EXERCISING AND RELINQUISHING CONTROL: SOME DIFFERENTIATING CONDITIONS.
Item
-
Title
-
EXERCISING AND RELINQUISHING CONTROL: SOME DIFFERENTIATING CONDITIONS.
-
Identifier
-
AAI8103950
-
identifier
-
8103950
-
Creator
-
MIRANSKY, LIBBY JEREMY.
-
Contributor
-
Prof. Ellen Langer | Prof. Morton Bard
-
Date
-
1980
-
Language
-
English
-
Publisher
-
City University of New York.
-
Subject
-
Psychology, Social
-
Abstract
-
The research reported here investigated some conditions under which people would prefer to relinquish rather than to exercise control. The medical setting was chosen for the study of these conditions because both relinquishing control and exerting control in the form of noncompliance take place regularly in this environment. Two dichotomized variables (1) Severity of disease, and (2) Degree of stabilization of disease were chosen for study in addition to a third independent variable, Instructions, which encouraged subjects either to participate in their own care by obtaining information (responsibility condition) or to strictly follow the doctors' orders (obedience condition). Thus, the experimental design was a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial with the following levels of each factor: (1) Severity of Disease: severe versus mild; (2) Degree of Stabilization of Disease: unstabilized versus stabilized; (3) Instructions: responsibility versus obedience.;It was assumed that individuals, in situations important to them, would prefer to relinquish control when they would feel responsible for potential failure. However, because it was unclear under what circumstances failure would be most salient to patients, two possibilities were considered. The first was that patients with severe unstabilized illnesses would prefer the obedience instructions because they would not want to take responsibility for an important (severe) negative (unstabilized) situation by asking questions and participating in their own care. Severe stabilized patients would prefer to exert control because their (important) situation was relatively benign.;On the other hand, the negative situation of the severe unstabilized patients is not due to their own failure, but can be attributed to their physicians. Accordingly, the second possibility was that severe unstabilized patients would prefer the responsibility message, while the severe stabilized patients, who by participating in their own care would be taking responsibility for any future failure, would prefer the obedience instructions. Because the assumption was that failure would only be relevant in important situations and patients with mild cases of the illness did not fall into that category, no predictions were made for them.;One hundred and eighty two hypertensive and diabetic patients were interviewed in the General Medical Clinic or a major New York Hospital. After the interview, the patients were randomly assigned to either the responsibility or the obedience condition and the relevant message was read to them. Patients were recontacted approximately two weeks later by telephone to answer a short questionnaire. Ratings of severity and degree of stabilization of the illnesses as well as medical information which served as a dependent measure were obtained from the medical records of the patients after contact with them was completed.;The results indicated some support for the second possibility discussed. That is, the patients with severe and stabilized illnesses chose to relinquish control by showing a preference for the obedience message. The unstabilized patients chose to exercise control by opting for the responsibility message. In addition, regardless of the severity and degree of stabilization of their illnesses, most patients knew very little about their conditions. The implications of these results for the fields of psychology and medicine were discussed.
-
Type
-
dissertation
-
Source
-
PQT Legacy CUNY.xlsx
-
degree
-
Ph.D.
-
Program
-
Psychology
