The Relationships among Ego States, Locus of Control, and Dogmatism Donald A. Loffredo Abstract This correlational study attempted to ‘identify relationships among funetional ego states, locus of control, and dogmatism. The sample consisted of 40 African-American and 40 Anglo-American undergraduate college students (ages 17-27). The results showed 11 significant corretations among functional ego states, locus of control, and dogmatism that support the expectations of ego-state expression. ‘The Relationships among Ego States, Locus of Control, and Dogmatism Few attempis have been made to integrate tterent measures of psychological constructs) Iraite oF 10 intograte different psychological traits with different theories of personality. Re- search investigating differences in personality too often focus on single psychological traits or single personality tests, The present study ‘was directed toward identifying the relation- ships among transactional analysis functional go states, locus of control, and dogmatism: © determine if significant relationships were con- sistent with transactional analysis theory. ‘The five functional transactional analysis ‘ego states (the Nurturing Parent, the Conirol- {ing or Criticat Parent, the Adult, the Adapted Child, and the Free or Natural Child) allow observation and measurement of configura: tions of personality (Dusay, 1972; Heyer, 1979), The concept of locas of control derives fire Rover's (1954) social learning theory and refers to the perception of the extent to which positive and/or negative events are considered ‘a consequence of one’s own actions (internal locus of contrat) or not (external loces of control). Dogmatism is defined as a relatively closed cognitive organization of beliefs about ol 29, No, 2. Apri 1998 reality focused around a central set of beliefs about absolute authority which, in ura, pro- vides a framework for patterns of intotetance and qualified tolerance toward others (Ro- each, 1954). For 8 more thorough discussion of the these constructs and a discussion of the methods, participants, instrumentation, and procedure ‘ased in tis study, see my earlier article (Lof- fredo & Omizo, 1997}, which described study that examined differences between African-American and Anglo-American under- graduates on the five functional ego states, Toeus of control, and dogmatism. No signifi- ‘cant differences were found. However, a one- way MANOVA revealed significant differ- ‘ence between males and females on the Nurture ing Parent ego state, F(,72) = 5.42; p< 01 Females scored significantly higher on the Nurturing Parent ego state than males. For the present study the same ego-state questionnaire data and the same locus of control and dogma- tism data were analyzed further to obiain the reported results, Statistical Analysis, The design used in this study was eorrela- tional. Scores on each of the aforementioned seven personality measures (five functional go states, locus of conto’, and dogmatism) and age were all correlated (Pearson r) with one another. Results CCovrelational results (Pearson r) are summa: rized in Table 1. There were Ii significant correlations. Discussion Asreflected by theresults, there was 2 moder- ately high (7r=.73, 7 <.01) positive correlation vwDONALD A. LOFPREDO Table 1 Correlations Between Controling Paront (CP), Nurturing Parent {NP}, Adutt (A), Adapted: Chid (AC, Free Child (FC, Locus of Control LOC}, Dogmatism (D), and Age (AGE) (n= 80) cp | one fa ac Fe |ioc |b AGE ce -A8 10 | 09 | -16 18 33" we | a ee A aa or eS 04 Fo D * significant beyond the .05 fevel between participants’ scores on dogmatism and tocus of contal, Subjects who scored high on dogmatism (HDs) scored high on the external- ity dimension of locus of control. This signifi- cant posttve corelation is consistent with re- alte ahtained by Plant, Telford, nnd Tharnas 1965) relaive to @ significant difference be- tween HDs and LDs (low on dogmatism) on a complementary construct to [ocus of control (responsibilty) as measured by the Responsi- bility Scale of the California Psychological Inventory. The HDs were revealed to be psy- chologically immature while the LDs were re- vealed to be responsible (Plant et al, 1965), ‘The significant positive correlation between the Nurturing Parent ego-state and the Adult ego-sate scores (r=.24,p<.03) as well asthe significant positive correlation between the Nurturing Parent and Froe Child ego-state scores (* — 44, p < .01) are both consistent with transactional analysis theory and repre- sentative of individuals eter therapy (Dusey, 1972; Steiner, 1974). “The significa: negative corelaton between she Adaltego-stat and loeus of consol scores (r= =.34, p <1) for the sample was in the direction expceted by transactional analysis theory. Individuals with frequently cathected (ootivated) Adult ego states ate typically good im {off ft “significant beyons the 01 fevel at problem solving (Drego, 1988; Woollams & Brown, i978), something individuals with an external locus of control seldom practice. “The significant positive correlation between the Adapued Child ego-state