating parenting attitudes and beliefs regarding child development.

Test Methodology: Respondents are asked to indicate their level of agreement with 60 statements concerning the factors influencing their children’s adjustment and outcomes.

Keywords

Attribution, Parental Beliefs, Child Development, Responsibility, Fate, Powerful Others, Locus of control, Psychological Assessment

[quads id=5]

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Information regarding specific permission fees is not provided in the source material; users must contact the author (Adrian Furnham) or relevant publishing bodies for licensing details. The scale was developed and published in academic literature, likely originating in the late 1980s or early 1990s, corresponding to the period of expanded research into specialized Julian Rotter LOC measures.

Reference’s

The original PDF containing the scale items and information can be downloaded here: http://teachinternalcontrol.com/uploads/LOC_Measures__1_.pdf

The primary reference detailing the development and validation of the scale should be sought in the published works of Adrian Furnham concerning Parental Locus of Control.

[quads id=5]

Items of the Furnham Parental Locus of Control Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. ha‎ving well-adjusted has little or nothing to do with chance.
2. Prenatal care and attention is a key factor in ha‎ving well-adjusted children.
3. Whether or not my children are well-adjusted depends mainly on my ability to look after and teachthem.
4. Psychologists can’t do very much for uncaring parents.
5. Anyone who can learn a few basic principles about caring parenting can go a long way to preventtheir children from becoming poorly adjusted.
6. Poor adjustment in children results from parents’ idleness and lack of caring.
7. To a great extent my life is controlled by accidental happenings.
8. Teachers help few poorly-adjusted children.
9. In spite of parents training‚ a child’s values change after he/she starts school.
10. Parental expectations of their children have a direct effect on their achievement.
11. Most parents feel confident that their children will live up to their expectations.
12. Children learn their bad behavior mostly from their friends.
13. The choice of a particular school for children is crucial in ensuring their personal adjustment.
14. Essentially all children are responsible for their own adjustment.
15. Teachers play a vital role in ensuring that a child is well adjusted.
16. A child’s poor adjustment usually results from restricted opportunities at school.
17. The school has too much control over the child’s development and adjustment.
18. Children help each other to overcome obstacles to their development and adjustment.
19. Children’s adjustment is in the hands of God.
20. Irrespective of the amount of good parenting given to children‚ poor schooling could seriously undermine good work.
21. Other influences‚ like television‚ exert more control over children’s adjustment than either home orschool.
22. It is an impossible task to ensure that one’s children are well adjusted.
23. Parents know best what is good for their children.
24. To a great extent parents can control their child’s mental and emotional development.
25. Parents have the ability to mold their children’s ch‎aracter.
26. Children’s attitudes reflect those of their parents.
27. When it comes to bringing up children‚ it is really a hit or miss affair.
28. I feel that children’s adjustment is mostly determined by powerful people.
29. There is little one can do to prevent children from going “off the rails.”
30. No matter what anybody does‚ there will always be poorly adjusted children.
31. When I make plans‚ I am almost certain to make them work.
32. Whether or not people have well-adjusted children is due to luck.
33. People who never have problems with their children are just plain lucky.
34. Often there is no chance of protecting children from bad (The rest of this item is missing from the document)
35. The seriousness of disturbed children is overstated.
36. When it comes to the adjustment of children‚ there is no such thing as “bad luck.”
37. When I get what I want‚ it’s usually because I’m lucky.
38. In the long run‚ people who take very good care of their children stay happy.
39. Preventing childhood delinquency‚ truancy‚ and maladjustment requires good hard work morethan anything else.
40. Although I might have ability‚ I will not become a successful parent without appealing to those inposition of power.
41. In the Western world‚ there is really no such thing as neglected children.
42. Becoming the parent of a happy well-adjusted child has nothing to do with luck.
43. How many friends I have depends on how generous I am.
44. Most people are helped a great deal when they go to an educational psychologist.
45. There is a lot of children’s emotional problems that can be very serious indeed.
46. People like myself have little chance of protecting our children when they are in conflict withthose from strong pressure groups.
47. Regarding children‚ there isn’t much you can do for yourself when you are poor.
48. Politicians can do very little to prevent childhood neglect.
49. It’s not always wise for me to worry too much about my children because many things turn out tobe a matter of good or bad fortune.
50. If I have poorly adjusted children‚ it’s usually my own fault.
51. Family security if largely a matter of fortune.
52. Getting what I want for my children requires pleasing those people above me.
53. Whether or not I get to be a parent of a happy child depends on whether I’m lucky enough to be inthe right place at the right time.
54. I can pretty much determine what will happen to my children.
55. I am usually able to protect my children’s interests.
56. When I get what I want‚ it’s usually because I worked hard for it.
57. My life is determined by my own actions.
58. It is chiefly a matter of fate whether I have adjusted or poorly adjusted children.
59. Only those who have money can possibly afford to become parents of well-adjusted children.
60. Children’s adjustment is all in the genes