Personal Competence / Personal Efficacy

Abstract

The Personal Competence/Personal Efficacy scale is a psychological instrument designed to assess an individual’s subjective sense of control, capability, and confidence in influencing life outcomes. This measure reflects the degree to which a person believes their efforts, planning, and decisions determine success, rather than external factors like luck or fate. The scale utilizes two primary formats: a four-point Likert-type agreement scale and a dichotomous forced-choice format, with items covering themes such as planning ahead, perceived luck, willpower, and decisiveness. Components of this scale have historically been linked to measures of Ego-Strength and were extensively used in major social and political attitude surveys conducted by the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research (ISR).

Keywords

Personal Competence, Personal Efficacy, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, Ego-Strength, Political Attitudes, Social Psychology, Decisiveness, Willpower.

Authors

Barron, F., Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E., Stokes, D.E., Robinson, John P., Shaver, Phillip R.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Personal Competence scale is to quantify an individual’s internal psychological resources and their belief in their capacity to manage life effectively. The items were initially developed to measure fundamental psychological resilience, often referred to as Ego-Strength, which was found to predict positive response to psychotherapy (Barron, 1953).

In later applications, particularly within political and social research (Campbell et al., 1960), the forced-choice items were utilized to assess how a sense of personal control correlated with broader political behavior, participation, and attitudes. This measurement helps researchers understand the psychological underpinning of self-reliance and proactive engagement with the environment.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Personal Efficacy, which is a domain-general belief in one’s ability to successfully execute courses of action required to produce given attainments. It is conceptually intertwined with Rotter’s Locus of Control theory.

High scores reflect an internal orientation, indicating that the respondent perceives themselves as capable of planning, making firm decisions, and overcoming adversity through personal effort and willpower. Conversely, low scores suggest an external orientation, where the individual feels frequently thwarted by external circumstances, bad luck, or the actions of others, leading to a sense of fatalism or futility regarding long-term planning.

Validity

While the source content does not provide specific statistical validity coefficients (e.g., correlations or factor loadings), the historical application of the scale components suggests established validity. Barron’s initial work demonstrated predictive validity, showing that high Ego-Strength scores (from which some items were adapted) successfully predicted favorable outcomes in clinical psychotherapy.

Furthermore, the inclusion of the forced-choice items in seminal large-scale studies, such as the 1960 survey reported in The American Voter, confirms the instrument’s utility and face validity in measuring core social psychological variables relevant to political science and sociology. The scale effectively distinguishes between individuals who feel agentic versus those who feel controlled by external forces.

Reliability

Specific internal consistency or test-retest reliability statistics are not provided in this excerpt. However, instruments compiled and disseminated by respected academic institutions, such as the Institute for Social Research (ISR), are generally considered reliable for population studies. The consistency of item usage across different waves of national surveys (1960 and 1964) suggests that the items demonstrated adequate stability and consistency to warrant repeated application in longitudinal research.

Researchers seeking detailed psychometric data, including reliability estimates (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha), should consult the comprehensive source volume, Measures of Political Attitudes (Robinson & Shaver, 1969), which details the standardization and psychometric properties of the scales included in the compilation.

Factor Analysis

The scale is generally treated as a unidimensional measure designed to capture a single overall factor of Personal Competence or control. However, the items cover distinct aspects of competence, including confidence in decision-making, belief in personal planning efficacy, and resilience against external misfortune. For example, some items focus on active planning, while others focus on passive acceptance of fate or luck.

A formal factor analysis would likely confirm a dominant factor of perceived control, possibly with minor sub-factors relating to decisiveness versus fatalism. The brevity and historical context of the scale prioritize its use as a concise measure suitable for inclusion in extensive survey batteries.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Attitude scale

Format: Mixed. Includes a 4-point Likert scale (Agree a lot / Agree a little / Disagree a little / Disagree a lot) and a dichotomous forced-choice format.

Language Available: English

Population Group: General Population

Age Group: Adults (Typically used in population samples aged 18+)

Population Details: Primarily utilized in large-scale national surveys in the United States, including political and social attitude studies.

Test Methodology: Can be administered via paper-and-pencil or interview. Scoring involves summing responses, with specific items requiring reversed scoring to align with the core construct of competence.

Keywords

Personal Control, Self-Confidence, Personal Efficacy, Ego, Survey Instrument, Political Behavior, Psychological Measurement.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source.

Correspondence Address: Correspondence generally directed toward the Institute for Social Research (ISR), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale components were developed over several years, beginning with F. Barron’s work in 1953. Key forced-choice items were used in the 1960 and 1964 surveys, and the compilation was published by Robinson and Shaver in 1969. The instrument is generally available for academic and non-commercial research purposes through the ISR archives, often without proprietary fees, provided proper citation is maintained.

The original PDF documentation detailing this instrument can be downloaded here: https://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/dis/infoserv/isrpub/pdf/Measuresofsocialpsychologicalattitudes_2928_.PDF

Reference’s

• Barron‚ F. (1953). An ego-strength scale which predicts response to psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology‚ 17‚ 327-333.

• Campbell‚ A.‚ Converse‚ P.E.‚ Miller‚ W.E.‚ and Stokes‚ D.E.‚ (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.

• Robinson‚ John P.‚ Shaver‚ Phillip R. (1969). Measures of Political Attitudes. Institute for Social Research‚ University of Michigan/. Ann Arbor‚ Michigan

Items of the Personal Competence/ personal efficacy

Likert Format Items:

(Agree a lot/ Agree a little/ Disagree a little/ Disagree a lot)

1. I would rather decide things when they come up than always try to plan ahead. *

2. I have always felt pretty sure my life would work out the way I wanted It to.

3. I seem to be the kind of person that has more bad luck than good luck. *

4. I never have any trouble making up my mind about important decisions .

5. I have always felt that I have more will power than most people have.

6. There’s not much use for me to plan ahead because there’s usually something that makes me change my plans. *

7. I nearly always feel pretty sure of myself even when people disagree with me.

8. I have often had the feeling that it’s no use to try to get anywhere in this life. *

* Reversed scoring

Forced Choice Items (1960 & 1964):

1. Have you usually felt pretty sure your life would work out the way you want it to‚ or have there been times when you haven’t been very sure about it? (* Pretty sure/ Sometimes not very sure)

2. Do you feel that you are the kind of person who gets his share of bad luck‚ or do you feel that you have mostly good luck? (*Mostly good luck /Bad luck)

3. When you make plans ahead do you usually get to carry out things the way you expected‚ or do things usually come up to make you change your plans? (*Things work out as expected/ Have to change plans)

(Forced choice items used only in 1960)

4. Are you the kind of person that plans his life ahead all the time or do you live more from day to day? (*Plans ahead/ Live from day to day)

5. Some people feel like other people push them around a good b it. Others feel that they run their lives pretty much the way they want to. How is it with you? (*Run own life/ Get pushed around)

6. Would you say you nearly always finish things once you start them or do you sometimes have to give up before they are finished? (*Always finish/ Sometimes give up)

7. I f you had your choice‚ would you rather have a job where you gave the orders or a job where somebody else told you what to do? (*Rather give orders/ Rather be told what to do)

* indicates personal competence