External locus of control is a psychological concept describing a tendency to believe that important outcomes in life are largely determined by factors outside one’s direct control, such as luck, fate, circumstances, powerful others, or broader social forces.
The concept forms part of the theory of locus of control, developed by American psychologist Julian B. Rotter within his social learning framework. According to the American Psychological Association, individuals with a more external locus of control tend to view outcomes as being shaped by circumstances or forces beyond their personal influence. APA Dictionary of Psychology – Locus of control
Concept
Locus of control concerns how individuals understand the relationship between their own behavior and the outcomes that follow.
People with a stronger internal locus of control generally believe that effort, choices, ability, and personal action can substantially affect results. People with a stronger external locus of control are more likely to attribute outcomes to luck, fate, circumstances, powerful others, or events that are difficult to influence directly.
Internal and external control are usually understood as opposite ends of a continuum. A person may also show different control beliefs across different areas of life. Someone may believe that academic performance depends largely on personal effort while also believing that career advancement is strongly shaped by the economy, organizational structures, or decisions made by supervisors.
In his 1966 work, Rotter focused on expectancies concerning whether reinforcement is contingent on one’s own behavior. When people believe that rewards or outcomes are relatively dependent on their own actions, they tend toward internal control. When they believe that outcomes depend on luck, fate, external forces, or other people, they tend toward external control. Rotter, 1966
History
The locus of control concept emerged from Julian Rotter’s social learning theory. In his 1954 book Social Learning and Clinical Psychology, Rotter developed a model of behavior based on expectations and the value of reinforcement.
Later research showed that individuals differ in how they interpret the causes of success and failure. Some people tend to see outcomes as closely connected to their own abilities and actions. Others are more likely to attribute them to luck or conditions outside their control.
In 1966, Rotter formalized the distinction in his paper Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement, published in Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, volume 80, issue 1, pages 1–28. The paper became a foundational work in locus of control research and introduced the Internal–External Locus of Control Scale, commonly known as the Rotter I–E Scale. Rotter, 1966 – PubMed
Rotter’s scale consists of 29 forced-choice item pairs. Twenty-three items contribute to the score, while six serve as filler items intended to obscure the purpose of the test. The resulting score is used to estimate a person’s relative position on the internal–external continuum. APA – Rotter I–E Scale
Rotter’s original model grouped several sources of external control together. This approach was later expanded by psychologist Hanna Levenson, who argued that belief in chance may produce different psychological and behavioral effects from belief in control by powerful people.
Levenson developed three separate scales:
- Internal : outcomes are influenced by one’s own actions;
- Powerful Others : outcomes are influenced by powerful individuals or institutions;
- Chance : outcomes are influenced by luck, fate, or randomness.
This distinction made external locus of control a more multidimensional construct. A person who believes that career opportunities depend mainly on supervisors may differ substantially from someone who believes that success and failure are largely random, even if both would score relatively high on external control in a simple two-pole model. Levenson, 1973
Manifestations
External locus of control can be observed in how people explain success, failure, and events around them.
After performing poorly on an examination, a person with a stronger external orientation may focus on the difficulty of the test, luck, grading practices, or the teacher. In the workplace, the same person may view promotion as mainly dependent on supervisors, organizational politics, or economic conditions. In health-related decisions, some individuals may believe that health is determined largely by genetics, physicians, fate, or other factors beyond their influence.
Such explanations are not necessarily inaccurate. The actual degree of control available to individuals varies considerably across situations. Natural disasters, economic recessions, war, discrimination, power structures, and social conditions can all impose genuine limits on personal control.
Locus of control therefore measures beliefs about control over outcomes, which should be distinguished from the amount of control a person actually possesses.
Relationship with behavior
Locus of control has been studied extensively in education, health, employment, organizational behavior, and personality psychology.
In educational settings, people with a stronger internal locus of control often show a greater tendency to accept responsibility for their own learning and to regard effort as capable of changing outcomes. A more external orientation is often associated with a lower tendency to view academic results as directly influenced by one’s own behavior. APA Dictionary – Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control Scale
In health psychology, the concept was extended into health locus of control, which refers to beliefs about the sources of control over health outcomes. Since the 1970s, researchers have used this concept to study behaviors such as smoking cessation, weight control, seeking medical information, and adherence to treatment. Wallston & Wallston, 1978
Kenneth Wallston, Barbara Wallston, and Robert DeVellis later developed the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scales , which separate health-related control beliefs into internal control, chance, and powerful others. Published in 1978, this work became an important development in the application of locus of control theory to health psychology. Wallston, Wallston & DeVellis, 1978
A 2024 systematic review of 50 studies on health locus of control found that internal health locus of control was generally associated with more positive health behaviors. Stronger belief in chance was more often associated with lower engagement in preventive behavior. The effects of powerful others were more complex, since reliance on physicians or other experts can sometimes support adherence to treatment. Mozafari, Yang & Talaei-Khoei, 2024
External locus of control and helplessness
External locus of control is sometimes associated with passivity, reduced motivation, or a diminished sense of personal influence. The relationship depends heavily on context.