scores and the for cus of control ego-sate scores (r = 29, p (01) forthe sample was consistent with trens- actional analysis theory. Individuals with afre- quently cathected Adapted Child ego state or Pig Parent (Steiner, 1974) are extemally (other) oriented (Drego, 1988; Wootlams & Brown, 1978). They behave in ways that are considered best for geting along with others instead of awtonortously and would therefore be expected to demonstrate a marked propen- sity to overadapt to external locus of control, ‘The significant negative corelation between the Adult ego-state and dogmatisin scores (r= =26, p<.01) was consistent with the theory of transactional analysis. The Adult ego state is characterized by logical thinking and data pro- cessing about felings, thinking, and behaviors, ‘while the dogmatic personality type does not evaluate information in an open, objective ‘manner. Subjects in the sample demonstrated the anticipated inverse relationship between the ‘Adult ego state and dogmatism measures. ‘The significant positive coreelation between sample scores for the Adapted Child ego state Transactional Analysis Journal‘THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG EGC STATES, LOCUS OF CONTROL AND DOGMATISM ‘and dogmatism (r= 23, p <.05) was consis tent with transactional analysis theory. The ‘Adapted Child ego state develops as a response to significant, more powerful others (Wool- Tams & Brown, 1978). the same type of people (Gc, those in authority) in whorn the dogmat individual seeks safety (Rokeack, 1960). ‘Subjects in the sample displayed che predicted positive relationship between the Adapted Child ego state and dogmatism. The significant correlations obtained be- ‘tween the Controlling Parent ego state and age (r= 33, p< 01), between the Nurturing Parent ego state and age (r =-.31, p <.08), and be- tween the Free Child ego tate and age (7 = ~32, p< .05) were neither consistent nor inconsis- teat with transactional analysis theory. The specific effects of age on ego states has not been adequateiy addressed by transactional analysis theorists. The implication is that as people get older they become more comrolling and less nurturing and spontaneous. Many of the relationshins reported here are consistent with transactional analysis theory and provide interesting associations arcong, functional ego states and the constructs of locus of control and dogmatism. Locus of control and dogmatism are important variables in developing counseling strategies with cli ents, especially resistant ones. Used in con- Junction with the functional ego states, locus of ‘control and dogmatism may provide a more in- depth view of clients and more important psychological constructs, which ean be incor porated with transactional analysis theory and the functional ego states to better understand and positively influence human behavior. : Redecis Suite 250, San Francisco, CA 94133-4640, US A. Vol 28, No.2, Aprit 1998 Back Copies of Special These Issues ofthe ransactional Analysis Joureal 1a Therapy: A Memorial to Robert L. Goulding, MD 1 ‘Guest Faited by Mary Goulding, MSW (October 1995) * $12/copy Social Applications of Transactional Analysis, Guest Edited by Alan Jacobs (January 1996) * $16/copy “To onder these or ater bask isnes ofthe Transactiona| Anabsis Journal, contct: ITAA, 480 Pacific Ave, Donald 4. Loffredo, EdD, is a ticensed psvohologist and an assistant professor of (psychology at the University of Houston-Victo via in Vietoria, Texas. He received a B.A, psychology from the University of Rhode Island, an M.A. in agency counseling from Rhode Island College, and an £4.D. in coun- seling psychology from the University of Houston-University Park, Please send reprint requests to him at University of Houston-Victo- ria, Division of arts and Sciences, 2506 East Red River, Vicioria, TX 77901-4450, USA REFERENCES: rego, A. (1988), Paasigns and model of eg states, Transactional analysis Jounal 23, 5:29, Dasay, J.-M. (1972), Egograms and the “sonsancy bypothess"Tranactonalanaisis Journal. 23), 37 4a Heyer, N.R. (1979), Developme of 9 questionnaire to measure eg0 aes wih ore aplcaions to social and omparaive psychiaty, ransaeiznal nays Jur al, 93,9219, Lofreds. DA. & Onan, M. M1997), Differences in ‘ego states, lous of conto, and dogmatim between ‘Afican-Amercan ind Anglo-Amerian undergraduate tollege students. Pransacional Anadis Journal, 2, 98-178 Plant WT, Talford © W. & Thomas. JA. (1965) Some personality ifeences between dogmatic and odopnaic groups oureal of Socal Prycholgy, 67, or. Rokzach, M. (1984). The nature and meaning of dogma tm, Pychological Review, 1, 198-204 Rokeach, M, in collaboration wih R. Bonier and others (1980), The pen and closed mind Ivestigationsiato the nature of belief syste and personality systems ‘New York: Basie Books Rotter, B. (1984) Social ieoraing and clntal psycke ‘2p. New York: Prentice-Hall Seeiner,C. M. (1978), Seip people tive: Transactional chats of ie series. New Vork: Grove Press Woollams, 5. & Brown, M. (1978). Transactional ‘ena Danes, MI: Huson Valley stint Fax 415-980-9343 | En: teat netong in