When people repeatedly believe that their actions have little effect on outcomes, investing additional effort may appear less worthwhile. Low expectations of control may also reduce the likelihood of trying new strategies or continuing after failure.
External locus of control therefore overlaps in some respects with research on learned helplessness, although the two concepts have distinct theoretical origins and measurement traditions.
External locus of control should also be distinguished from self-control and self-efficacy. Self-control concerns the regulation of behavior and impulses. Self-efficacy concerns whether a person believes they are capable of performing a particular action. Locus of control concerns what a person believes determines the eventual outcome. Botha & Dahmann, 2023
Multidimensionality
Research following Rotter increasingly showed that treating all external control beliefs as a single category can conceal important differences.
For example, three people may all believe that they have limited control over an outcome for entirely different reasons.
One may believe that the result depends on luck.
Another may believe that it depends on powerful people.
A third may believe that it is constrained by objective social conditions or institutional structures.
These beliefs can lead to different behaviors. A patient who believes strongly in the authority of a physician may follow treatment very carefully. A person who believes that health is entirely governed by chance may be less likely to engage in preventive behavior.
For this reason, many later measures divide external control into several dimensions rather than relying on a single external-control score. Wallston, Wallston & DeVellis, 1978
Limitations and criticism
A common simplification treats internal locus of control as desirable and external locus of control as undesirable. This interpretation can ignore the realities of different situations.
Many outcomes genuinely depend heavily on external conditions. Employees may have very little influence over corporate restructuring. People living in disaster-prone regions cannot control weather events. Patients depend partly on healthcare systems and medical professionals. Recognizing the limits of personal control can therefore represent an accurate assessment of reality.
An external locus of control also does not necessarily imply avoidance of responsibility. A person can acknowledge the importance of external conditions while still acting actively within the areas they can influence.
Another limitation concerns the generality of early locus of control scales. Control beliefs can differ substantially across education, health, work, interpersonal relationships, and political life. Domain-specific measures such as health locus of control were developed partly to address this issue.
Modern studies also tend to examine locus of control alongside self-efficacy, self-control, socioeconomic conditions, health status, and living environment. A 2023 study using Australian survey data found that locus of control and self-control were related but remained distinct psychological constructs. Including self-control in statistical models reduced some of the observed associations between locus of control and health outcomes. Botha & Dahmann, 2023
Applications
Locus of control is used in educational psychology, health psychology, organizational behavior, management research, clinical psychology, and behavioral science.
In healthcare, understanding a patient’s control beliefs may help clinicians adapt communication and intervention strategies. A systematic review of patient–provider communication found that locus of control was associated with factors including decision-making preferences, satisfaction, treatment adherence, and interactions between patients and healthcare professionals. PubMed – Locus of control and patient–provider communication
In education, locus of control is commonly studied alongside academic motivation, responses to failure, and responsibility for learning outcomes.
In the workplace, different locus of control measures have been used to examine perceived autonomy, occupational stress, and employee responses to organizational conditions. APA – Locus of control measures
See also
- Internal locus of control
- Learned helplessness
- Self-efficacy
- Self-control
- Attribution theory
- Fundamental attribution error
- Just-world hypothesis
- Victim mentality
- Health locus of control
References
- Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. DOI: 10.1037/h0092976.
- American Psychological Association. Locus of control. APA Dictionary of Psychology.
- Levenson, H. (1973). Reliability and Validity of the I, P, and C Scales — A Multidimensional View of Locus of Control.
- Wallston, B. D. & Wallston, K. A. (1978). Locus of control and health: a review of the literature. Health Education Monographs, 6(2), 107–117. DOI: 10.1177/109019817800600102.
- Wallston, K. A., Wallston, B. S. & DeVellis, R. (1978). Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scales. Health Education Monographs, 6, 160–170. DOI: 10.1177/109019817800600107.
- Botha, F. & Dahmann, S. C. (2023). Locus of control, self-control, and health outcomes. SSM – Population Health, 25, 101566. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101566.
- Mozafari, S., Yang, A. & Talaei-Khoei, J. (2024). Health Locus of Control and Medical Behavioral Interventions: Systematic Review and Recommendations. Interactive Journal of Medical Research.